You would take nothing, as far as I know and have been running it. It comes up infrequently, but the wording is "The ally gains resistance to all damage against the triggering damage," and not "The ally gains resistance to all damage against the sum of the triggering damage."
It’s possible to have resistance to all damage. When an effect deals damage of multiple types and you have resistance to all damage, apply the resistance to each type of damage separately. If an attack would deal 7 slashing damage and 4 fire damage, resistance 5 to all damage would reduce the slashing damage to 2 and negate the fire damage entirely.
Seeing as the wording of the champion's reaction is identical, saying that "The ally gains resistance to all damage against..." I'd say it works as Ruzza said, blocking all of the damage in that scenario. Assuming it all came from one source of damage, of course, as the reaction only works "against the triggering damage", and doesn't remain for a duration such as the end of that turn, the round, etc.
|
What they said, except for Precision damage, which is sorta weird:
Sometimes you are able to make the most of your attack through sheer precision. When you hit with an ability that grants you precision damage, you increase the attack's listed damage, using the same damage type, rather than tracking a separate pool of damage. For example, a non-magical dagger Strike that deals 1d6 precision damage from a rogue's sneak attack increases the piercing damage by 1d6.
Some creatures are immune to precision damage, regardless of the damage type; these are often amorphous creatures that lack vulnerable anatomy. A creature immune to precision damage would ignore the 1d6 precision damage in the example above, but it would still take the rest of the piercing damage from the Strike. Likewise, since precision damage is always the same type of damage as the attack it's augmenting, a creature that is resistant to non-magical damage, like a ghost or other incorporeal creature, would resist not only the dagger's damage but also the precision damage, even though it is not specifically resistant to precision damage.
ok so, for the Shield of Reckoning, that imply to use Champion reaction AND shield block at the same time, we don't add the shield block resistance on physical damage to the champion reaction, that just use the better (because in the resistance rule, i read we use the better resistance when we have 2 of the same damage) ?
Shield Block doesn't give you (or in this case your ally) resistance to physical damage, but rather prevents / redistributes some of the damage. The rule about taking the better of the 2 options is only for the resistance mechanic and doesn't affect other things that may effect the damage roll, such as the shield block reaction, immunities, penalties to the damage roll, etc.
In this case, the shield would take 68, because it's also taking the poison and frost damage, but otherwise yes.
A shield is immune to Poison, but frost can be apply, right
Where are you getting that a shield can't be dealt poison damage?
Mechanically, yes, you are correct. However, I think that particular exception will rarely come up, as there aren't that many physical attacks that also deal poison damage.
That's an inanimate object so ...
That is how I interpret that as well. To me, it's a niche benefit since there aren't THAT many creatures that deal straight poison damage on physical attacks. Most of the time if a Poison is involved, it's an actual poison that you have to save against and all that.
The only non-actual poison poison damage I can even think of off the top of my head is from a Green dragon's breath attack, which you normally can't shield block anyway, since it is decidedly not a physical attack.
well, but the reaction of champion only affect an ally, not the shield ?
For example, if my ally is to take 50 physical damage, 20 frost and 10 poison ... I shield warden my ally with a 12 hardness shield, so he reduce physical damage by 12. Then i apply my reaction that give him 15 resistance to all damage. So, my ally take 23 physical, 5 frost and no poison, but the shield take 38 ?
In the current wording there's some wiggle room for order of operations. Personally, I've always read it as the hardness applying first, and then the resistance, since thematically resistance is usually tied to the character and wouldn't make sense to apply to a shield. For example, a Charhide Goblin's skin being more resistant to fire than a normal goblin shouldn't make their shield be better at blocking fire. With that in mind the above scenario would go as follows (Again, keep in mind there are other ways to read the text):
Your ally is about to take 50 physical damage, 20 frost and 10 poison damage. You use shield of reckoning (which has a pre-requisite of shield warden) to use both shield block and your champion's reaction. This is the only way to have both apply at once, because the ability collapses 2 reactions into 1, and only 1 reaction can be used for any given trigger.Assuming the shield block applies first we would reduce the physical damage dealt by 12 (the shield's hardness) and both your ally and your shield take the remaining damage, which in this case is 38 physical + 20 frost + 10 poison.
Both your ally and your shield apply any appropriate resistances or immunities. So, your shield would end up taking 38 physical damage and 20 frost damage, and no poison (since inanimate objects are immune to poison). While your ally would take 23 physical damage, 5 frost damage, and no poison damage (since it was all resisted).
Don't be surprised if a GM rules the order of operations is different, though, since it's not super clear, unfortunately (unless I'm missing something).
Both your ally and your shield apply any appropriate resistances or immunities. So, your shield would end up taking 38 physical damage and 20 frost damage, and no poison (since inanimate objects are immune to poison). While your ally would take 23 physical damage, 5 frost damage, and no poison damage (since it was all resisted).Don't be surprised if a GM rules the order of operations is different, though, since it's not super clear, unfortunately (unless I'm missing something).
I agree with your order of operations and it is the same I would use, though I would like to point out that normally an object's hardness applies to all damage types affecting the object, meaning the shield would also reduce the cold damage, at least for calculating the damage done to itself.
Just from the wording of shield block there is also some room for argument that you could apply hardness on behalf of the shielded character, but I am not prepared to make that case myself. Only that I note that the shield block reaction specifies that only the overall attack must be physical, and otherwise refers to the damage from that attack without modifier--so it may be possible in theory to block the fire damage of a flaming weapon, but certainly not an energy ray or breath weapon
I agree with your order of operations and it is the same I would use, though I would like to point out that normally an object's hardness applies to all damage types affecting the object, meaning the shield would also reduce the cold damage, at least for calculating the damage done to itself.
Both your ally and your shield apply any appropriate resistances or immunities. So, your shield would end up taking 38 physical damage and 20 frost damage, and no poison (since inanimate objects are immune to poison). While your ally would take 23 physical damage, 5 frost damage, and no poison damage (since it was all resisted).
I can understand that interpretation, but I don't think it's entirely accurate... Heavy emphasis on think. Long ramblyness about my understanding of hardness in the next paragraph. Feel free to skip it and head to the last paragraph for the relevant point XD
My Thoughts:
This entire question is assuming that all of this damage is from a single source. If each type of damage is considered a different source of damage, then the champion's reaction, which grants resistance to "the triggering damage" wouldn't be able to work on multiple types of damage. But if that was the case, why would it say that you gain resistance to all damage from it? This leads me to believe that even if there's multiple types of damage that doesn't necessarily mean there's multiple sources. Thus, the wording on hardness, which states that "Whenever a shield takes damage, the amount of damage it takes is reduced by this amount." Would only apply once, since it's only taking damage once. Granted, the wording for Hardness under item damage in general is worded in a more ambiguous way, saying "Each time an item takes damage, reduce any damage the item takes by its Hardness. The rest of the damage reduces the item’s Hit Points." However, there's nothing special about a shield's hardness over any other generic item other than the shield block reaction, which isn't being referred to in the quoted passage, so the interpretation should be the same for both, and I think one reduction works with both wordings. At least that's how I see it.
Relevant point:
Regardless, though, the shield block reaction is a specific ability that says even more clearly what happens. It "prevents you from taking an amount of damage up to the shield's hardness" and then you and the shield take the remainder. Any reading that causes it to prevent more damage than the shield's hardness is explicitly excluded from being possible with this ability.