PDA

View Full Version : An alll new damage reduction question



psisai
2010-03-25, 04:59 PM
Ok, I have scanned through old posts concerning damage reduction and I couldn't find anything hitting on the questions I'm about to ask, so I hope this is new mindfood for most people.

1. Assume that A is about to hit B with a sword and doesn't meet any criteria to get through B's damage reduction. I'm well aware of how the DR rules work for most instances. DR applies to the base weapon damage as well as any bonus to the base damage from sources like strength, power attack, weapon specilization, and enhancement. And I know that energy damage that rides the wepon ignores DR, just as spells do.
My question pertains to damage that has been added to a weapon that is magical in origin, but isn't listed as any energy type. For example, you could give the weapon the following properties: Viscious or Bane (both DMG), Vampiric (MIC) or terran, aquan, ignan, auran (MIC), all of which simply state that xD6 of damage is added to the weapon. There are spells and Su abilities that also enchant a weapon with added damage, but the damage isn't listed as any specific energy type. I want to know if this untyped magical damage bypasses DR or is considered part of the base physical damage.
According to the definition of DR, all spells, (Sp), and (Su) abilities bypasses it, and since all of the above mentioned cases are unquestionably magical in origin, my initial thinking is that they would ignore DR. (Ex) sources like sneak attack damage, crit damage, feats, and whatnot don't however.

2. And along these same lines, do weapons that are created from spells also automaticaly ignore DR because they are magical, even if they have unlisted damage types? Examples of these are:
Scimitar of sand (sandstorm)
Boneblade (book of vile darkenss)
ice lance or spectral weapon (spell compendium)
black blade of diasaster (spell compendium)
magic stone or spike stones (PHB)
blelker claws (somewhat like a magic weapon)

3. Finaly, many, many spells don't list their damage type. In fact, some of them explicitly list part or all of their damage as either piercing, bludgenoning, or slashing. Does damage from these spells, even though there is no middle man delivery system like when they enchant a weapon, bypass DR? Examples of these are:
disintegrate (PHB)
sphere of ultimate destruction, earth reaver, eradicate earth, defenstrating sphere (spell compendium)
ice storm or storm of vengence (PHB)
Desiccate (sandstorm) [for this matter, does desiccation damage even count as an energy type?]

Sorry for long post.

tl:dr = if damage is not explicity stated in what type it is, but is from an obvious magical source, does it bypass DR?

deuxhero
2010-03-25, 05:03 PM
spells ignore DR, even if they do damage (slash/pierce/bludgeon). If the Complete Crud writers didn't understand this or if they got this and thought Psionics were overpowered.

Starbuck_II
2010-03-25, 05:06 PM
Magical overrides DR. There are exceptions but unless the spells/powers say they are the exceptions (like Complete Psionic says for Crystal shard): they bypass it.

So assume bypass, unless a source says those specific spells/powers act otherwise.

psisai
2010-03-25, 05:28 PM
I see. Thanks for the info. I also agree with you guys. I do still wonder why they describe some spells with the damage type slash/pierce/bludgeon, but since some monsters like skeletons and zombies are affected differently from those 3 types independent of DR, I guess they had to specify in some cases.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-25, 05:41 PM
Splintershard is a druid slashing version of scorching ray. It also applies DR according to the spell description.

I think the RAI may have been that DR would have applied but only if its vs a damage type (slashing/bludgeoning/piercing)

It does actually make sense that any conjuration(creation) damaging spell would be subject to damage reduction as the created material is non-magical, which is why it ignores DR.

psisai
2010-03-25, 06:04 PM
True, but the problem with letting in s/p/b magic damage to be reduced by DR, is that many spells don't state their damage is s/p/b, but the implications are heavy that it is, and therefore, if I allow one avenue of magic damage to be stopped by DR, then that avenue can become a superhighway if RAI is applied to spell and magic damage descriptions. But, all things considered, I somewhat agree that initialy the writers of those spells might have had envisioned the damage to be like normal damage.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-03-25, 07:06 PM
Unless the damage says slashing/bludgeoning/piercing.
Then its safe to say it ignores DR in both RAW and RAI, but so few spells actually deal a damage type its probably safe to just ignore it in terms of DR.

It was probably more relevant when creatures had abilities like half damage from x weapons. (like how skeletons used to take half damage from all piercing instead of having DR)

Keld Denar
2010-03-25, 07:15 PM
Ring of Blades is another of those funny crossover spells. Its explicitly Silvered and Slashing damage, which would means it would be reduced against a skeleton or similar.

Also, I think the spell is Splinterbolt, and its Piercing. I was a table where someone messed up and accidentally said [Plant] damage though, which caused about 10 minutes of uncontrolled laughter as we tried to figure out exactly what [Plant] damage would entail.

psisai
2010-03-25, 08:02 PM
Actualy, I do have one last question to ask. Where exactly does it state that the magical bonus to damage from an enhancement bonus to a weapon does not bypass DR? I've been searching the books because its been nagging me but I can't find it anywhere. I hope I haven't been assuming that it doesn't get through DR all these years when in actuality theres nothing saying it shouldn't.

Starbuck_II
2010-03-25, 08:26 PM
Actualy, I do have one last question to ask. Where exactly does it state that the magical bonus to damage from an enhancement bonus to a weapon does not bypass DR? I've been searching the books because its been nagging me but I can't find it anywhere. I hope I haven't been assuming that it doesn't get through DR all these years when in actuality theres nothing saying it shouldn't.

Because it enhances the weapons damage so anything that blocks weapon blocks it.

It isn't magic damage. But extra weapon damage.

KillianHawkeye
2010-03-25, 09:12 PM
Yeah, you're not missing anything. It doesn't state that because it doesn't have to. Rather, it would have to somewhere state the opposite (that DR does NOT apply to the magical bonus on your weapon even if the normal weapon damage is blocked, which is silly).

Lysander
2010-03-25, 11:45 PM
Actualy, I do have one last question to ask. Where exactly does it state that the magical bonus to damage from an enhancement bonus to a weapon does not bypass DR? I've been searching the books because its been nagging me but I can't find it anywhere. I hope I haven't been assuming that it doesn't get through DR all these years when in actuality theres nothing saying it shouldn't.

It pretty explicitly states that magical enhancement bonuses are a vulnerability some but not all creatures with DR have:


Some monsters are vulnerable to magic weapons. Any weapon with at least a +1 magical enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls overcomes the damage reduction of these monsters.

ShneekeyTheLost
2010-03-25, 11:51 PM
My question pertains to damage that has been added to a weapon that is magical in origin, but isn't listed as any energy type. For example, you could give the weapon the following properties: Viscious or Bane (both DMG), Vampiric (MIC) or terran, aquan, ignan, auran (MIC), all of which simply state that xD6 of damage is added to the weapon. There are spells and Su abilities that also enchant a weapon with added damage, but the damage isn't listed as any specific energy type. I want to know if this untyped magical damage bypasses DR or is considered part of the base physical damage.

These add base damage to the weapon, just like regular enhancement bonuses, and as such, are affected by DR.

Magic Stone is an enhancement bonus to damage on the thrown stone, therefore also is affected by DR, except DR/magic or DR/bludgeoning.

panaikhan
2010-03-26, 08:31 AM
Damage Reduction has been through the ringer a few times... here's what I think.

Weapons 'summoned' by spells would be magical, defeating DR X/magic but not X/+N unless the spell included a progression (i.e. +1 per 4 levels of caster).
Bane, and similar effects, simply list a damage boost. It is considered an 'enhancement bonus' to damage, so is still effected by DR.

Energy. This is effected by the various Resistences according to it's type (energy of an unspecified type cannot be resisted). It bypasses DR.

Special Material/Type/Alignment. This can ONLY be overcome by the condition specified.

If a DR lists more than one component separated by 'AND', the attacking weapon has to be ALL of the components, regardless of it's origin, or be reduced.

Spells that simulate non-magical, non-energy damage (such as sandstorms) would be subject to DR.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-03-26, 08:44 AM
1. Assume that A is about to hit B with a sword and doesn't meet any criteria to get through B's damage reduction. I'm well aware of how the DR rules work for most instances. DR applies to the base weapon damage as well as any bonus to the base damage from sources like strength, power attack, weapon specilization, and enhancement. And I know that energy damage that rides the wepon ignores DR, just as spells do.
My question pertains to damage that has been added to a weapon that is magical in origin, but isn't listed as any energy type. For example, you could give the weapon the following properties: Viscious or Bane (both DMG), Vampiric (MIC) or terran, aquan, ignan, auran (MIC), all of which simply state that xD6 of damage is added to the weapon. There are spells and Su abilities that also enchant a weapon with added damage, but the damage isn't listed as any specific energy type. I want to know if this untyped magical damage bypasses DR or is considered part of the base physical damage.
According to the definition of DR, all spells, (Sp), and (Su) abilities bypasses it, and since all of the above mentioned cases are unquestionably magical in origin, my initial thinking is that they would ignore DR. (Ex) sources like sneak attack damage, crit damage, feats, and whatnot don't however.

If it doesn't qualify it to by pass the DR normaly(like a bludgion weapon hitting a dr 5/bludgion) or

damage from energy attacks (even nonmagical ones), spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities then it gets stopped by DR even if its added damage from magic weapons.




2. And along these same lines, do weapons that are created from spells also automaticaly ignore DR because they are magical, even if they have unlisted damage types? Examples of these are:
Scimitar of sand (sandstorm)
Boneblade (book of vile darkenss)
ice lance or spectral weapon (spell compendium)
black blade of diasaster (spell compendium)
magic stone or spike stones (PHB)
blelker claws (somewhat like a magic weapon)

Unless they fall under the qualities that by pass Dr then no. They are creating something once created though magical still don't by pass DR as per a spell unless other wise stated.



3. Finaly, many, many spells don't list their damage type. In fact, some of them explicitly list part or all of their damage as either piercing, bludgenoning, or slashing. Does damage from these spells, even though there is no middle man delivery system like when they enchant a weapon, bypass DR? Examples of these are:
disintegrate (PHB)
sphere of ultimate destruction, earth reaver, eradicate earth, defenstrating sphere (spell compendium)
ice storm or storm of vengence (PHB)
Desiccate (sandstorm) [for this matter, does desiccation damage even count as an energy type?]

This one is a bit different. I read it as it counts as a spell unless something in the description gives it a quality.
For example: Ice storm I belive is the one that does cold and bludgion damage. The cold would by pass DR. But the bludgeon would not.
(assuming non bludgeon dr)



tl:dr = if damage is not explicity stated in what type it is, but is from an obvious magical source, does it bypass DR?
If it is from a Spell, spell like ability, or supernatural ability then yes.

Runestar
2010-03-26, 08:55 AM
3) Spells ignore sr, even if their damage replicates physical damage. However, I think some of the shard powers were revised to be affected by dr in complete psionic.

1) Bane is in fact subject to dr, as it simply improves the base damage of the weapon.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-03-26, 08:58 AM
3) Spells ignore sr, even if their damage replicates physical damage. However, I think some of the shard powers were revised to be affected by dr in complete psionic.


Then whats the point of having them typed?

edit:
never mind

Though i don't think its unreasonable to allow those spells to be stoped by magic.

PhoenixRivers
2010-03-26, 08:59 AM
RAW: Spells/SLA's/SU's bypass DR, when the spell directly deals damage.

So Spell X deals damage, and bypasses DR.

Spell Y (Snake's swiftness) grants you an attack. You make the attack, and do not bypass DR. The damage wasn't direct.

In addition, if damage added to an attack (such as sneak attack or the vicious enhancement) is not typed, it is generally considered to be of the same type as the weapon. Such qualities are effects on the weapon, not abilities.


Then whats the point of having them typed?

Possibly for other effects that trigger off damage type.

psisai
2010-03-26, 05:21 PM
Wow, thanks for all the great feedback.

Please allow me to bring up another way to view this problem. As PhoenixRivers correctly quoted, all the rules officialy say on this whole subject is that damage (directly) from spells, Sp and Su abilities bypasses DR, as does energy. Starting with this fact, question 3. I put forward can be said to be essentialy covered by this statment. The few spells that list a physical damage type like s/p/b likely do so in the rare cases they go up against something that modifies some type of physical damage by means other than Dr, like skeletons and zombies.

Question 1. and 2. now bring up the first logical question to be asked about spells that fall into one of those two categories. Is the damage added to the weapon or the damage dealt by a created weapon, DIRECTLY a result of the spell? Obviously, if you cast enlarge on someone, that enhances the muscles, which then deal the damage. The muscles become the middle man, or energy transfer medium. If you cast haste on someone, then you have only allowed them to deal more damage of the type(s) they normaly already can; nothing comes from the spell. If you enchant a weapon with the bane effect or cast a spell that does the same thing, the damage added, imo, is directly a result of the spell. The damage is listed in the spell's description, it stops when the duration ends, you can target the weapon thus enchanted with a dispel magic to end the spell, so if it smells, feels, and talks like a spell, its a spell. As far as permanent enchantments, like the bane weapon ability, a spell is needed in the creation cost. All the gold and xp essentialy in the items creations cost go to makeing the spells involved permanent. the ability goes away in an AMF, or can be turned off temporarily with a dispel magaic. So again, I would say damage from any magical enhancement also bypasses DR.

Similar logic can be applied to 2.
The damage from the created weapon is listed in the spell's description, thus can be maximized, enhanced like a spell. The weapon lasts for the seplls duration, like normal spell effects. A detect magic and dispel magic work on the weapon as if it were a spell. QED, spell.

I can see the other side with the others who argure the opposite on this. And that the rules are not clear at all. Ultimately, like so much in dnd, it must be a dm descion at the end. My last final point would be that if I spent all the money to permanently enchant a weapon, or use a prescious spell slot to do the same thing, or to make a weapon, or deal damage, I would hate for it to so easily be shrugged off by something that gets to be very common after a while and is almost a given for any real challenge. And this is coming from a dm's perspective.