Does damage from a touch attack ignore Damage Reduction

[RigaMortus2]

I think Wraithstrike lets you treat your melee attacks as touch attacks, and I think DR does not negate touch attacks.

-Hyp.

But do you think DR does not negate damage from touch attacks?

 

[irdeggman]

Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks

The way I read it, it seems like all it is stating is the actual touch attack is not negated (and is thus resolved normally). Which might seem kind of funny, since DR has nothing to do with Armor Class or resloving if you were hit. But that's how I read it. The actual DAMAGE however, is different. You have to follow how each damage type is resolved via DR.

It doesn't state that DR does not negate damage from a touch attack. Not sure how you can extrapolate that from the quote. A touch attack is first and foremost an attack type (IMHO). You have to actually hit first before you can even start to determine if the type of damage is applied or negated.

I agree.

The text is very clear.

IMO the question should actually be "Should" and not "Does".

 

[Hypersmurf]

But do you think DR does not negate damage from touch attacks?

I think if I make a touch attack that does nothing but deal damage, and DR causes that damage not to have any effect, then DR has negated my touch attack, which it explicitly cannot do.

Given the existence of touch attacks which do nothing but deal damage, it seems that negating the damage from such a touch attack is the same as negating the touch attack; thus, I think that if DR cannot negate touch attacks, it must be unable to negate the damage from touch attacks.

-Hyp.

 

[BobbyMac]

DR does not negate touch attacks = DR applies to touch attacks


My english teacher always said those double negatives would get me in trouble some day!

 

[wildstarsreach]

I think if I make a touch attack that does nothing but deal damage, and DR causes that damage not to have any effect, then DR has negated my touch attack, which it explicitly cannot do.

Given the existence of touch attacks which do nothing but deal damage, it seems that negating the damage from such a touch attack is the same as negating the touch attack; thus, I think that if DR cannot negate touch attacks, it must be unable to negate the damage from touch attacks.

-Hyp.

Here's where I'm trying to go with this. 20th level F/W/EK, has a BA +16 ect. The character uses power attack. With other add's they have about a +13 to hit and doing average damage about 70 points a hit. To totally bypass DR make this spell so much overpowered for it's level. Since the damage is mainly melee based, even though the spell allows the attacks to hit the touch AC, shouldn't they be subject to the DR? DR is rarely above 15 points as it is.

 

[Slaved]

I think if I make a touch attack that does nothing but deal damage, and DR causes that damage not to have any effect, then DR has negated my touch attack, which it explicitly cannot do.

The touch attack was not negated, you still made a successful touch attack. Anything that triggers off of a successful touch attack will work but damage reduction might reduce the damage dealt to 0. 0 is not the same as -.

 

[Stalker0]

I don't think the damage done by touch attacks is ignored by DR, its simply the fact that most touch attacks carry some kind of spell damage that does ignore DR.

Inflict Moderate Wounds vs DR 15/-. Its spell damage, so DR doesnt' apply.

Contact Poison vs DR 15/-. The DR does not affect the touch. I touch the creature, he still needs a poison save.

Wraithstrike vs DR 15/-. The DR does not hinder the touch attack. However, the damage dealt is regular old physical damage. 15 points of damaged is removed.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The touch attack was not negated, you still made a successful touch attack. Anything that triggers off of a successful touch attack will work but damage reduction might reduce the damage dealt to 0. 0 is not the same as -.

So energy damage dealt along with an attack, while not negated, might be reduced to 0?

-Hyp.

 

[Slaved]

So energy damage dealt along with an attack, while not negated, might be reduced to 0?

By energy resistance? Of course.

 

[Hypersmurf]

By energy resistance? Of course.

No, by DR.

Energy damage dealt along with an attack is not negated by DR... but you're suggesting that damage can be reduced to 0 while not being negated, so what's preventing DR from reducing energy damage dealt along with an attack to 0 without negating it?

-Hyp.