Area and close attacks

[Virindi]

Wizard in party uses the power below against a corpse rat swarm and misses.


Orbmaster's Incendiary Detonation

Gouts of flame pulse from your orb and explode amid your enemies, setting the area alight and roasting them as they attempt to escape.
Encounter

Arcane, Fire, Force, Implement, Zone
Standard Action Area burst 1 within 10 squares
Target: Each creature in burst
Attack: Intelligence vs. Reflex
Hit: 1d6 + Intelligence modifier force damage, and you knock the target prone.
Effect: The burst creates a zone of licking flames that lasts until the end of your next turn. Each enemy that enters the zone or starts its turn there takes 2 fire damage.




The corpse rat swarm is:

Immune disease, poison; Resist half damage from melee and ranged attacks; Vulnerable 10 against close and area attacks


Does the rat swarm take 2 fire damage at the beginning of its next turn or 12 damage from starting its turn in the zone? I originally ruled 2, but after so quick debate ruled 12 in the interest of time.

What says the rules Guru?

 

[fba827]

I am NOT a "Rules Guru" (tm), nor do I have book references to back up anything I say. So this is just an opinion.

If such a situation occured in a game I ran, I would rule it as 12 damage.
My logic: a zone (from MM1 glossary) is "a persistant -area- effect,..." therefore i'd rule it being similar enough to an 'area' effect in this case (it affects whole squares within the area).
To me, swarms have resist to melee and ranged because those are often single target or multiple single target attacks. whereas a close or area get entire squares within the effect. swarms are a bunch of critters acting as a single entity so targetting one single critter (or multiple single critters) within the swarm does the hive-body little damage (hence the resist) but getting the whole sqaure will catch the entire hive-body (hence the vulnerable).

having said all that, if there is an official rule-based answer on it, i have no idea

 

[chitzk0i]

The rat swarm takes 2 damage. The rat swarm asks, "Is this from an area or close power?" If the answer is yes, the rat swarm takes 10 extra damage. It's that simple.

 

[1of3]

It IS damage from an Area power.

 

[DracoSuave]

Most recent version of it, from the Monster Manual II:

------------------

vulnerable: A creature that is vulnerable to a specified damage type usually takes a specific amount of extra damage when it takes damage of that type, or it suffers a specific effect. For example, a creature that has vulnerable 10 radiant takes 10 extra radiant damage when an attack deals radiant damage to it or when it takes ongoing radiant damage.

------------------

So, yes, it takes 12 damage from this power, and should probably stay away from it.

As an aside, that makes Paladins to be the kryptonite against certain types of swarms, as Divine Challenge is a Close power that deals damage.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The rat swarm takes 2 damage. The rat swarm asks, "Is this from an area or close power?" If the answer is yes, the rat swarm takes 10 extra damage. It's that simple.

By that logic, the swarm takes 12: the zone is the result of the power, the power is an area burst 1 within 10.

 

[Virindi]

Thank you everyone, I will share this at the table next week.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yup, it will take 12 damage. Whatever keywords a power has, its effects have those keywords because everything to do with the power is governed by them. The same is true with attack type. In this case that means 12 damage.

And yes, paladins happen to be pretty handy against swarms.

 

[sfedi]

That ruling, though correct, brings a problem:

Powers with a certaing keyword that deal damage afterwards, such as this encounter, or cloud of daggers, end up dealing double vulnerability damage.

Vulnerable damage is balanced more on a once-a-turn per char basis.

 

[DracoSuave]

That ruling, though correct, brings a problem:

Powers with a certaing keyword that deal damage afterwards, such as this encounter, or cloud of daggers, end up dealing double vulnerability damage.

Vulnerable damage is balanced more on a once-a-turn per char basis.

Vulnerable explicitly states ongoing damage qualifies. You can be assured that if ongoing damage counts for vulnerable, these other damage sources are a drop in the bucket, really, and are just as potent.

Claiming something is balanced a certain way when the rules go 'Nope, this is perfectly fine, and in fact, we went even further in that direction' is not reasoned well.

Given that players are never vulnerable, it's really a keyword for 'Use X against this monster, and be rewarded for awesome.' If the players find a monster Vulnerable to Fire, and they keep tossing that monster into a Flaming Sphere, that rewards them for good thinking, and is moist delicious cake.


This is also why vulnerable doesn't show up as often as you'd like. It's cake to be enjoyed rarely, if it were on every monster then you'd appear to punish every martial build or build based around a damage type.

So, it'd be counterproductive to... builds by weapon... and builds by element... both of which are the entire focus of damaging feat trees. That's counterproductive design.