Regeneration (troll or otherwise)

[werk]

Damage done to a regenerating creature is logged as non-lethal unless it is from a susceptible attack form that bypasses the regen ability, like acid/fire. It then regenerates that non-lethal damage at a fixed rate.

Them's the rules. My question is: do you play it that way? Specifically, say a rogue gets a critical on a sneak attack on a troll with a flaming greatword. Is everything non-lethal except the 1d6 flaming damage, or does the flaming property make all of the damage from that attack lethal?

I've usually played it such that if the weapon does lethal damage, all damage you do with it is lethal, but I'm thinking of making it harder on my group.

 

[interwyrm]

Damage done to a regenerating creature is logged as non-lethal unless it is from a susceptible attack form that bypasses the regen ability, like acid/fire. It then regenerates that non-lethal damage at a fixed rate.

Them's the rules. My question is: do you play it that way? Specifically, say a rogue gets a critical on a sneak attack on a troll with a flaming greatword. Is everything non-lethal except the 1d6 flaming damage, or does the flaming property make all of the damage from that attack lethal?

I've usually played it such that if the weapon does lethal damage, all damage you do with it is lethal, but I'm thinking of making it harder on my group.

First... I suppose I have to pass over the inherent humor in SNEAK ATTACKING with a HUGE FLAMING SWORD. *Ahem*.

Before thinking about it, I'd probably make all the damage bypass the regeneration... but after thinking about it... yeah... only the flaming gets through.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Just because a weapon is flaming does not make the 4d6+strx3 crit damage lethal. However the sneak attack damage might be, because I believe its damage type is of whatever type it was delivered with, therefore it might be fire or slashing, I'm not sure which.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Only the flaming is lethal.

The sneak attack damage would be the slashing damage of the greatsword. The rogue cannot choose between one or the other. I suppose you can make an argument to divide the sneak attack damage equally, but make sure you make that rule first as it will likely have a much more significant impact on creatures with fire resistance as the rogue starts clamoring for the sneak damage to be slashing.

 

[werk]

First... I suppose I have to pass over the inherent humor in SNEAK ATTACKING with a HUGE FLAMING SWORD. *Ahem*.

Gotta make that one level of fighter work for you.

 

[Arnwyn]

Them's the rules. My question is: do you play it that way?

Yes. Only the flaming damage is lethal.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Tangentially, Monte Cook has also stated that in the event of a sneak attack with a weapon that deals purely Vile damage (such as a Vile Lance), the sneak attack damage is not itself Vile damage.

-Hyp.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Think of it this way -- the sneak attack doesn't make the flames hotter, it makes more of the pointy thing stick out of your chest.

 

[Rkhet]

the nipple?

 

[IceFractal]

The critical would definitely not be flaming, but the sneak attack might be, given that you can sneak attack with fire damage (scorching ray, produce flame, or alchemist's fire, for example). Also, note that Sneak Attack doesn't mean that the sword is hitting harder or the the fire is burning hotter, it means that you hit them in a vulnerable place - and certainly a flame to the face would be worse than one to the leg.

The real question is what type is the sneak attack when you have multiple types? You might assume slashing, because that's the "primary" type, but what about, for instance, an Admixtured(electric) Ray of Frost (worst 4th level spell ever, but that's not important). Is the sneak attack damage cold, electric, or both? Personally, I've no idea. I'd probably have them do something like make a Dex check to pick which type it is, otherwise it's determined randomly or split.