| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not entirely clear, but I'd say that you roll for each type.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Persistent damage is unique in that it is the only condition that you can be effected by multiple instances of so long as each is a different damage type. For instance, you can be on fire while also bleeding.
Because these persistent damages are treated as discreet conditions, with the caveat that they only trigger "on damage" effects once collectively, you would follow the rules for persistent damage for each in whichever order you choose.
So in my example above you would resolve first either the bleeding or fire damage, roll the flat check to see if the condition ends, then repeat the process for the other condition.
This is important since there are effects that can change the DC for recovery from a specific type of persistent damage. Assisted Recovery is the one that will most often come up.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're on fire, your condition is not that discreet. ;)
But yeah, discrete rolls for discrete conditions.
I would think definitely separately if only for the fact that for some builds will have different odds for their persistent damage (charhide goblin, for example, needing only a 50/50 chance. While you could roll once and compare DCs for the flat check, it makes more sense to me to roll separately
Each type of persistent damage should have a form of action involved in trying to stop the damage. Bleeding is stopping the flow of blood, often via pressure. Fire is suffocating the fire with blanket or water. Acid is trying to scrape or wash the acid off.
So I think I would recommend it frequently as a base, have any one action apply to a specific type of persistent damage. However, if there is a viable action that might apply to both that is available at the moment, it wouldn't be unreasonable for a GM to let it apply to both.
If a poor soul was hit by Acid and Fire persistent damage, and there is a waterfall/large fountain nearby, it might not be unreasonable for jumping into the flow of water and washing the fire/acid away could potentially allow your one action to try to stop both.
Potentially, if hit with bleed damage and fire, if a nearby player has a large blanket, I might allow them to run over and wrap the victim character and apply pressure at the bleeding wound, to try to stop both forms of damage. If it fails to stop the fire damage, I might rule the blanket has caught fire leading this double option no longer valid to cover both.
Persistent damage can be awful, so having the potential of being able to stop more than one seems like something that could help deal with some situations. But I'd want players to understand they shouldn't always count on it, or overuse it. (hopefully, however it won't be a common occurrence in either case)
If the circumstances don't allow a single way to deal with both forms, you obviously shouldn't get to apply the action towards both. For instance if you had persistent fire damage and persistent lightning damage, and a bucket of water. I don't think throwing a bucket of water on you should be a solution for taking persistent lighting damage. (unless it was something that would cause you to immediately fail the check causing damage, but relieve the persistence after one try, as a sort of instant grounding)
However, if there is a viable action that might apply to both that is available at the moment, it wouldn't be unreasonable for a GM to let it apply to both.
Assisted Recovery doesn't call out being able to apply to multiple types of persistent damage specifically, but it also doesn't say that it can Only apply to one or the other.
You can take steps to help yourself recover from persistent damage, or an ally can help you, allowing you to attempt an additional flat check before the end of your turn. This is usually an activity requiring 2 actions, and it must be something that would reasonably improve your chances (as determined by the GM). For example, you might try to smother a flame or wash off acid. This allows you to attempt an extra flat check immediately, but only once per round.
The GM decides how your help works, using the following examples as guidelines when there's not a specific action that applies.
The action to help might require a skill check or another roll to determine its effectiveness.
Reduce the DC of the flat check to 10 for a particularly appropriate type of help, such as dousing you in water to put out flames.
Automatically end the condition due to the type of help, such as healing that restores you to your maximum HP to end persistent bleed damage, or submerging yourself in a lake to end persistent fire damage.
Alter the number of actions required to help you if the means the helper uses are especially efficient or remarkably inefficient.
Bold for emphasis.
From a balance perspective, I would probably increase the actions involved to 3, to show the extra effort being used by the assisting character, unless they have some "especially efficient" method for treating both conditions. I also probably would not allow such assistance to automatically end the condition or even reduce the DC, unless there was a very good reason, instead just allowing the afflicted character an additional flat check for each condition.
In your example of the blanket vs. bleed and fire for example, I'd say that using the blanket to Only treat one or the other would be more efficient than trying to hold a wound closed while also beating the flames with any real effort. So sure, you can do it, but it will take longer than normal (3 actions) and won't necessarily be as effective against either one (no reduction in DC or automatic ending of the conditions).
But that is just my read on the situation. Yours could very well be different.