Undead and Ability Drain

[mehs]

Pathfinder seems to assume at times that undead can inflict ability drain, as a recurring natural ability. Except they can't, searching through all of pfsrd20, the only 1st party undead with ability drain is a unique monster from shadows of gallowspire and wraiths. There are a TON of undead that can do ability *damage*, vampires, shadows, allips, etc, but literally 2 with ability drain.

With that in mind, how does the necrotic resistance from the soul warden PRC work. It is a class focused on dealing with undead, that gives resistance to ability drain. I've been assuming that ability drain is a greater version of ability damage (like shaken, frightened, panicked), and it protects against both, but I've heard other people say they are separate. How should I interpret this according to RAW and/or RAI? Should i just call it a typo and say it protects from ability damage not drain?

Also what are usual sources of ability drain?


edit: by assume at times, point to daywalker spell, lifesurge weapon enhancement, and classes/archetypes that are anti undead and also give resistance to ability drain, soul warden, dread investigator, spirit scarred paladin, spirit master monk, etc.

[Rynjin]

Energy Drain is actually negative levels, not ability drain. It's this ability:


Energy Drain (Su)*


This attack saps a living opponent’s vital energy and happens automatically when a melee or ranged attack hits. Each successful energy drain bestows one or more negative levels (the creature’s description specifies how many). If an attack that includes an energy drain scores a critical hit, it bestows twice the listed number of negative levels. Unless otherwise specified in the creature’s description, a draining creature gains 5 temporary hit points for each negative level it bestows on an opponent. These temporary hit points last for a maximum of 1 hour. Negative levels remain until 24 hours have passed or until they are removed with a spell such as restoration. If a negative level is not removed before 24 hours have passed, the affected creature must attempt a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 the draining creature’s racial HD + the draining creature’s Cha modifier; the exact DC is given in the creature’s descriptive text). On a success, the negative level goes away with no harm to the creature. On a failure, the negative level becomes permanent. A separate saving throw is required for each negative level.

Format: energy drain (2 levels, DC 18); Location: Special Attacks and individual attacks.

Vampires, for example, have it. (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/undead/vampire/)

So the negative levels are common. Ability drain might be rarer, but it's still nice to have.


Also note that Soul Warden gives you resistance to ALL ability drain and negative levels, not just those inflicted by undead.

Finally, yes, drain and damage are different things. Resistance to one doesn't imply resistance to the other.

[mehs]

Im talking about ability drain, not energy drain.

At 8th level, a soul warden becomes resistant to ability drain and negative levels. Whenever a soul warden is targeted by an effect that would result in ability drain or impose negative levels, he takes 1 point of ability drain fewer and gains 1 negative level fewer than he normally would (to a minimum of 0). At 10th level, he takes 2 fewer points of ability drain and gains 2 fewer negative levels than he normally would.

My GM ruled it a typo and changed 'ability drain' to 'ability damage' in this ability, but interested in what others would say.

[Darg]

While ability drain is rarer, that doesn't mean it isn't nasty. Unlike damage it doesn't naturally heal over time. That said, the main benefit is obviously the reduction to negative levels (raise dead and resurrection don't impose a negative level for example), but as even you've shown there are at least a few cases where ability drain reduction can have its uses, like being the target of a Polar Ray.

[Maat Mons]

Not to be that guy, but if this thread's going to be about ability drain and not energy drain. the thread title should probably say ability drain instead of energy drain.

[mehs]

... huh. How do I change the thread title?

[Rynjin]

I'm trying to figure out why your GM would rule the ability (that functions perfectly) as a typo, and then nerf it a bunch. Being resistant to ability drain is very, very good. Much better than being resistant to ability damage.

1 point of ability damage does...nothing. Damage only affects you in increments of 2.

1 point of ability drain actually reduces your score, meaning if you have a 14 Con and take 1 Con drain, you instantly lose HP equal to your level.

Getting to ignore that one point is very good.

[mehs]

a) damage to constitution also lowers your hp, b) I wanted it that way, because resisting ability damage makes it actually function against undead, which my character is flavored around doing.

[Darg]

a) damage to constitution also lowers your hp, b) I wanted it that way, because resisting ability damage makes it actually function against undead, which my character is flavored around doing.

In pathfinder it's only in increments of 2. So 1 point of constitution damage would not reduce your HP, but 2 would give you a -1 con modifier.

As for b), you can do what you want in your game, but based on the flavor of the ability it's not meant to counter undead per se. Rather harm to the soul/self. As I mentioned earlier, it removes the negative level from Raise Dead. So it does a lot more than just protecting from undead creatures. Though I do agree that ability drain reduction just isn't as valuable in pathfinder as it is in 3.5e as paizo changed much of the drain attacks to be damage instead (allips only do wis drain on crit for example).

[Rynjin]

a) damage to constitution also lowers your hp.

As mentioned, only in increments of 2. Ability drain also has the distinction of actually lowering the score. If you take a bunch of Str damage, it lowers your attack and damage rolls, but not much else.

If you take a bunch of Str drain, your score is now actually that new number until it's fixed. So if you go from 18 to 12 Str, you no longer meet the prerequisites for the Power Attack Feat for example. Meaning the Feat is no longer usable, and neither are any Feats you may possess which have it as prerequisites (eg. Improved Bull Rush).

[mehs]

So just ignoring the latter half where I was saying I wanted ability damage resistance because it's actually thematic? As well as ability drain also only lowering hp in increments of 2.

Question remains, do people think the ability drain resistance was a typo? Are there actually a lot of undead with ability drain I'm overlooking? How would you have ruled it?

[Rynjin]

I didn't have a comment on the latter half because I didn't really care one way or the other on your preference. That's between you and your GM to houserule. Just correcting a misconception.

Anyway, no, it's not a typo. I think your mistske is in thinking abilities have to be very narrowly focused for them to be correctly written for whatever reason. It's drain because it's a VERY high level PrC ability and by the time you get it ability damage is so easy to fix as to be irrelevant.


As well as ability drain also only lowering hp in increments of 2.

This is also inaccurate. Changing your Con from 14 to 13 (one point of drain) reduces your modifier, and by extension total HP.

[mehs]

And this thread is asking about the weird ability

[Maat Mons]

Not to get this thread too far off topic, but ability damage in Pathfinder is nothing like ability damage in 3.5. In Pathfinder, ability damage does not reduce your ability score. So someone with a Con of 14 who takes 1 point of Con damage does not wind up with a Con of 13, and so does not suffer any of the negative effects that would come with such a decrease in Con score.

[icefractal]

Yes, but that's a difference that applies only to the first point of ability damage, and only half the time. Con 13 = they're the same, Con 14 = as if you took one less point (total, not per loss). There are certain things it won't effect, but in the majority of cases it's the same stats modified. I feel like the difference is being overstated.

Like, technically the ability works as written and it's not inconceivable you'd want to protect against ability drain in particular. But given that ability damage is by far the more common one, I'd much rather have resistance to that than drain-only, and as noted there are very few undead who deal ability drain (Ghosts can, but only some of them). Also, conceptually, it's a bit weird to resist ability drain but not ability damage.

Personally, I'd just make it apply to both.

[Rynjin]

Making it apply to both would certainly be better than to one.

But as-is it likely applies to drain because, again, this is an ability that comes online at level 14 at the earliest and gives full casting progression. It takes 100 gp and 3 rounds to blast away ALL ability damage accrued. Or a few casts of Lesser Resto from the wand your party probably has lying around at that point.

[mehs]

Level 13, not 14

[Rynjin]

Level 13, not 14

True true.

[mehs]

So anyone care to actually respond to how they would rule it if it came up in their game?

[Darg]

Seems perfectly fine as is for me.

[Rynjin]

So anyone care to actually respond to how they would rule it if it came up in their game?

Most comments made in this thread indicate that the participants would not "rule it" at all; the text functions perfectly as written.

[mehs]

Most of the comments in this thread were you. actually counting the people, 2 are for no change, 1 is for applying it to both, and 1 (me) is for making it be ability damage only.

[Maat Mons]

If it came up in a game I was running, I wouldn’t make any change.

For any DMs considering changing it, I’d suggest making it apply to both. Maybe give double effect for ability damage, a la Ring of Inner Fortitude. Maybe even give immunity to ability damage.

But I’d recommend against removing the protection from ability drain. I don’t see any reason to remove pre-existing functionality.

[Rynjin]

Most of the comments in this thread were you.

Thus making me technically correct, the best kind of correct.