Hey friends, I got a question. I am looking over Swashbuckler and I am curious what the intended reading of Confident Finisher is. Specifically, the Failure result.
Failure: You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.
I get that the damage on a success would be considered precision damage and would not apply to attacks against creatures immune to precision, but if the damage from the failure still considered Precision damage. I get that precision damage becomes the same damage as the attack, so the second line comes out to the same thing under most situations, but it seems like it might be slightly better to miss against a creature immune to precision.
Thoughts on this one?
Confident Finisher's failure effect stipulates that the added damage becomes the type of the weapon or unarmed attack that you attempted your strike with, not precision damage, so yes I would agree that it is fair to say that a failed confident finisher would deal damage to an enemy that is typically immune to precision damage.
I'm not sure exactly how useful that would be at the end of the day, since precise strike doesn't scale all that high on it's own, so half of it won't be a TON of damage at any level really. And with many creatures who are immune to precision damage being low AC/High HP enemies (looking at you Swarms and Oozes) it will be hard to guarantee a failure anyway.
A neat interaction, just not something to lean on, know what I mean?
Confident Finisher's failure effect stipulates that the added damage becomes the type of the weapon or unarmed attack that you attempted your strike with, not precision damage, so yes I would agree that it is fair to say that a failed confident finisher would deal damage to an enemy that is typically immune to precision damage.
Precision damage isn't a unique damage type to begin with, it already does the same type of damage as your weapon when it hits normally. That statement is there because without it the damage wouldn't have a type.
I haven't played a swashbuckler to all that high of a level yet, and I haven't done any math analysis on it. But my gut instinct on the idea is that generally half your precise strike damage is going to be slightly less that your full weapon damage. So it would usually still be better to succeed at the attack than miss even against a creature that is immune to precision damage.
And also, yes. Confident Finisher does the value of half your precise strike damage on a miss, but it is no longer precision damage if you miss. It is just weapon damage.
Confident Finisher's failure effect stipulates that the added damage becomes the type of the weapon or unarmed attack that you attempted your strike with, not precision damage, so yes I would agree that it is fair to say that a failed confident finisher would deal damage to an enemy that is typically immune to precision damage.Precision damage isn't a unique damage type to begin with, it already does the same type of damage as your weapon when it hits normally. That statement is there because without it the damage wouldn't have a type.
Sure, I get that. The reason I err on the side if confident finisher's failure state not dealing precision damage is that precise strike itself is not adding the damage. Confident finisher is dealing half the damage your precise strike would have added, a subtle difference.
I could see it ruled the opposite way, I just tend to be permissive with that sort of thing.
I could see it ruled the opposite way, I just tend to be permissive with that sort of thing.
That is what Squiggit and I are trying to say. I really don't see how it could be ruled the opposite way.
Precision damage is a pseudo-type of damage. There are the primary damage types: Physical damage (b/p/s), Energy damage (of various subtypes), Alignment damage, Mental damage, Poison damage and Bleed damage. Then there is the pseudo-type: precision damage. And then there are traits that are added to damage such as precious material traits, area, splash, and non-lethal.
Precision damage isn't its own primary damage type. It just gets its own category for purposes of weakness, resistance, and immunity. Bleed damage is only barely a primary damage type because it is used on its own in persistent damage.
Because the idea is that every attack needs to have a primary damage type.
So you couldn't have a miss on Confident Finisher dealing just precision damage. It isn't a primary damage type.
So instead, Confident Finisher says that you deal the value of half of your Precise Strike, but it changes the damage type to match the Physical Damage subtype that the weapon normally deals. So it no longer is precision damage at all.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"You deal half your precise strike damage to the target"
" the additional damage is 2d6 precision damage instead."
So, you deal 1/2 of 2d6 precision damage. That is 2d6/2 precision damage.
It seems pretty clear cut to me. The confident finisher damage on a miss IS precision damage.
“Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.”
The second sentence notes that the damage is not precision but weapon damage. This is important due to the feature at level 19 Eternal Confidence which allows the character to just take the failure effect in lieu of a successful attack. The only point to that I can see is specifically to get damage through when the target is immune to precision damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"You deal half your precise strike damage to the target"
Indeed. Don't look at only half of the rule and forget about the other half.
That second half overrides the damage type of Precise Strike.
"You deal half your precise strike damage to the target"Indeed. Don't look at only half of the rule and forget about the other half.
That second half overrides the damage type of Precise Strike.
Correct. The first sentence tells us how much damage is done. The second tells us what type of damage it is.
“Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.”
The second sentence notes that the damage is not precision but weapon damage. This is important due to the feature at level 19 Eternal Confidence which allows the character to just take the failure effect in lieu of a successful attack. The only point to that I can see is specifically to get damage through when the target is immune to precision damage.
You misunderstood Eternal Confidence. It allows you to take the failure effect of Confident Finisher instead of the failure effect from your Finisher (which is certainly none).
You misunderstood Eternal Confidence. It allows you to take the failure effect of Confident Finisher instead of the failure effect from your Finisher (which is certainly none).“Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.”
The second sentence notes that the damage is not precision but weapon damage. This is important due to the feature at level 19 Eternal Confidence which allows the character to just take the failure effect in lieu of a successful attack. The only point to that I can see is specifically to get damage through when the target is immune to precision damage.
Yeah, I am aware. I’m a bit confused by your reply. Wasn’t the point of this thread about if the damage from a failure of Combat Finisher is precision? My comment was to indicate that it is not and was using another ability to further confirm that.
Yeah, I am aware. I’m a bit confused by your reply.
Probably because that's not what you said here:
Eternal Confidence which allows the character to just take the failure effect in lieu of a successful attack.
Which is wrong and not what Eternal Confidence does.
Eternal Confidence has nothing to do with the OP's question anyways. It would work the same regardless of what damage type Confident Finisher does.
On the subject of clarifications:
“Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.”
The second sentence notes that the damage is not precision but weapon damage.
The bolded part is slightly incorrect, because precision damage is weapon damage by default anyways.
Yeah, I am aware. I’m a bit confused by your reply.Probably because that's not what you said here:
Eternal Confidence which allows the character to just take the failure effect in lieu of a successful attack.Which is wrong and not what Eternal Confidence does.
Eternal Confidence has nothing to do with the OP's question anyways. It would work the same regardless of what damage type Confident Finisher does.
On the subject of clarifications:
The bolded part is slightly incorrect, because precision damage is weapon damage by default anyways.“Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.”
The second sentence notes that the damage is not precision but weapon damage.
It is what I said, at least as to what I was referring when I said it. Also, what would be the point of taking the failure effect instead of a successful effect if it didn’t remove the “precision” part?
The point is your strikes do damage on a failure even if you use a high level finisher instead.
Voluntary failure has nothing to do with it.
Voluntary failure has nothing to do with it.
That I will agree. I was remembering (maybe incorrectly) that it was stated in a thread, errata, or somewhere that voluntarily failing was an option. Maybe it was a different ability.
Anyway, I will go back to the other post I made that the damage isn’t specifically precision on a failure. The second sentence would be unnecessary otherwise.
However, I will concede that my point on Eternal Confidence is irrelevant.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The damage done on a failure is still precision. The point of that line is to give it a primary damage type, since precision can only be added onto existing damage.
So if you miss with a rapier, it would do piercing precision damage, not untyped precision damage. (Strangely though, you can do untyped precision damage with a Sneak Attack Disintegrate, but that's a different issue)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK until you say
So it no longer is precision damage at all.
It never really loses the precision tag even though it is something else. It can still be pulled up by immunity rules.
Two things:
One, precision damage automatically changes into a physical damage type when it is added to the damage. The rules for Precision damage are what tell us this. At that point the damage is piercing precision damage (for example). Which is still a different type than the piercing damage that the weapon would be dealing.
But the rule in Confident Finisher isn't doing that. It isn't causing the precision damage to become precision damage of the type of the weapon. It instead is its own rule that says "This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike."
That isn't the precision damage rule that is converting the precision damage. That is Confident Finisher saying to use a different damage type entirely. The damage type of the weapon. And no weapon that I am aware of deals precision damage by default.
Two, piercing damage and piercing precision damage are combined when looking at piercing resistance or immunity, and piercing damage and piercing precision damage are looked at separately when looking at precision immunity. That does not mean that precision is a 'tag' that is attached to that damage. It is a damage type. It is not a trait on the damage like Nonlethal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Precision damage is a damage type just like energy, bleed, mental, poison, etc. The damage one does on a failure of a use of Combat Finisher is listed as the weapon type even though the amount is half what the precision damage would be. I can see why most here believe it to still be precision, but the specific wording of the ability combined with rules on resistance/immunity as well as damage types leads me to believe the failure effect doesn’t do precision damage. As the rules on page 451 of the CRB state that precision damage adds to the weapon damage but is tracked separately, then why bother adding the second line of the Combat Finisher failure effect if it isn’t meant to be different than precision? I know that doubling up on a rule happens and maybe that is the case here, but I also think it is incorrect to assume that as the reason the Combat Finisher failure rule is written as such. So if it isn’t written to restate the rule about how precision damage works a la adding to the weapon damage, then it has to be separate from precision.
I also found where it says (under the Key Terms information part of Finishers) that one could choose to take the failure effect when making a successful attack. So I ask again why do that if the damage to the finisher is still precision given the only reason I know to do that would be to avoid precision damage immunity?
But the rule in Confident Finisher isn't doing that. It isn't causing the precision damage to become precision damage of the type of the weapon. It instead is its own rule that says "This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike."
I'm Ok with that.
So I ask again why do that if the damage to the finisher is still precision given the only reason I know to do that would be to avoid precision damage immunity?
A course of action being an objectively bad idea has little bearing on how to interpret damage types. This is a complex game. The ability to make decisions with good and bad consequences is vital. If all my choices invariably result in "win" I really do not have much choice at all. Players are allowed to select the failure result if they score a success. This feature does not imply any sort of qualitative judgement. It does not claim the failure effect has to be useful or even relevant.
So I ask again why do that if the damage to the finisher is still precision given the only reason I know to do that would be to avoid precision damage immunity?A course of action being an objectively bad idea has little bearing on how to interpret damage types. This is a complex game. The ability to make decisions with good and bad consequences is vital. If all my choices invariably result in "win" I really do not have much choice at all. Players are allowed to select the failure result if they score a success. This feature does not imply any sort of qualitative judgement. It does not claim the failure effect has to be useful or even relevant.
I disagree. There would be absolutely no point to the feature without some type of payoff.
then why bother adding the second line of the Combat Finisher failure effect if it isn’t meant to be different than precision?
So you know what type the damage is?
I disagree. There would be absolutely no point to the feature without some type of payoff.
A pointless feature makes no implications about damage types. The Finisher trait and Press trait share common language. Some of them have failure effects and both traits state you can choose the failure option if you got a success. This is an example of a general rule that has been attached to each relevant trait. A player is allowed to do this. This is effective future proofing. We do not need a preconceived situation where failure is preferable, we have a rule stating it is an option if we want it. Nothing about this option implies or requires that the failure effect be desirable in every situation.
then why bother adding the second line of the Combat Finisher failure effect if it isn’t meant to be different than precision?So you know what type the damage is?
The weapon damage as the feature states.
Precision damage is a damage type just like energy, bleed, mental, poison, etc.That's demonstrably false.
Unlike all the other types of damage you mentioned, by RAW Precision damage has no type of its own but takes the type it is added to.
I've even linked the raw text above.
So, by definition, it is NOT "like the other types of damage".
There is no "just precision damage" like there is "just slashing damage".
Then explain CRB pg.451 that lists out the different damage types and lists precision as it’s own category.
I disagree. There would be absolutely no point to the feature without some type of payoff.A pointless feature makes no implications about damage types. The Finisher trait and Press trait share common language. Some of them have failure effects and both traits state you can choose the failure option if you got a success. This is an example of a general rule that has been attached to each relevant trait. A player is allowed to do this. This is effective future proofing. We do not need a preconceived situation where failure is preferable, we have a rule stating it is an option if we want it. Nothing about this option implies or requires that the failure effect be desirable in every situation.
Okay. So why doesn’t any other class have the ability to do half (actually even less given the initial weapon damage isn’t applied either) damage by choice upon a successful attack? There would be no point to it at all unless there was some kind of benefit. It also says the damage is the weapon type in the description of the ability.
I also put more faith into the designers efforts than to assume they would put a useless ability forward just to add more words to a description. To claim future proofing seems more a cop-out as there hasn’t been any new feats or features added to swashbucklers since inception.
At this point, I can see this will be another going around in circles debate. Without any errata or specific mentions from the devs, I believe this is an impasse as I can see (as I above have stated) why some would believe it is still precision. I don’t and have already said why.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. The only thing I would add at this point is that it feels really strange from a narrative standpoint to still be dealing precision damage when you miss.
Precision damage is for when you hit so accurately that you damage something extra vulnerable.
So flubbing the attack roll and still managing to do a small amount of standard weapon damage makes narrative sense.
Flubbing the attack roll and therefore hitting a super sensitive area very gently... Not so much.
Okay. So why doesn’t any other class have the ability to do half (actually even less given the initial weapon damage isn’t applied either) damage by choice upon a successful attack?As I said here:
The Finisher trait and Press trait share common language. Some of them have failure effects and both traits state you can choose the failure option if you got a success.
That means Fighter, if you are not familiar with the Press trait. The Fighter has the ability to do half damage (actually even less) by choice upon a successful attack. Yes, it is generally a bad idea. But it is an option, explicitly stated in the rules. The traits share a lot of common language.
Confident Finisher might not deal Precision damage on a failure, argue that point all you want. However, I suggest you find better evidence than the option to choose the failure result on a successful Finisher. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Yeah. The only thing I would add at this point is that it feels really strange from a narrative standpoint to still be dealing precision damage when you miss.
Precision damage is for when you hit so accurately that you damage something extra vulnerable.
So flubbing the attack roll and still managing to do a small amount of standard weapon damage makes narrative sense.
Flubbing the attack roll and therefore hitting a super sensitive area very gently... Not so much.
Devil's Advocate time: You could just as easily say that, in this situation, your character was still perfectly accurate, your failed attack roll just indicates you didn't hit HARD enough to deal full weapon damage. But you still deal a small amount of precision due to placing the strike RIGHT where it needed to go.
Yes, that is an argument against the way I said I'd rule it, but it does deserve consideration just as much as how odd it is to deal precision damage on a "miss". Remember, a successful attack doesn't just mean that your weapon struck the enemy. It means it struck it with enough force to also deal damage.
Devil's Advocate time: You could just as easily say that, in this situation, your character was still perfectly accurate, your failed attack roll just indicates you didn't hit HARD enough to deal full weapon damage.
Flubbing the attack roll and therefore hitting a super sensitive area very gently... Not so much.
then why bother adding the second line of the Combat Finisher failure effect if it isn’t meant to be different than precision?
This is another example of shared language between Finisher trait and Press trait actions with a failure effect. Assuming the sole intent is to remove Precision is demonstrably false as Press trait failure effects include a similar line even when Precision is not under discussion. The damage, on a failure, is coming from the feat. That does not in itself suggest a type, so it includes a rule to use the same type as the weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
then why bother adding the second line of the Combat Finisher failure effect if it isn’t meant to be different than precision?This is another example of shared language between Finisher trait and Press trait actions with a failure effect. Assuming the sole intent is to remove Precision is demonstrably false as Press trait failure effects include a similar line even when Precision is not under discussion. The damage, on a failure, is coming from the feat. That does not in itself suggest a type, so it includes a rule to use the same type as the weapon.
I would also agree that the balance considerations about the failure effect of Confident Finisher being precision damage or not are a bit of a red herring. A distraction from what the explicit rules say about the damage types. The balance point is somewhat valid when discussing how powerful Precision immunity is and how it affects Swashbuckler characters though.
But for talking just about what the rules say about the damage type of Confident Finisher:
Piercing, Slashing, and Bludgeoning are damage types. Those are damage types that weapons have. Precision is not a damage type that weapons have.
So when that second sentence of Confident Finisher says to use the damage type of the weapon, then it is no longer precision damage. It is the damage type of the weapon - either Piercing, Slashing, or Bludgeoning. Or maybe in some very rare cases there is a weapon that only deals an energy damage type, in which case failure effect of Confident Finisher would deal that energy type.
I would also agree that the balance considerations about the failure effect of Confident Finisher being precision damage or not are a bit of a red herring. A distraction from what the explicit rules say about the damage types. The balance point is somewhat valid when discussing how powerful Precision immunity is and how it affects Swashbuckler characters though.
I will admit my goal here was to engage with the structure of the argument and not the conclusion. If the structure is sound the conclusion will take care of itself.
As for balance? No idea. Maybe Swashbuckler needs the boost. Well, they most likely need something but is this it?
Anyway. To engage directly with the damage type we need some common ground. I believe we agree Precision cannot or does not currently exist as an independent damage type? It is a type of sorts, it interacts with immunity and such, but it cannot be the only type (Weird Disintegrate cases not withstanding). It usually, by its own rules, adopts the type of whatever weapon or attack it accompanies. We all good here?
Now we get to the failure effect language,
You make an incredibly graceful attack, piercing your foe's defenses. Make a Strike with a weapon or unarmed attack that would apply your precise strike damage, with the following failure effect.
Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.
I believe we agree the express intent of that line is to reestablish the damage is physical (or whatever the weapon deals) and not solely to remove the Precision trait. We might disagree on, or are at least discussing, if it also removes the Precision tag just due to how it literally reads.
I ask this: if an attack is physical, piercing and precision, does stating it is physical and piercing delete the precision tag? Is the statement adding the tags "physical and piercing" just in case they were not there already, or is it deleting all tags and replacing them with "physical and piercing" only? The line is there first and foremost to make sure the feat damage is recognized as weapon damage, as opposed to something like Mental damage from the Confident part of Confident Finisher. Due to the fact that Precision damage can already attach itself to weapon damage and keep both types, I do not think restating the weapon part overwrites the Precision type.
... Likewise, since precision damage is always the same type of damage as the attack it's augmenting...
To me, it looks like Precision expects to go along with whatever the base damage type is doing. Changing the base type would just change the type of the Precision, not remove the Precision.
It is a bit weird that the base damage being augmented is zero in this case. Also a bit weird that you lose the weapon damage entirely on a miss but keep some of the Precision. Certainly worth the discussion, this is a strange effect.
The weapon damage as the feature states.then why bother adding the second line of the Combat Finisher failure effect if it isn’t meant to be different than precision?So you know what type the damage is?
... Yeah exactly.
Anyway. To engage directly with the damage type we need some common ground. I believe we agree Precision cannot or does not currently exist as an independent damage type? It is a type of sorts, it interacts with immunity and such, but it cannot be the only type (Weird Disintegrate cases not withstanding). It usually, by its own rules, adopts the type of whatever weapon or attack it accompanies. We all good here?
Somewhat. Precision damage is a strange damage type. So it is a damage type. It is a damage type that is not tracked separately - unless it is.
Honestly the wording on it really needs cleaned up.
It combines with the primary attack damage type when dealing with things that interact with that primary damage type, but it is tracked separately when dealing with things that interact with Precision damage specifically.
Now we get to the failure effect language,I believe we agree the express intent of that line is to reestablish the damage is physical (or whatever the weapon deals) and not solely to remove the Precision trait. We might disagree on, or are at least discussing, if it also removes the Precision tag just due to how it literally reads.You make an incredibly graceful attack, piercing your foe's defenses. Make a Strike with a weapon or unarmed attack that would apply your precise strike damage, with the following failure effect.
Failure You deal half your precise strike damage to the target. This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike.
Yes, the point is to set the damage type - because precision damage on its own wouldn't be valid.
Precision isn't a 'tag' though. It is a damage type.
I ask this: if an attack is physical, piercing and precision, does stating it is physical and piercing delete the precision tag? Is the statement adding the tags "physical and piercing" just in case they were not there already, or is it deleting all tags and replacing them with "physical and piercing" only? The line is there first and foremost to make sure the feat damage is recognized as weapon damage, as opposed to something like Mental damage from the Confident part of Confident Finisher. Due to the fact that Precision damage can already attach itself to weapon damage and keep both types, I do not think restating the weapon part overwrites the Precision type.
Damage is going to be one type or another. It isn't going to be both. An attack can include multiple types, but they would be tracked and interacted with separately. Except for the strange damage type of Precision damage - which specifies exactly how and when to combine the damage types together.
So another question: If an attack says that it does bludgeoning damage on a hit, and does cold damage on a critical hit - if you roll a critical hit, what damage type does it do?
I would say that it does cold damage. Because that is the damage type for a critical hit. It isn't going to do Bludgeoning-Cold damage, because that isn't a valid damage type. Damage types aren't traits. Or tags.
So when Confident Finisher says that a failure deals the damage type of the weapon, it is going to deal specifically, and only, the damage type of the weapon.
-----
For comparison, Nonlethal is not a damage type. It is a trait that is added to an attack and all of the damage that it deals.
But Precision is a damage type - even though it is a strange one.
Damage is going to be one type or another. It isn't going to be both.
Then do you ever actually do precision damage? Because the normal use case of precision damage also inherits damage type from the attack being made.
Damage is going to be one type or another. It isn't going to be both.Then do you ever actually do precision damage?
Yes.
And then later, no.
Fun, yeah?
So you deal precision damage from an attack. Then when calculating resistances, weaknesses, and immunities it is sometimes combined with the other damage of the attack and sometimes not. Then when it comes to applying the damage to the target it is always combined with all of the rest of the damage and you don't actually deal Precision damage to the target.
Which is the basis for my stand on this. It is the attack (or in this case, the failure effect of the attack) that specifies the damage type. And at that point, Precision damage is a fully separate damage type. It only combines and morphs into a different damage type later in the process of applying damage.
Damage is going to be one type or another. It isn't going to be both.
This is objectively false. Let me rephrase that; source please. Lots of attacks have multiple types. I can think of a relevant one with Physical, Piercing and Precision. The rules identify Physical as a damage type and Piercing as a type of Physical damage. That is two already, and we both seem to understand Precision can be a third.
So another question: If an attack says that it does bludgeoning damage on a hit, and does cold damage on a critical hit - if you roll a critical hit, what damage type does it do?
Of course it does Cold. That was never a question. This discussion is about Precision damage, which explicitly can be multiple types, and not about Cold. So lets make it about an attack that would also deal Precision damage. On a success we would get Bludgeoning Precision damage and on a critical success we would get Cold Precision damage. Although it would interact strangely with the rule about not doubling effects you only get from a critical, but that is beside the point. Changing the base damage type does not block Precision from adding on as an additional type.
So when Confident Finisher says that a failure deals the damage type of the weapon, it is going to deal specifically, and only, the damage type of the weapon.
This does not follow logically. Your argument leading up to this conclusion did not address Precision damage and Precision damage definitely behaves differently. Specifically, your example did not establish that Precision would be excluded implicitly. I think we agree that the types of Physical damage and the types of Energy damage would most likely overwrite each other in the situation of a rule reading "this attack deals X type of damage". But Precision inherently expects to coexist with another type and thus is not contradicted by the statement the same way Physical or Energy would be.
In any case, yes, I should have been more consistent with using the word "type" every time. I hope my meaning was clear. This has been informative and entertaining.
Damage is going to be one type or another. It isn't going to be both.This is objectively false. Lots of attacks have multiple types.
Attacks can have multiple damage types, yes.
I haven't found any damage amounts that are multiple types.
There is the Versatile trait that allows the user to switch which damage type it does. And the Concussive trait that switches automatically depending on the resistances and weaknesses of the target.
But neither of those will deal multiple types at the same time.
And as I mentioned earlier, you can have an attack that deals multiple types of damage, such as a longsword with a Flaming rune that deals both slashing damage and fire damage. But those two damage pools are separate - they have different values (even if they are coincidentally equal). None of that damage is both slashing and fire.
I can think of a relevant one with Physical, Piercing and Precision. The rules identify Physical as a damage type and Piercing as a type of Physical damage. That is two already, and we both seem to understand Precision can be a third.
If we wanted to be really technical, Piercing, Bludgeoning, and Slashing aren't full damage types. Physical is the damage type and piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing are the subtypes. Same with Energy damage and Alignment damage. Each of those damage types have subtypes. And Precision is a first-order damage type in the list. Right there with Physical, Energy, and Alignment damage.
So calling Piercing and Physical as two separate damage types is not accurate. They are the same type - Physical. Just one is more fully specified with its subtype.
-----
And yes, informative and entertaining is the point.
physical+slashing
both are simultaneously explicitly damage types that occur in the same instance.
Like I mentioned in the previous post. The damage types listed are:
Physical
Energy
Alignment
Mental
Poison
Bleed
Precision
Precious Materials are in the list, but are also specified to not be a damage type.
And Slashing damage is a sub-type of Physical.
So Physical+Slashing is redundant - not an instance of damage with multiple separate types.
And Slashing damage is a sub-type of Physical.
So Physical+Slashing is redundant - not an instance of damage with multiple separate types.
I cannot find where the rules delineate subtypes of damage. Help me out?
You also seem to be selectively ignoring Precision damage. You identify Precision here
And Precision is a first-order damage type in the list. Right there with Physical, Energy, and Alignment damage.but weirdly forgot about it earlier
haven't found any damage amounts that are multiple types.
Precision might be something of an exception, but so long as we are literally discussing Precision damage it seems relevant.
Also, check out Bleed again. It is as much a first-order type as Physical or Precision but also explicitly claims to be Physical.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think we have gotten to the point of nit-picking the table of damage types to the point of insanity.
Physical is a damage type, but piercing, slashing, and bludgeoning are only defined inside of that type's rules description (hence making them subtypes). But bleed is also a Physical damage type. And Precision is a primary damage type that can't be used independently and morphs into one of the other damage types when used. Splash damage doesn't even show up on the list anywhere.
But in all of this, I think there is still room to say that weapons don't deal precision damage, so when Confident Finisher says that the damage type is that of the weapon, it is no longer precision damage. Because precision isn't a trait on the attack that sticks around like Nonlethal is. It is a damage type that gets overridden by the rule "This damage type is that of the weapon or unarmed attack you used for the Strike."
Are there other valid interpretations - yeah. Does it make a difference 99% of the time, no.