Persistent damage doubling / halving

[Raveve]

Recently ran into a situation and I can't find the exact section i would need in the rulebook. My players were fighting a fire mephit that used it's breath weapon that does 2d4 fire plus 1d4 persistent fire. Now normally if there is persistent damage on a spell or spell like ability it says exactly if it halved/doubled or if it even happens but for the breath it is just a basic save.

Some of my players thought that it is not subject to the basic save success/failure rules like the regular fire damage is and would there for not be doubled or halved at all. In the moment I ruled that it is just like any other damage and is subject to normal rules, to which they asked is half of d4 a d2 or just roll d4 and then half.

I know persistent damage CAN be doubled/halved but i just wanted to make sure in this specific situation. So was this ruling correct? and if so would half of the d4 be d2 or just half of a d4 every turn?

[thenobledrake]

I somehow did not notice this when I used a fire mephit in my own game...

Basic saves normally only apply to initial damage, and when there is some effect besides the initial damage it is usually listed with which category of save result it gets applied with (like how the daze spell is a basic save, and additional effect if you critically fail).

So I'm really not sure if the intent of the mephit breath weapon is to apply the persistent damage no matter what, even if it's a critical save, or to apply it in what I think is the logical case of only if the basic save is a failure or critical failure.

But the saving throw itself shouldn't affect the amount of persistent damage dealt because that's not how persistent damage works as a condition, and the persistent damage doesn't happen at the time you make your save (and luckily the devs don't expect people to jot down a note of how the save went for later reference).

[Raveve]

thenobledrake wrote:

I somehow did not notice this when I used a fire mephit in my own game...

Basic saves normally only apply to initial damage, and when there is some effect besides the initial damage it is usually listed with which category of save result it gets applied with (like how the daze spell is a basic save, and additional effect if you critically fail).

So I'm really not sure if the intent of the mephit breath weapon is to apply the persistent damage no matter what, even if it's a critical save, or to apply it in what I think is the logical case of only if the basic save is a failure or critical failure.

But the saving throw itself shouldn't affect the amount of persistent damage dealt because that's not how persistent damage works as a condition, and the persistent damage doesn't happen at the time you make your save (and luckily the devs don't expect people to jot down a note of how the save went for later reference).

I know Persistent is subject to doubling/halving (there is an example for acid flask)and there are several new spells (blistering invective and blood vendetta to name two) in the apg that double/half persistent damage on varying saves so i know it is possible. Is there an actual place where it says in the rules that you don't apply basic saves mechanics to persistent damage?

[Ascalaphus]

Raveve wrote:

I know Persistent is subject to doubling/halving (there is an example for acid flask)and there are several new spells (blistering invective and blood vendetta to name two) in the apg that double/half persistent damage on varying saves so i know it is possible. Is there an actual place where it says in the rules that you don't apply basic saves mechanics to persistent damage?

This is less clear than you'd think. The acid flask example in the CRB basically pulls that doubling of persistent damage out of nowhere, it's the only such example in the CRB. And it's even inconsistent with the description of the acid flask item itself on the same page, because it ignores the initial 1 damage from the direct hit (last line on the same page). So since there's at least one other clear error in the example, using it as the only real proof of a rule isn't a good idea.

We can't say if Blistering Invective/Blood Vendatta remind us of a general rule, or are an exception to a general rule. Just like we don't know if Acid Arrow is a reminder of a general rule that persistent damage doesn't double on a crit, or an exception.

[Raveve]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Raveve wrote:

I know Persistent is subject to doubling/halving (there is an example for acid flask)and there are several new spells (blistering invective and blood vendetta to name two) in the apg that double/half persistent damage on varying saves so i know it is possible. Is there an actual place where it says in the rules that you don't apply basic saves mechanics to persistent damage?

This is less clear than you'd think. The acid flask example in the CRB basically pulls that doubling of persistent damage out of nowhere, it's the only such example in the CRB. And it's even inconsistent with the description of the acid flask item itself on the same page, because it ignores the initial 1 damage from the direct hit (last line on the same page). So since there's at least one other clear error in the example, using it as the only real proof of a rule isn't a good idea.

We can't say if Blistering Invective/Blood Vendatta remind us of a general rule, or are an exception to a general rule. Just like we don't know if Acid Arrow is a reminder of a general rule that persistent damage doesn't double on a crit, or an exception.

I don't know if you can discount the acid flask example simple because of that, as it is a direct and clear example that it can double even if there is a slight error in that it forgot the 1 extra acid damage. If it even is an error, as the placement of the 1 damage in the flask is weird, it doesn't say do 1 acid in the actual lesser/moderate/etc. descriptions but in the item description itself which I can't think of another alchemical item that has damage in that particular area.

There are at least 3 spells in the apg that reference doubling and halving persistent damage. So if we go by sample size I could say that acid arrow is the exception not the rule, but again it is a little fuzzy. Also the wording seems to be intentional as the spell enervation has persistent damage but instead of doubling or halving it just says take 2d8 persistent on a success but 4d8 persistent on failure with no reference to doubling/halving. I am starting to believe they slightly changed the wording in apg and are going to release an errata on the 30th with more clarifications.

[The Gleeful Grognard]

Persistent damage is listed with the other damage types in the damage section.

The rule on crit strikes is that you double all damage unless that damage only applies on a crit or is specifically stated not to double. This seems pretty consistent imo.

Saves only double if
- They are a basic save and don't specify otherwise
- They specify they double in the save effects

We might see something in the errata and I won't claim to know the RAI in this case, but I would guess that it will be like any other crit.

[Castilliano]

I'll add that I think a crit save for zero normal damage should avoid the persistent damage since you effectively avoided the effect which causes the persistent damage. I'm thinking much like venom gets avoided if a bite fails to penetrate resistance (or hardness in the case of a shield).

As for a regular save, I'd lean toward no persistent damage since that's the norm, albeit not an official norm.
If persistent damage is allowed even if they save (especially if also w/ crit save), then Weakness Fire would be a fatal flaw to PCs summoning mediocre Mephits.