Can the attacker stop the persistent damage if he wished to such as if facing a Redeemer? What level of control does the attack have over persistent damage once applied?
Why is this relevant? The Redeemer gets to use their reaction when the damage is applied - IE, when the attack hits, the spell comes into effect, an aura triggers, however the Enemy causes the damage - and then the Enemy chooses right then which of the Glimpse of Redemption options to use. If they choose no damage, then yes, no damage at all. If they choose Resistance, then the personal damaged gets resistance to that damage - all of it - for as long as relevant.
If you're suggesting that the Redeemer could use their reaction on the second or subsequent round an ally is damaged by a source of persistent damage... then I think yes, the Redeemer magically grants the causer of the damage the option of stopping it at that moment. Everyone still has to be in range and everything... but I do think that works. I'm not sure why it wouldn't.
"Its not me dealing the damage, its the persistent damage from my Acid Arrow." is no more valid than, "Its not me dealing the damage, it was my sword." The character behind it is still responsible.
First, to address your last point - it is 2+level less per damage type, with zero doubts. Resistance to All Damage is quite explicit about this.
Persistent Damage is no less part of the initial damage than any other secondary damage type, like Fire or Evil. The fact that it is also a condition in no way disqualifies it from counting as damage, which is supported repeatedly in its rules descriptions. I have not seen anyone provide any actual evidence that indicates persistent damage does not remain part of the "triggering damage", other than to identify it as a condition - which does not preclude it counting as damage as well.
Finally, the resistance from the Champion Reaction is (as written) no less permanent than Resistance gained from any Feat or ability. This sounds absurd in concept, but in actuality its fairly simple to resolve and doesn't cause real problems. Maybe this is not intended - but I dont see any language in the feat or reaction that limits it to an instantaneous effect, nor have I found anything elsewhere that seems to limit such instances to being instant.
Ok, even if I would follow the line of reasoning that CR applies to both initial damage and persistent damage, for how long would you apply the resistance granted by CR?
So if the level 4 champion reacts to an 14 points Acid Arrow, blocking 6 points of the initial damage (thats much but no all, so the persistent damage is not blocked per se) and 6 points of any persistent damage, can the target just ignore the condition - like - forever?
So if the level 4 champion reacts to an 14 points Acid Arrow, blocking 6 points of the initial damage (thats much but no all, so the persistent damage is not blocked per se) and 6 points of any persistent damage, can the target just ignore the condition - like - forever?
I'll need to find the quote, but it was pointed out in another thread that somewhere in the CRB it notes that most persistent damage ends on its own after about a minute. EDIT - Found it, also on 621 "Persistent damage runs its course and automatically ends after a certain amount of time as fire burns out, blood clots, and the like. The GM determines when this occurs, but it usually takes 1 minute."
So yeah, they'd ignore/reduce that specific source of that persistent damage until it ended - which might be when another, bigger source of the same type is applied and overwrites it.
IF however the initial damage and the persistent damage are affected by any resistance present at the moment they actually happen then my line of reasoning has a high chance of being correct. So for the above example that would be 9 initial acid damage and 4 persistent acid damage, simply because the resistance is gone when the condition triggers.
This is how resistance works, but it's not the right question here. Timing doesn't matter, because the reaction is relevant as long as the damage is relevant. There's no expiration date on it.
What matters is whether or not the persistent damage is part of 'base' damage of the attack or if it's a rider that happens separately.
It's not just relevant for persistent damage either, it also matters for how you calculate how resistance interacts with other attacks that have rider damage associated with them.
Quick intermediate question: Any PFS GM's here? What is the ruling on this in PFS?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I'm up on all the rulings for PFS2; don't think we've seen one on this topic. Personally I've never seen a GM (nor thought of it myself when GMing) to have the resistance granted by a champion's reaction apply to the persistence damage condition.
My current interpretation after reading this thread:
a) Yes, the resistance granted by the champion's reaction would snapshot onto the persistent damage. So if the you were a level 2 champion, and your ally got hit with an attack that was doing 1d6 persistent, the condition applied would effectively be 1d6 -4 (minimum 0, not 1 as is usual). This appears to appears to follow from the using what Resistance All means, and the Communities, Resistances, and Weaknesses section of the persistent damage rules. This does feel a little odd, but I don't see anything to block it.
b) No, You can't retrigger your champion's reaction when the condition-based persistent damage ticks. So part a) is still blocking some of the damage, but you don't get your retributive strike/reapply enfeebled/free step each time it ticks. The trigger is not met.
However I would fully expect to see table variation on point a. I don't think you'd see much table variation on b.
a) Yes, the resistance granted by the champion's reaction would snapshot onto the persistent damage. So if the you were a level 2 champion, and your ally got hit with an attack that was doing 1d6 persistent, the condition applied would effectively be 1d6 -4 (minimum 0, not 1 as is usual). This appears to appears to follow from the using what Resistance All means, and the Communities, Resistances, and Weaknesses section of the persistent damage rules. This does feel a little odd, but I don't see anything to block it.
b) No, You can't retrigger your champion's reaction when the condition-based persistent damage ticks. So part a) is still blocking some of the damage, but you don't get your retributive strike/reapply enfeebled/free step each time it ticks. The trigger is not met.
However I would fully expect to see table variation on point a. I don't think you'd see much table variation on b.
I concur with b) and it would be extremely important to know the correct ruling for a) not only for CR but also for other abilities that grant ad hoc resistances.
For example the Cleric focus spell Flame Barrier grants fire resistance 15 as an reaction as early as level 8. And while a reduction of 15 points does not seem overly impressive when compared to the nominal damage of a spell level 4 or 5 fireball (28/35), or a Young Red Dragon's breath (11d6/38.5), it would be extremely potent versus an attack that contains persistent fire damage, e.g. a Firewyrm's tail attack (2d8+11 fire + persistent fire 2d8).
b) No, You can't retrigger your champion's reaction when the condition-based persistent damage ticks. So part a) is still blocking some of the damage, but you don't get your retributive strike/reapply enfeebled/free step each time it ticks. The trigger is not met.
Any particular rules reason for b?
I don't think its an unreasonable ruling, but the persistent damage did come from somewhere, and with the limitations on its total duration, it doesn't seem un-workably burdensome to remember where from.
And I still don't see a philosophical difference between making the contention that "The enemy didn't deal damage to you, their Persistent Acid Damage condition imposed by magic missile did." and "The enemy didn't damage you, the blade of their sword did." The second is clearly wrong, but the only real difference is timing. Therefore, the first also seems like it should be wrong.
For b, its a mix of book-keeping and proximate/secondary cause. I don't want to have to know which creature (if there's multiple identical creatures) imposed a condition a couple of rounds ago to know which of those creatures is the target of the reaction.
On the proximate/secondary cause, I subscribe to the 'its the condition that did the damage, not the enemy' in the case of persistent damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're not going to convince each other differently on this point. I've said my piece.
So here is a realistic scenario, and look at it from this perspective: you see an enemy cast acid arrow on an ally but you are 80 feet away. You spend your entire turn running to your allies aid, who is dying from the attack - on your turn you’ve taken 3 strides but they’re still not in reach of lay on hands. On that players turn, they’re going to take a small amount of persistent damage that will kill them (let’s say it’s 3). Do you really believe there is Nothing the Champion can do, even though he saw the enemy slap his ally in the face with the acid arrow, and his ally would die if not for his divine reaction?
How do you justify that this is reasonable and that the evil mage is not dealing the fatal damage?
Note that even if this does work, you'd need the enemy and the ally to both be within 15 feet when you prevent the damage. Why? Because that's a mechanical requirement of the ability...
So it does become a bit weird.
You won't find a RAW for either side here. Hence its not worth debating if that's your goalpost.
You won't find a RAW for either side here. Hence its not worth debating if that's your goalpost.
Except that there has been found significant rules actually written that supports the position that persistent damage is damage caused by an enemy, both when initially inflicted and down the road.
Whats missing is anything at all in the written rules to contradict that.
Theres absolutely RAW here, people just don't like the implications, from what I can see.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I agree ally and enemy would have to be within 15 feet. At moment of action incurring damage?
From what I can tell RAW, persistent damage is dealt by the enemy, but I would concede that there’s no rule that says the enemy continues to deal the damage, you just take the damage dealt over multiple rounds. So in that case, maybe Twist the Knife example, to prevent the damage, you would have to be there when that action occurs. But as we looked at earlier, that resistance would apply separately each round. Maybe that’s how it works - I’m more comfortable with that.
Btw, I appreciate you reviewing this objectively as written.
I think the Champion needing to be there when the damage is dealt initially is the most intuitive and reasonable way for it to work, and is consistent with how people would want it to work. I'd probably run it this way in general.
I just cant provide any supported reason why you technically couldn't React when damage is suffered in subsequent rounds, if all the other requirements are met. If a characters life were in danger, I dont think id argue it with a player
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I agree ally and enemy would have to be within 15 feet. At moment of action incurring damage?
From what I can tell RAW, persistent damage is dealt by the enemy, but I would concede that there’s no rule that says the enemy continues to deal the damage, you just take the damage dealt over multiple rounds. So in that case, maybe Twist the Knife example, to prevent the damage, you would have to be there when that action occurs. But as we looked at earlier, that resistance would apply separately each round. Maybe that’s how it works - I’m more comfortable with that.
Btw, I appreciate you reviewing this objectively as written.
I think the Champion needing to be there when the damage is dealt initially is the most intuitive and reasonable way for it to work, and is consistent with how people would want it to work. I'd probably run it this way in general.
I just cant provide any supported reason why you technically couldn't React when damage is suffered in subsequent rounds, if all the other requirements are met. If a characters life were in danger, I dont think id argue it with a player
Yes, I think that’s reasonable.
Since I have your attention, what’s your thought on using Delay Consequence and moving into the range requirement? Doesn’t have to be persistent. Opponent hits ally that is 30’ away, I Delay Consequence and move to be within 15’, then spell ends with ally and enemy in 15’ each - reaction available now?
I think that's exactly the sort of thing Delay Consequence is thematically intended to allow, and the description explicitly calls out that damage is dealt when the spell ends so... absolutely?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing about any RAW is, that depending on how it is written, read and understood, can still be subject to interpretation. So while you claim that RAW is fully in line with your interpretation others have the right to be entitled to their own interpretation of said RAW.
For example:
The ally gains resistance to all damage against the triggering damage equal to 2 + your level.
This establishes that the resistence gained via CR is only valid verus the "triggering damage". However to determine what constitutes this triggering damage we need to look a little further.
1. Roll the dice indicated by the weapon, unarmed attack, or spell, and apply the modifiers, bonuses, and penalties that apply to the result of the roll.
2. Determine the damage type.
3. Apply the target’s immunities, weaknesses, and resistances to the damage.
4. If any damage remains, reduce the target’s HitPoints by that amount.
This establishes the sequence of events for normal damage.
...Unlike with normal damage, when you are subject to persistent damage, you don’t take it right away. Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns...
This tells us that persistent damage is not part of the "normal" damage of any attack, spell or ability, but will be applied at a later time, which to me is a more than clear indication that persistent damage can never be part of the above mentioned "triggering damage".
...If you have resistance to a type of damage, each time you take that type of damage, you reduce the amount of damage you take by the listed amount...
This tells us that if you take damage at different times you apply your resistance each time, which is quite logical.
..Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns
...if an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to the initial damage and to the persistent damage.
This two paragraphs just repeat within the conditions chapter was has already been stated in the damage chapter, i.e. that persistent damage will be dealt at a later time than normal damage and that is subject to its own resistence.
In short:
1) CR resistence is only effective versus the triggering damage.
2) Persistent damage is not part of the normal damage / triggering damage.
3) Persistent damage is not affected by CR because the restistance granted to the triggering damage is no longer in effect when the persistent damage happens.
q.e.d.
The thing about any RAW is, that depending on how it is written, read and understood, can still be suject to interpretation. So while you claim that RAW is fully in line with your interpretation others have the right to be entitled to their own interpretation of said RAW.
For example:
The ally gains resistance to all damage against the triggering damage equal to 2 + your level.This establishes that the resistence gained via CR is only valid verus the "triggering damage". However to determine what constitutes this triggering damage we need to look a little further.
1. Roll the dice indicated by the weapon, unarmed attack, or spell, and apply the modifiers, bonuses, and penalties that apply to the result of the roll.
2. Determine the damage type.
3. Apply the target’s immunities, weaknesses, and resistances to the damage.
4. If any damage remains, reduce the target’s HitPoints by that amount.
This establishes the sequence of events for normal damage.
...Unlike with normal damage, when you are subject to persistent damage, you don’t take it right away. Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns...This tells us that persistent damage is not part of the "normal" damage of any attack, spell or ability, but will be applied at a later time, which to me is a more than clear indication that persistent damage can never be part of the above mentioned "triggering damage".
...If you have resistance to a type of damage, each time you take that type of damage, you reduce the amount of damage you take by the listed amount...This tells us that if you take damage at different times you apply your resistance each time, which is quite logical.
..Instead of taking...
Uh, ok. Let's stop a second here.
In the sequence you provided, the Champion Reaction has to be applied between steps 2 and 3, in order to know which damage it applies to and be there in order to reduce damage.
Persistent damage was determined to be part of the damage during step 2, when you look at and determine the damages type. That means it is part of the Triggering Damage to which the Champions Reaction applies.
The Champions Reaction grants Resitance that never stops existing. It will continue to apply until the damage determined during steps 1 and 2 are fully resolved.
I think your rules quotes here do more to support the idea that this works, than the opposite.
Persistent damage was determined to be part of the damage during step 2, when you look at and determine the damages type. That means it is part of the Triggering Damage to which the Champions Reaction applies.
Persistent damage was defined as not being part of the normal damage in step 1.
Persistent damage was determined to be part of the damage during step 2, when you look at and determine the damages type. That means it is part of the Triggering Damage to which the Champions Reaction applies.Persistent damage was defined as not being part of the normal damage in step 1.
Oops, you're correct on the step.
I could argue though, since its explicitly part of damage determined in step 1 - its resolution is simply delayed - its still part of the "triggering damage", just delayed.
Since the Resitance granted by the Champion Resitance is not limited in when it applies, it will still be there when the persistent portion of the damage stops being delayed and is resolved.
Some out of line question: When do you guys (or girls) usually determine and apply persistant damage? Do you already roll the persistent damage with the initial attack and just apply the result later or do you just roll at the end of the targets turn when it is actually applied. Our group does the later and I think the answer to this question could shed some light on our individual perception of persistent damage.
@KrispyXIV and Liegence
I saw and read your reference to page 621 "Immunities, Resistances, and Weaknesses", however my problem with this paragraph is, that at least to my understanding it is quite silent on timing.
Is it
If an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to (both) the initial damage and to the persistent damage (immediately).
or
If an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to the initial damage and to the persistent damage (at the moment they occur).
I therefore prefer to use the section of the rules that more or less states the same but also provides guidance on timing.
If you have resistance to a type of damage, each time you take that type of damage, you reduce the amount of damage you take by the listed amount (to a minimum of 0 damage).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So when the attack’s damage is “x damage + xd6 persistent damage” your saying the persistent damage isn’t damage indicated by the attack?
We play it as "x damage + condition xd6 persistent damage", quite the same as we would play "x damage + condition frightened x" or "x damage + condition sickened x".
That is, the persistent damage is its own effect and not part of the normal damage caused by the attack.
Some out of line question: When do you guys (or girls) usually determine and apply persistant damage? Do you already roll the persistent damage with the initial attack and just apply the result later or do you just roll at the end of the targets turn when it is actually applied. Our group does the later and I think the answer to this question could shed some light on our individual perception of persistent damage.
I think rolling it each time at the end of turn is correct, but I absolutely cannot support that. If anyone can clarify for me, I'm in your debt.
And you're correct its relevant - rolling once and applying a set value would allow this to be more easily resolved in how I read the literal rules as written -
@KrispyXIV and LiegenceI saw and read your reference to page 621 "Immunities, Resistances, and Weaknesses", however my problem with this paragraph is, that at least to my understanding it is quite silent on timing.
Is it
If an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to (both) the initial damage and to the persistent damage (immediately).or
If an effect deals initial damage in addition to persistent damage, apply immunities, resistances, and weaknesses separately to the initial damage and to the persistent damage (at the moment they occur).I therefore prefer to use the section of the rules that more or less states the same but also provides guidance on timing.
If you have resistance to a type of damage, each time you take that type of damage, you reduce the amount of damage you take by the listed amount (to a minimum of 0 damage).
Because I think the first way you emphasized this is RAW, but the second is more intuitive.
So when the attack’s damage is “x damage + xd6 persistent damage” your saying the persistent damage isn’t damage indicated by the attack?We play it as "x damage + condition xd6 persistent damage", quite the same as we would play "x damage + condition frightened x" or "x damage + condition sickened x".
That is, the persistent damage is its own effect and not part of the normal damage caused by the attack.
And so the Champion's Reaction can do nothing vs. the Strike of a Worm That Walks? (It's only persistent damage.)
And so the Champion's Reaction can do nothing vs. the Strike of a Worm That Walks? (It's only persistent damage.)
As per my current perception not versus the very first "attack". If the reaction can be triggered by the later persistent damage is what started the debate.
This is basically the same case as if a hypothetical monster had an attack that reads: Melee (10 reach, 1 Action) +xx to hit. Damage: Your doomed condition increases by 1 and improved grab.
As the attack deals no damage but just inflicts conditions the CR is not triggered.
“ Instead of taking persistent damage immediately, you take it at the end of each of your turns as long as you have the condition, rolling any damage dice anew each time.“
Reroll each time RAW
Figured I wasn't crazy, and it was right in front of me. Thanks!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My hot take, no the Champion's reaction won't apply to persistent damage.
To me it just doesn't make sense and falls under the "too good to be true" clause.
If the Champion's reaction however reduced the initial damage to 0 it might stop some things that apply persistent damage, like poison.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does the Champion's reaction carry forward on each individual 'tick' of poison damage from an injury poison?
How about every morning when you roll your Fort save vs a disease and take damage from it.
Where I’m at currently:
CR applies to all damage of the triggering damage, and the resistance section seems to clearly state resistance is applied separately to persistent damage. Thus if initial damage of triggering attack was 10 + 2d6 persistent damage, and your CR res was 5, the attack would do 5 initial damage + (2d6-5) persistent damage. If your CR was was 10, you would entirely negate the persistent damage as clearly indicated RAW (although it does say GM discretion in this case).You must be in the range requirement at the time the action dealing the damage is committed (the persistent damage was dealt on initial attack, but is rolled and cumulated based on the condition)
Does that sound about where we’ve landed based on RAW?
This was my impression before and is still after reading through the topic.
Having res applied after the damage sounds illogical. Not getting resistance at all also sounds off. Resistance applies to all damage done by an attack.
Not 100% sure on this though: can you even have resistance to poison damage, or damage from disease, or does resistance only apply to physical & energy?
You certainly could, but they're usually not "triggering damage" and to me that's where this falls apart.
Poison damage, damage from disease, etc usually only happens after the initial attack, and so champion resistance's description (which is a more specific rule than the general rule of resistances applying to persistent damage) limits it to only the initial triggering damage.
But if you had a spell which dealt poison damage as part of the initial damage, the champion reaction would reduce it.
No. I don't agree with your reading, the black scorpion venom isn't part of the triggering damage, it's just in the stat block to remind you that the target needs to make a save or start suffering the affects of poison, which typically includes an onset time, which means it doesn't deal damage at the same time as the triggering attack.
Some poisons might inflict damage at the same time as the triggering attack, and I think the champions resistance would apply then, but not on the subsequent rounds, because Champion's Resistance specifies it only functions against the triggering attack.
This is something the designers should address as this could become a huge annoyance, especially as the Champion gets an AoE reaction to reduce damage and double reaction at later levels and lots of creatures can do persistent damage.
I think will play it as follows:
1. Champion's Reaction is only usable against the triggering attack and cannot be activated when a target takes persistent damage unless the attacker has to use an action to activate the persistent damage.
2. The champion's damage resistance will apply to the persistent damage from the attack that applied it for the duration of the effect. If a new application of the persistent damage is applied absent being blocked, that will override the resistance from the blocked attack.
This should simplify my tracking until we hopefully get some clarification on this situation as persistent damage is a fairly common rider to attacks.