Touch Attacks and DR

[Coredump]

I'm afraid it's pretty unambiguous.

From the DMG, under Damage Reduction:

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.

DR does not negate touch attacks.

-Hyp.

But that is not the question at hand. The question is if touch attacks negate DR, not if DR negates touch attacks.

Wouldn't you say that DR would apply to the bludgeoning damage from meteor swarm? That is also a ranged touch attack.

 

[Caliban]

But that is not the question at hand. The question is if touch attacks negate DR, not if DR negates touch attacks.

Wouldn't you say that DR would apply to the bludgeoning damage from meteor swarm? That is also a ranged touch attack.

No, officially spells ignore DR, regardless of whether or not they are touch attacks. Ice Storm, Mordenkainen's sword, etc. all ignore DR.

 

[Zandel]

Where are you reading that cal?

 

[shilsen]

Where are you reading that cal?

As Hyp quoted above:

"Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction."

You can find it in the description of DR in the DMG or the MM.

 

[Zandel]

Thanks for that couldn't find it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But that is not the question at hand. The question is if touch attacks negate DR, not if DR negates touch attacks.

The touch attacks don't need to negate the DR. They just need to avoid being negated by it... just like energy damage dealt along with an attack.

Do we ever say "No, your 5 fire damage isn't negated by his DR, it's just reduced to 0"?

-Hyp.

 

[Jhulae]

So if I make a touch attack to deal 3 damage against someone with DR 5/-, how much damage do I do?

If the answer is 0, has the touch attack not been negated by the DR?

-Hyp.

I'm not going to get into a drawn out discussion, but if you make the touch attack and *hit*, the touch attack hasn't been negated. The damage has been negated.

That being said, if those 3 points were from a spell or magic or whatever else the rule specifies, the rule clearly states that the damage gets through to the creature.

If someone found a way to make a touch attack with the dagger, then, just like a *normal* attack, the attack hits, but the damage has been reduced. Any other effect on the weapon, such as shocking or whatever, would *still* apply (unless the said creature had energy resistances or whatever).

I don't often disagree with you, Hyp (and often look to you for clarifications of the rules), but here, I'm going to disagree with your intepretation, and again state that the attack is successful, but a dagger strike (for instance) that did 3 points of damage would not get by DR that it wouldn't normally overcome on a non-touch attack.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'm not going to get into a drawn out discussion, but if you make the touch attack and *hit*, the touch attack hasn't been negated. The damage has been negated.

So if I make a normal attack with a longsword, dealing 3 points of damage against DR 5/-, you'd say the attack wasn't negated, just the damage, right?

So why mention touch attacks at all if they work exactly like normal attacks?

-Hyp.

 

[Jhulae]

So if I make a normal attack with a longsword, dealing 3 points of damage against DR 5/-, you'd say the attack wasn't negated, just the damage, right?

So why mention touch attacks at all if they work exactly like normal attacks?

-Hyp.

Yes, I'd say the damage was negated.

Because there are some attacks that need to be delivered by touch, like many spells.

If DR negated the touch attack, then those spells could never be delivered.

 

[Drowbane]

Quite simply, House Rule that Master THrowers touch-attack throw BS does not negate DR... as it makes no sense. Its just rediculous. An obvious Loophole.

If we were meant to go 100% by RAW, we wouldn't need DMs.