A quick (but possibly challenging) Vicious question

[UltimaGabe]

So, we all know (or should know) that the Vicious Weapon Quality from the DMG deals an extra 2d6 damage when used in melee, but 1d6 backlash damage is dealt to the attacker. (I am also of the camp that said damage is untyped and thus bypasses pretty much anything.)

Let's say you're wielding a +1 Cold Iron Vicious Short sword against a creature with Damage Reduction of, say, 5/Lawful.

So you attack the creature. (A slaad or something.) You roll damage, and you deal 14 damage to the creature (7 from the weapon, 7 from the Vicious quality) and 4 to yourself. That's all fine and dandy.

But then let's say you deal less than 5 damage with the sword itself. That is, you roll a 1 on the sword's damage and the total comes up to 4 or something.

As we all know, if the initial attack fails to damage the target, any additional effects do not occur as well (can someone get the actual quote for me?). This, of course, is believed by many (myself included) to include energy damage from a Flaming weapon and such- if you aren't able to damage the Slaad with the sword itself, it takes no Fire damage either. That's all fine and dandy too.

But what happens to the Backlash?

That is, if you attack and fail to overcome DR with the weapon, and the target doesn't take any damage from the Vicious quality, do you still take the 1d6 backlash, since you did, after all, strike the target?

 

[RigaMortus2]

What does the vicious weapon say? Does it say when you attack with it, or when you deal damage with it, that it deals 1d6 damage to the wielder?

Just to be on the safe side, don't purchase a Vicious Machettee to chop weeds and vines out of your way when adventuring through a jungle.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As we all know, if the initial attack fails to damage the target, any additional effects do not occur as well (can someone get the actual quote for me?). This, of course, is believed by many (myself included) to include energy damage from a Flaming weapon and such- if you aren't able to damage the Slaad with the sword itself, it takes no Fire damage either.

Despite the fact that "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." is immediately followed by "Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains."?

-Hyp.

 

[Particle_Man]

Smurf why the heck aren't you yet hired by wotc to write 4e?

 

[blargney the second]

I think Hypersmurf would make a better editor than a writer - the skill he displays is in identifying inconsistencies.

 

[Machiavelli]

Nifft to write, Hypersmurf to edit. Motion seconded?

 

[javcs]

Nifft to write, Hypersmurf to edit. Motion seconded?

Yep, seconded.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Despite the fact that "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." is immediately followed by "Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains."?

-Hyp.

Oh. Well, that not only answers my entire question, but it also means I've been doing it wrong for a while.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Oh. Well, that not only answers my entire question, but it also means I've been doing it wrong for a while.

All you had to do was ask

-Hyp.

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

ok - but here's a question for you. What type is the "energy", if it's "energy damage dealt along with an attack".