Ask the Sage: Quick Rules Questions Vol. 5 (DnD 4e)

[Sic]

Not that I want to bybass Nocturnal's tricky question, but I have an easy one for the sage...

Can a 1st level eladrin mage wield both a staff as an implement and a longsword or does the staff implement have to be wielded with two hands ? Could that eladrin make both implement end melee attacks without penalty and without having to take a feat ? Would he get the benifit of the staff of defense class feature ?

[Nocturnal]

How can it be nobody answered that yet? I look away for one week and the whole place falls to pieces...

All other implements can be used one-handed so I've always ruled (and seen ruled) that you only need to hold a staff in both hands if you want to use it as a weapon. And you'd benefit from the Staff of Defense feature even if you're holding another object (though it might not have been intended that way.) These aren't obvious rulings.

Easier question than the last one I asked and nobody could answer...

If you're prone at the edge of a drop and you get pushed over the edge, do you get to make a saving throw to keep from falling even if you're already prone?

[hvg3akaek]

If you're prone at the edge of a drop and you get pushed over the edge, do you get to make a saving throw to keep from falling even if you're already prone?

Yup - if you make the save, you fall prone. It doesn't matter that you are already prone, as the conditions do not stack

Remember, with exception-based design, "prone" would have to say "you don't get to save" for it to nullify the other ruling

A young white dragon is Weakened when he bites a target that has vulnerable 5 cold. The dragon rolls and deals 7 untyped damage and 1 cold damage. How much damage does the target take? Things to consider...

Firstly, the +5 from vulnerability would not be altered, as it is the creature taking extra damage, not the attacker dealing more damage. A very slight, but important detail

(it comes up most often when using radiant damage against insubstantial undead...you halve your damage, and *then* add the vulnerability damage in).

Now, assuming the 1 damage is rolled (and not a +1 cold damage Weakened only halves damage rolls, not ongoing damage or damage that wasn't rolledconstant thing), it could be argued that it is decreased to 0.5, then rounded down to 0, and thus doesn't trigger the vulnerability. However, I would say that it is still doing cold damage, even if it was rounded down, and thus vulnerability still triggers. Especially as I would round the 0.5 damage in with the left-over 0,5 damage from the other source.

Thus, the target would take 7/2 + 1/2 + 5 damage, or 9 damage total.

However that brings up a good question that I had and don't know the answer to. What happens if you deal multiple distinct types of damage (written as e.g., "5 cold damage and 5 fire damage"), or typed and untyped (as might actually happen) and are Weakened?

So, my main reasoning here is that Weakened says that your attacks deal 1/2 damage, not each element of your attack deals 1/2 damage.



And finally:

How can it be nobody answered that yet?

Somehow, my subscription disappeared

[Nocturnal]

Thanks for the answers Hugga, that seems pretty reasonable, though it would also mean that damage that's been reduced all the way to 0 somehow (like from an Aegis of Shielding) still deals damage to a vulnerable creature (from allergies.)

Hmn, doesn't resist insubstantial also halve ongoing damage? That's better than weakening an attacker.

On a similar note, if a defender has two separate resistances and you hit with something that triggers both of them, you'd only count the higher one of the resistances right? e.g. your attack does does 5 fire damage and 5 cold damage and your target has resist 5 cold and fire, you do 5 damage, not 0, right? Or if you do 15 untyped damage and 4 cold damage, and your target has resist 5 all - your total damage would be 14, not 10. Similar situation happened in one of my games but I figured that from a balance perspective resistances weren't meant to double up in such weird cases.

[hvg3akaek]

Hmn, doesn't resist insubstantial also halve ongoing damage? That's better than weakening an attacker.

That is correct - and have the two together, and it's a whole world of hurt...!

Thanks for the answers Hugga, that seems pretty reasonable, though it would also mean that damage that's been reduced all the way to 0 somehow (like from an Aegis of Shielding) still deals damage to a vulnerable creature (from allergies.)

My assumptions above rested on the fact that it was still doing some cold damage, just less than one HP worth (but greater than 0 HP).

Although, I think the stance with vulnerabilities and resistances is that both apply: so if someone has resist 10 fire and vulnerable 15 fire, then takes 5 fire damage, even though the resistance brings it down to 0, the vulnerability still applies too.

Whether it applies before or after (5+15-10 = 10; 5-10 => 0 +15 = 15) however, I am unsure

if a defender has two separate resistances and you hit with something that triggers both of them, you'd only count the higher one of the resistances right? e.g. your attack does does 5 fire damage and 5 cold damage and your target has resist 5 cold and fire, you do 5 damage, not 0, right?

This is one of the things they refuse to clarify Every reiteration of the resistances seems to forget that it can happen - and usually, the assumption is correct. The initial 4e monsters *did* have damages that were "X fire and Y cold", but these changed to "X fire and cold" in about 99% of the cases. Thus, the resist 5 cold and resist 5 fire only resists 5 HP.

However, as far as can be determined, if something did 5 fire and 5 cold, and someone had resist 5 fire and 5 cold, they would take no damage. (just as if someone with vulnerable 5 fire and 5 cold took 5 fire and cold damage, they would take 15 damage total).

The strangeness really shows itself in your next example, though:

Or if you do 15 untyped damage and 4 cold damage, and your target has resist 5 all - your total damage would be 14, not 10.

By their rules, it *should* be 10 damage (15-5 + 4-5 => 10 + 0 = 10). However, they keep changing it so that all examples only reference combined damage types, and most new powers and items only deal combined damage types. The instances of two separate damage types (especially in the hands of a PC) are getting rarer...and harder to adjudicate

The thing to remember is if someone was slapped with vulnerability 5 (all), and hit with 15 untyped and 4 cold, they would take 29 damage (15+5 + 4+5 = 20 + 9 = 29). In that case, resisting both (as they are separate) seems fair enough.

[Sedracus]

Or the TL:dr version, memorable version:
If an attack deals multiple stacks of damage, check for each stack separately whether it would be resisted.

[Nocturnal]

That's not what he said, and not consistent with added rounded-off fractions of damage together for a whole hit point of damage. I am not sure we can distinguish between 0.5 HP and 0 HP because the game explicitly doesn't anywhere else (the general rule is everything's rounded down, but the order of the math is not defined.) If there's a move towards combined types of damage rather than different stacks of damage, that would imply the intention at least isn't to count resistances and vulnerabilities more than once on the same attack.

[hvg3akaek]

Yah, it's the question of exactly when you drop .5 to 0 that matters. I'd say only round it off at the very end, thus minimising all the rounding errors. And in that case, the 0.5 damage triggers the vulnerability.

If there's a move towards combined types of damage rather than different stacks of damage, that would imply the intention at least isn't to count resistances and vulnerabilities more than once on the same attack.

I'd disagree. A power that did 30 Cold and Fire and Lightning damage (ie, one big combined bit), should trigger all vulnerabilities. The resistance aspect has been spelled out: you need to resist all the damage types, and only the lowest resistance counts. But so has the vulnerability: each counts, and they stack.

• 30 Cold and Fire and Lightning damage vs Resist All 10 deals 20 damage.
• 30 Cold and Fire and Lightning damage vs Resist Fire 5, Resist Cold 10 and Resist Lightning 15 deals 25 damage.
• 30 Cold and Fire and Lightning damage vs Vulnerable Fire 10, Vulnerable Lightning 5 and Vulnerable Cold 5 deals 50 damage.
• 30 Cold and Fire and Lightning damage vs Vulnerable All 10 deals 60 damage.

See for example, the warlock's 3rd level "Vestige's Calamity" power; or the cleric's 29th level "Astral Storm" power.

[Nocturnal]

I didn't think about it that way (especially not the last one) but it makes sense, going by "more types of damage should always be better." So, when my player did 15 normal and 6 cold damage to an object with resist 5 all that should have done 10 normal and 1 cold damage for 11 total. I credited 16, by policy of "when in doubt, rule in favor of the players", but that's fine, it only would have prolonged the fight one more round for a few points of damage.

From this we get that the ideal attack is untyped damage, plus every type of damage. (Some monsters have a bite attack of that style.) Resistances must work against all the types, and vulnerabilities will trigger off all the types. Resist insubstantial always reduces everything, so that's not different from any attack. The unusual thing there is that resist all would count exactly twice since such an attack is always separate "stacks" of damage... but vulnerable all would work at least 11 times (every type of damage plus the untyped) so in this case resist all is stronger than resisting every type of damage because it's impossible for the same damage to be both typed and untyped. That's where the problem lies. It's unbalanced because resist all doubles in effectiveness no matter how many types of damage there are in the other "combined-type stack", while vulnerable all increases in effectiveness by as little as 10% by adding the untyped damage. So, against an enemy with resist all, the ideal attack is not ideal (it would be better to have all the damage typed and have the resistance count once, going by the "stacks" interpretation.) I feel like I'm writing a Set Theory proof that should end with "and this is a contradiction, so there is no ideal attack, Q.E.D."

[Houtoku]

Got another one, this time Death saving throws.

PHB says "20 or higher" and you can spend a healing surge, brings your HP back up, etc. What modifiers (if any) get applied to death saving throws? Or is it just in the case of one of those powers/item abilities that say something to the effect of "When you or an ally makes a death saving throw, add X to the roll"; or do you just have to hit a nat20 to wake up?

[hvg3akaek]

What modifiers (if any) get applied to death saving throws? Or is it just in the case of one of those powers/item abilities that say something to the effect of "When you or an ally makes a death saving throw, add X to the roll"; or do you just have to hit a nat20 to wake up?

You can add a variety of modifiers to your saves, and thus don't always have to roll a 20.

I am currently playing an (epic) human fighter.

He has: Human Perseverance (feat), Stubborn Survivor (feat), Amulet of Physical Resolve (item), and Unyielding Avalanche (daily power). That totalled to +4 to most saves, and +6 vs slowed, weakened, poison and immobilised.

So when I saved vs death and rolled a 17, it totalled to 21, and thus I got back up.


They are a selection of things that add to saves; there are probably more feats, items, and racial powers out there that will also do it. I know that with one of the Epic Destinies I was looking at, and a few other items, I could have gained another +3 to +6 to my saves, and rolled twice each time. That was a little crazy, though, so I didn't go there

[hvg3akaek]

From this we get that the ideal attack is untyped damage, plus every type of damage

yeah, but I don't think that works Once you start combining damage types, I think powers loose the untyped damage. I cannot think of a power that has both untyped and combined damage, can you? In general, we have standard attacks (eg, melee) that have some rider (eg whetstone) with a minor typed damage in addition to it. Or, we have standard attacks (eg, melee) that are overridden by the type (eg, flaming sword).

But yes - vulnerability is worse than resistance is good.

[Nocturnal]

Of course, I gave an example: critical hit on a melee basic attack with a frost warhammer when the cold damage property is turned off, deals untyped and cold damage. It's a pretty low level item. Or, combine a flaming sword (with the flaming property turned off) with a frozen whetstone and score a critical hit to deal untyped, cold, and fire damage in three separate stacks.

Or, what one of my NPSG players actually did: bless a flaming weapon with the level 2 paladin utility power "Bless Weapon" and trigger its daily power, and it will deal untyped, radiant, fire, and ongoing fire damage all in separate stacks. (My newbies are fans of overkill.)

Finding untyped plus combined types is actually harder, since PCs and items seem to have more options for adding "riders" to damage... but Striker extra damage (warlock's curse, sneak attack, hunter's quarry...) doesn't have a type so by some ruling that could always be untyped damage added to any attack. If Warlocks don't have an attack that deals combined damage, there is always multiclassing.

Well, with 10 damage types I could think of there shouldn't really be an attack that deals all of them, so there isn't really one "ideal" attack like that, but if there were then resist all would be the one case that stymied it. It would work much worse against the same attack in 11 different stacks of damage - but vulnerability wouldn't change between the two so the combined one is superior.

[hvg3akaek]

Of course, I gave an example:

Sorry, I was meaning an example of:

X untyped + Y multityped.

Striker extra damage (warlock's curse, sneak attack, hunter's quarry...) doesn't have a type

I'm pretty sure it's the type used in the attack. ie: if it's a melee weapon dealing untyped, then it is also untyped. If it's a firey attack (either because of the power, or because of a flaming sword), then it's fiery damage.

[SpatulaOdoom]

Originally Posted by lastpage

However that brings up a good question that I had and don't know the answer to. What happens if you deal multiple distinct types of damage (written as e.g., "5 cold damage and 5 fire damage"), or typed and untyped (as might actually happen) and are Weakened? Here's the thorniest example situation:

A young white dragon is Weakened when he bites a target that has vulnerable 5 cold. The dragon rolls and deals 7 untyped damage and 1 cold damage. How much damage does the target take? Things to consider...

Is the damage summed then halved so the total would be 4, or is it halved separately, then summed, so the total would be 3?

If it's halved first then is the cold damage negated (as it rounds down to zero) so it doesn't trigger vulnerability at all? So the final damage is 3?

Is extra damage inflicted on a vulnerable creature also halved if the attacker is weakened? So in the first case (summed then halved) the total damage would be 6 after the 5 from vulnerability got halved and rounded down to 2 (or the 13 total got halved to 6)?

Actually the rounds down has a caveat "to a minimum of one" in most situations, damage is one of them.
If the damage is done in separate instances then it is halved separately not summed then halved. There was a clarification between mixed damage and multiple instances of damage on one attack some time ago.

Vulnerable comes into play after the damage is applied (Thus producing other caveat that if the damage is reduced to the point where they would only take damage due to the vulnerability then the vulnerability doesn't kick in and thus they take no damage) and it is not part of "the damage you deal" so any damage from a creatures Vulnerability is not halved due to the attackers weakened condition.

In the case of your young weakened white dragon the target takes 3 normal damage and 6 cold damage, if the target had even 1 point of cold resistance they would take no cold damage.