Does damage from a touch attack ignore Damage Reduction

[Mort]

Simple question opened up to a poll:

Does the damage from a touch attack ignore damage reduction? Assume standard damage such as from emerald razor, deep impact, wraithstrike and similar abilities.

relevant SRD Portion:

Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury type poison, a monk’s stunning, and injury type disease. Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.
Attacks that deal no damage because of the target’s damage reduction do not disrupt spells.
Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction.

 

[Darklone]

Where was that thread a few days ago where Hyp said that...?

IMHO: when the core rules have been written, touch attacks were supposed to be spells and alchemical substances or charged electricity. Abilities that allow to attack with a weapon by making a touch attack haven't been taken into account. Honestly, I don't think the game needs them.

 

[Stone Dog]

"Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks"

That pretty much means "no" the way I read it.

 

[Darklone]

"Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks"

That pretty much means "no" the way I read it.

Sorry, the sentence you quote would mean "yes" in the poll.

 

[AuraSeer]

"Touch attack" is not a damage type, it's a kind of attack roll. So your question doesn't have a yes-or-no answer. [Edit: Now that I reread the poll, I want to change my answer. No, an attack does not automatically bypass DR just by virtue of being a touch attack.]

Most things that use the touch attack mechanic are magical attacks, which do bypass DR. A ray of frost spell or the weakening touch of a shadow are not subject to DR.

But it's also possible for a touch attack to do nonmagical damage. For instance, I think wraithstrike is the spell that lets you make a touch attack with a regular weapon. You do standard damage for that weapon, which is subject to DR, even though you're using the touch attack mechanic to determine whether you hit.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Melee type physical damage should still be subject to DR. Spell or energy should as per rules ignore DR with regards to touch attacks.

 

[Mort]

"Touch attack" is not a damage type, it's a kind of attack roll. So your question doesn't have a yes-or-no answer.

Most things that use the touch attack mechanic are magical attacks, which do bypass DR. A ray of frost spell or the weakening touch of a shadow are not subject to DR.

But it's also possible for a touch attack to do nonmagical damage. For instance, I think wraithstrike is the spell that lets you make a touch attack with a regular weapon. You do standard damage for that weapon, which is subject to DR, even though you're using the touch attack mechanic to determine whether you hit.

It is expressely a yes no answer on whether the damage from a touch attack (referring to standard damage such as from wraithstrike, as clarified in the post) is subject to damage reduction. For example, your answer, as expressed in the second paragraph, is a clear no.

I don't think there is such a thing as "a type of attack roll." you roll a d20 and there you have it. A touch attack is a specific type of attack.

 

[Darklone]

Melee type physical damage should still be subject to DR. Spell or energy should as per rules ignore DR

Well, I guess the problem is that the game designers didn't plan to ever have melee type physical touch attacks.

 

[SlagMortar]

Melee type physical damage should still be subject to DR. Spell or energy should as per rules ignore DR

From a balance perspective, I whole heartedly agree. From a logic perspective, if the damage reduction comes from something like adamantine armor, it makes sense that a touch attack would bypass it. If it ignores the AC bonus of the armor, it should ignore the damage reduction of the armor.

 

[Nail]

Taking one sentence out of context ("Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks..") is what's causing the confusion here.

Look at (and read) the entire paragraph.

In context, it's refering to the fact that normally, when DR "soaks up" all of the damage, no special effect tied to the damage is effective. Since "normal" touch attacks don't (usually) do damage, you might assume that creatures with DR can ignore the special affects tied to the touch attack.

The sentence "Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks.." shows that such an assumption is NOT the case: special effects tied to a touch attack are not negated by DR, regardless of the fact that the touch attack may or may not cause does damage.

So.....if the touch attack does damage, DR applies. If the touch attack has a special effect tied to it, the special affect happens, even if the DR "soaks up" the normal damage.

Again: Don't take the troublesome sentence out of context. I'll get you in trouble.