D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
Monster Aura: A PC takes 5 necrotic damage if starting his turn in the aura or enters it.
Zone: Take 10 necrotic and fire damage if starting his turn in the zone.
I made an at table-ruling for the sake of time in the moment that they did stack. My main justification was that 1) they're from different sources (a zone vs. an aura) 2) they are different damage types (one being pure necrotic, the other being a mixture of necrotic and fire).
I'm fine with how I ruled it for this instance, but, having said that, in case it comes again... and it probably will ... am I just trying to see if I should look at it a different way for next time.
(if it matters, reference the lich in the MM1; but the cold & necrotic damage was changed to fire & necrotic damage for story reasons)
In contrast:
* if the PC was standing in the same auras of two creatures (i.e. next to two liches), I would not let it stack
* if the PC was standing in two of the exact same zones, I would not let it stack
* if the PC was standing in the aura and the zone and they both dealt the exact same type of damage (both just pure necrotic), I would (perhaps wrongly?) let it stack since in my head it's two different sources
Anyway, thoughts, references, etc on the topic?
Thanks in advance.
__________________ If you're bored and like to follow links provided by random strangers, check out my ENWorld Blog http://www.enworld.org/forum/blogs/fba827/
It will have campaign logs and random thoughts...
The only thing that wouldn't stack here is a double-aura situation where both auras are the same. Zones don't care about that tho; You can stack all the zones you want. If two auras are not the same, from two different -kinds- of monsters, they'd stack as well.
Kordeth do you have a citation for that? I know that ongoing damage from the same source or from the same attack from two different monsters doesn't stack but why would say a fire trap that causes ongoing fire damage and a redspawn firebletcher's attack not stack?
Hmmm, maybe I played this wrong the other night then....
I just ran a fight with a large swarm of Kruthik's attacking the party, and I had each player take 2 damage/per kruthik they were adjacent to at the end of their turn. Reading it, it seemed that it made more sense, especially from a swarm creatures perspective. (i.e. the more creatures surrounding you, the harder it was to avoid getting hit)
It was a much more dynamic fight that way, so I'm happy how it turned out
Flipguarder, see page 278 of the Player's Handbook - Ongoing Damaage (The Same Type of Ongoig Damage).
Basically, ongoing damages of the same type - regardless of source - do not stack.
__________________
It only surprised me up until around 1977, ... I had thought we were going to have a considerable audience of gamers and science fiction and fantasy fans. I thought easily with those we'd have 50,000 or more [buyers], but when people began to write me [with questions] about what fantasy books to read, and I saw the wide range of both younger and older people who were attracted to the game, I understood that it was reaching a deeper chord, something deep within us. E. Gary Gygax (July 27, 1938 March 4, 2008)
MM2 has some updated wording on Aura. The last paragraph states
"If auras overlap and impose penalties to the same roll or game statistic, a creature affected by the overlapping aura is subject to the worst penalty; the penalties are not cumulative. Similarly, a creature in the overlapping area takes damage only from the aura that deals the most damage, regardless of damage type."
So, from this reading, I would have to say that DracoSauve's reading is wrong. Regardless of damage type, same monster or different, you only take damage from the most damaging aura. Thats how I interpret anyways.
Again, zone has updated wording as well in the MM2. The last paragraph is virtually identical to aura paragraph listed above.
FWIW, how you played it, is how we play it. A zone is a zone, an aura is an aura, a zone is therefore not an aura so we stack the two.
Technically, they're not "stacking", either. In your example, the PC would take 10 Necrotic Damage from the Zone, and 5 Nec. Damage from the Aura- separately.
If you had Resist 5 Necrotic, you'd take 5 damage from the Zone, and no damage from the Aura, for example.
So, from this reading, I would have to say that DracoSauve's reading is wrong. Regardless of damage type, same monster or different, you only take damage from the most damaging aura. Thats how I interpret anyways.
Again, zone has updated wording as well in the MM2. The last paragraph is virtually identical to aura paragraph listed above.
Was just gonna say, actually, now that I finally got my copy.
Do you live in the South Pole? 
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
