Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 3305174" data-attributes="member: 1656">If the phrase "touch attacks are not negated by DR" means, in fact, "special effects attached to a touch attack are not negated by DR", then the special effect of Injury Poison attached to a touch attack is not negated by DR.  So the sentence "If a creature has sufficient damage reduction to avoid taking any damage from the attack, the poison does not affect it" is overridden.  If the special effect of poison does not affect the creature because of its DR, then "special effects attached to a touch attack are negated by DR", so that can't be what "touch attacks are not negated by DR" means.If "touch attacks are not negated by DR" means its damage is not reduced, then the line under Injury poison can still be true, but no amount of DR will be 'sufficient damage reduction to avoid taking any damage from the attack' when the poison is delivered by a touch attack.Or to put it another way:Effects that merely require a successful hit, not to deal damage, won't be affected by DR anyway, so the note "touch attacks are not negated by DR" is irrelevant to them anyway.A wraith deals hit point damage and ability drain.  Ability drain is already covered separately as "not negated by DR", so "touch attacks are not negated by DR" is irrelevant to that.  So either "touch attacks are not negated by DR" means the hit point damage is not affected by DR - which would apply to Wraithstrike as well - or "touch attacks are not negated by DR" means nothing to the hit point damage, so the note is irrelevant.Effects that require damage to be dealt are either modified so as not to require this if delivered via a touch attack, or else "touch attacks are not negated by DR" is irrelevant.If one rules that the phrase has not effect on hit point damage and does not permit poison to have an effect if damage is reduced to zero, then the phrase is meaningless.  To me, this makes that interpretation less likely to be correct; while on the odd occasion, a rule has no meaning (Uncanny Blow in CW contains an example), in most cases, the interpretation that means something is the one to go with!A question - if the text were altered to include the line "Damage reduction does not negate longsword attacks", do you consider this would have any effect on the outcome of any conceivable situation in the rules?  Is there any circumstance under which the phrase "Damage reduction does not negate longsword attacks" would cause someone to take more or less damage than otherwise, or to suffer a special effect they would otherwise not need to worry about?Similarly, if the line "Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains" were altered to say "Damage reduction does not negate energy damage dealt along with an attack or energy drains", would it have any mechanical effect on the game whatsoever, in your opinion?-Hyp.</blockquote>

Verification