If I have the acid and flaming runes on my fist (due to handwraps of mighty fists or some other effect), are my fist attacks still considered nonlethal?
It seems odd to me to be nonlethally burning and melting a victim's flesh.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems odd to me to be nonlethally burning and melting a victim's flesh.
Tell that to the kineticists with Safe Elements.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's no weirder than nonlethally breaking their bones or cutting their flesh. Pathfinder is not a simulationist game.
I'm still curious about the divide, if any. Is it possible that the fist damage is nonlethal, but the acid and fire damage is lethal? How would that even work?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If there was a rule that the damage from the runes was lethal even on a nonlethal Strike, it would be very weird to resolve, yes.
But there isn't any rule indicating that the Strike stops being entirely nonlethal, so that issue doesn't happen.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I have the acid and flaming runes on my fist (due to handwraps of mighty fists or some other effect), are my fist attacks still considered nonlethal?
It seems odd to me to be nonlethally burning and melting a victim's flesh.
Non-lethal damage is better explained by damage done on non-vital parts of the anatomy. So you are non-lethally burning and melting the victim's leg, so you can't kill it because of that (well, on paper, you should, but this is a game where you can take an arrow and survive, so...).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no divide. If there was it would probably be stated and likely have a trait for ease of reference. You are free to houserule one, but this strikes me as a pain in the butt to try to track and fairly arbitrary.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I have the acid and flaming runes on my fist (due to handwraps of mighty fists or some other effect), are my fist attacks still considered nonlethal?
It seems odd to me to be nonlethally burning and melting a victim's flesh.
I have been burned before. It has not killed me yet. Most burns are nonlethal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In general, if you're not paying extra to make attack non-lethal I would say it's generally a benefit.
If necessary, you can always kill a thing after its unconscious (although most tables ignore what happens to a downed enemy I think, whether it's unconscious or dead).
I don't think creature types have blanket non-lethal immunity like they used to, so it's not as much an issue as it was in previous editions.
So yeah, non-lethal elemental damage.
In general, if you're not paying extra to make attack non-lethal I would say it's generally a benefit.
If necessary, you can always kill a thing after its unconscious (although most tables ignore what happens to a downed enemy I think, whether it's unconscious or dead).
I don't think creature types have blanket non-lethal immunity like they used to, so it's not as much an issue as it was in previous editions.
So yeah, non-lethal elemental damage.
Constructs have that blanket immunity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The big one I was thinking of was undead.
Constructs aren't completely uncommon, so that is a bit of a drawback.
The most common way of avoiding it, is to be a monk. But one can always take the -2 penalty to hit with a weapon with the non-lethal trait to deal lethal damage instead.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still curious about the divide, if any. Is it possible that the fist damage is nonlethal, but the acid and fire damage is lethal? How would that even work?
There is no such divide. A strike can be nonlethal, in which case the whole thing is nonlethal.
Presumably that means you burn a non-vital area. Nonlethal punching with a flaming fist frankly makes far more sense than a nonlethal flaming greataxe does, at least.
My poor, poor conrasu avenger of Monad, charged with destroying unnatural imbalances in the world, yet forced to use his fists to use his abilities, and therefore wholly unable to harm those abominations he seeks to destroy without first taking a -2 to attack.
It's like he's the polar opposite of the fighter. >C
My poor, poor conrasu avenger of Monad, charged with destroying unnatural imbalances in the world, yet forced to use his fists to use his abilities, and therefore wholly unable to harm those abominations he seeks to destroy without first taking a -2 to attack.
It's like he's the polar opposite of the fighter. >C
That would be a bard. I think your character should play the piccolo.
I can't actually find an iconic undead that's immune to nonlethal damage.* There is the question of what happens when you reduce a creature immune to being unconscious to 0 hp with nonlethal damage, but dealing damage to undead should not be a problem for your character.
*Searching AON for undead with "immunities" and "nonlethal" gave me 11 results, but all but one of those was actually an undead who dealt nonlethal damage. And that one undead that did have an immunity to nonlethal damage was from Age of Ashes, so it's obscure and quite possibly the result of a writer missing a memo.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My poor, poor conrasu avenger of Monad, charged with destroying unnatural imbalances in the world, yet forced to use his fists to use his abilities, and therefore wholly unable to harm those abominations he seeks to destroy without first taking a -2 to attack.
Just deal non-lethal 'til the beastie is unconscious, then take the -2 when their AC is -6 (prone: -2 circumstance penalty; unconscious: -4 status penalty).
My poor, poor conrasu avenger of Monad, charged with destroying unnatural imbalances in the world, yet forced to use his fists to use his abilities, and therefore wholly unable to harm those abominations he seeks to destroy without first taking a -2 to attack.Just deal non-lethal 'til the beastie is unconscious, then take the -2 when their AC is -6 (prone: -2 circumstance penalty; unconscious: -4 status penalty).
That's fine except for the plethora of creatures that are immune to nonlethal attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And that plethora is:
Constructs. Pretty much just constructs.
And that plethora is:
Constructs. Pretty much just constructs.
I could have sworn it included undead, oozes, and some aberrations.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could have sworn it included undead, oozes, and some aberrations.And that plethora is:
Constructs. Pretty much just constructs.
Oozes are precision damage not nonlethal. It's almost exclusively constructs for nonlethal. You can nonlethally beat an undead, say A lich, to 0 hp. The only thing is that you can't knock them unconscious [immune], so the final hit has to be something that deals lethal.
edit: Double checked, and it seems that you could kill an undead with a nonlethal. Getting Knocked Out [Player Core pg. 410] says "When undead and constructs reach 0 Hit Points, they're destroyed." So looks like punching a skeleton to death is a go.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could have sworn it included undead, oozes, and some aberrations.And that plethora is:
Constructs. Pretty much just constructs.
Not in 2E. You might be assuming some things that were immune in 1E still are. That was definitely how it went with undead.
Yeah, they removed the majority of immunity to non-lethal.
So dealing non-lethal damage isn't as big a drawback as it used to be, even if the concept of non-lethal fire/acid/electricity does come across as odd...we just need to imagine it as not hitting (or not reaching) critical areas of the body that would inflict lethal damage.
I can't actually find an iconic undead that's immune to nonlethal damage.* There is the question of what happens when you reduce a creature immune to being unconscious to 0 hp with nonlethal damage, but dealing damage to undead should not be a problem for your character.
*Searching AON for undead with "immunities" and "nonlethal" gave me 11 results, but all but one of those was actually an undead who dealt nonlethal damage. And that one undead that did have an immunity to nonlethal damage was from Age of Ashes, so it's obscure and quite possibly the result of a writer missing a memo.
Try the following complex queries:
immunity:(nonlethal attacks)
immunity:(nonlethal)
Both immunities appear to be identical in the remaster.
Also, I think undead are destroyed at 0 HP (except undead PCs).
I can't actually find an iconic undead that's immune to nonlethal damage.* There is the question of what happens when you reduce a creature immune to being unconscious to 0 hp with nonlethal damage, but dealing damage to undead should not be a problem for your character.
*Searching AON for undead with "immunities" and "nonlethal" gave me 11 results, but all but one of those was actually an undead who dealt nonlethal damage. And that one undead that did have an immunity to nonlethal damage was from Age of Ashes, so it's obscure and quite possibly the result of a writer missing a memo.
Try the following complex queries:
immunity:(nonlethal attacks)
immunity:(nonlethal)Both immunities appear to be identical in the remaster.
Also, I think undead are destroyed at 0 HP (except undead PCs).
Thanks. So, there are four non-constructs that are immune to nonlethal damage- Two fiends and two animated spells (the previously mentioned undead also has the construct trait, which explains how it got immunity to nonlethal damage).
How do you use complex queries on AoN? I fiddled with the filters for a bit, but wasn't able to get the results I sought.
...we just need to imagine it as not hitting (or not reaching) critical areas of the body that would inflict lethal damage.
Isn't torture a war crime? :P
I can't imagine the nonlethal use of acid and fire as being anything else.
How do you use complex queries on AoN? I fiddled with the filters for a bit, but wasn't able to get the results I sought.
It's a bit complex but for me was basically following the instructions there and a lot of trial and error before I understand it.
...we just need to imagine it as not hitting (or not reaching) critical areas of the body that would inflict lethal damage.Isn't torture a war crime? :P
I can't imagine the nonlethal use of acid and fire as being anything else.
I'm going to say something that some people might find absurd. But the definition of torture is quite relative.
Keeping a person imprisoned under limited conditions, with their food controlled, contact with other people severely restricted, and being restrained or even beaten in case of resistance in several aspects can be considered a case of torture, but that's how modern prisons work.
The problem is that punishments, when they are no longer punishments, are very similar to torture processes, and often torture processes are punishments. So when you need to punish someone without killing them in a certain way, you will be torturing that person by preventing their freedom in many ways, something that murder and death in combat do not do. It is quite contradictory that avoiding killing can in some way be considered more cruel than killing someone who needs to be punished or restrained because they are a threat to society or to serve as an example to discourage new crimes or irresponsibility.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How do you use complex queries on AoN? I fiddled with the filters for a bit, but wasn't able to get the results I sought.
...we just need to imagine it as not hitting (or not reaching) critical areas of the body that would inflict lethal damage.Isn't torture a war crime? :P
I can't imagine the nonlethal use of acid and fire as being anything else.
Nonlethal damage is basically wearing someone out. Agonizing stings, heat exhaustion, shivering cold, nervous system thrown for a loop, muscle spasms, shortness of breath, etc. can all winnow you down until you pass out from the strain.
Lots of good answers here, but note one edge case: If you nonlethal someone to 0, but also inflict persistent damage (eg a crit with a flaming weapon), then as soon as that damage ticks, they are taking damage while already at 0.
Any damage, even nonlethal, on a 0-HP target (stable or dying) will increase their dying value, making them no longer stable.
That's not really true. From my experience, players tend to consider that persistent damage inherits the traits of the attack that dealt it. Like Persistent damage from a Ghost Touch weapon not being reduced by Incorporeal Resistance, Bleeding from a Silver Weapon going through a Physical Resistance (except Silver). Considering that Persistent damage from a non lethal attack is lethal is a GM choice and one that would be criticized by most tables.
Any damage, even nonlethal, on a 0-HP target (stable or dying) will increase their dying value, making them no longer stable.
Damage dealt to 0 HP targets without the dying condition is not addressed by the rules. The closest rule we have is the earlier text for gaining the dying condition upon reaching zero. And that text states that nonlethal effects don't give dying.
If you are unconscious and at 0 Hit Points, but not dying, you return to 1 Hit Point and awaken after sufficient time passes. The GM determines how long you remain unconscious, from a minimum of 10 minutes to several hours. If you are healed, you lose the unconscious condition and can act normally on your next turn.
PF2e often spreads rules across conditions and traits.
If you are unconscious and at 0 Hit Points, but not dying, you return to 1 Hit Point and awaken after sufficient time passes. The GM determines how long you remain unconscious, from a minimum of 10 minutes to several hours. If you are healed, you lose the unconscious condition and can act normally on your next turn.PF2e often spreads rules across conditions and traits.
And that still doesn't address what happens to targets that take damage while at 0 HP but are not dying.
And that still doesn't address what happens to targets that take damage while at 0 HP but are not dying.If you are unconscious and at 0 Hit Points, but not dying, you return to 1 Hit Point and awaken after sufficient time passes. The GM determines how long you remain unconscious, from a minimum of 10 minutes to several hours. If you are healed, you lose the unconscious condition and can act normally on your next turn.PF2e often spreads rules across conditions and traits.
They don't get 0 HP. Every time a target get a 0 HP with a non-lethal damage it returns to 1 HP. Already being in unconscious conditions doesn't change that unless only if you do a lethal damage that the target will be 0 HP and start Dying condition.
Explaining logically and programmatically:
Was the damage lethal and brought the target to 0 HP or less? So the target is left with 0 HP and becomes 1 + wounded value.
Was the damage nonlethal and brought the target to 0 HP or less? So the target returns to 1 HP and becomes just unconscious.
I think it's silly to think that that a character who is at 0 hp and not dying wouldn't immediately begin dying again if they took damage.
Was the damage lethal and brought the target to 0 HP or less? So the target is left with 0 HP and becomes 1 + wounded value.
A bit fix due my lazy auto-translator:
Was the damage lethal and brought the target to 0 HP or less? So the target is left with 0 HP and becomes dying 1 + wounded value.
I think it's silly to think that that a character who is at 0 hp and not dying wouldn't immediately begin dying again if they took damage.
Yes, but a nonlethal effect shouldn't be capable of that because that's what nonlethal means.
I think it's silly to think that that a character who is at 0 hp and not dying wouldn't immediately begin dying again if they took damage.Yes, but a nonlethal effect shouldn't be capable of that because that's what nonlethal means.
Generally, I agree with the sentiment.
However, if someone took a sap and beat a patient in critical condition over the head, I can see the case being made for the possibility that the patient could easily die from the abuse.
After all, that's as precarious a situation as it gets.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Generally, I agree with the sentiment.
However, if someone took a sap and beat a patient in critical condition over the head, I can see the case being made for the possibility that the patient could easily die from the abuse.
After all, that's as precarious a situation as it gets.
That's a situation where you deal lethal damage with your sap, as you are specifically aiming to kill.
In PF2e, non-lethal weapons can be used lethally, as long as you deal with the penalty.
In practice, with the exception of immune creatures such as constructs. Non-lethal damage kills just as easily as lethal damage. Because you will hit the target until it is unconscious, then it will have such a high status and circumstance penalty (-4 status penalty to AC and reflexes, added to the -2 from off-guard) that even attacking with -2 will hardly be a problem to start to killing the target.