Damage reduction 30/fire

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

If a creature has damage reduction 30/fire, what does it mean?

If they get hit by a flaming +1 sword, what damage do they take?

What about a +4 flaming sword?

What about a fireball spell?

What about a plain +4 sword?

Is it the same as fire resistance (30)?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Artoomis]

No official source, but I think it means any sort of fire or any magic weapon.

 

[bleedthefreak]

If a creature has damage reduction 30/fire, what does it mean?

If they get hit by a flaming +1 sword, what damage do they take?

Let's look at this backwards, if a creature had 30/+2 and you hit them with a flaming +1 longsword, they would still take the 1d6 fire damage, right? So, it stands to reason that if you struck a creature with a +1 flaming sword it would do the fire damage, but not the weapon damage (because a +1 sword is not a fire source)

What about a +4 flaming sword?

Same as above.


What about a fireball spell?

Full damage from any fire source, including a fireball spell.

What about a plain +4 sword?

No damage at all, no fire source.

Is it the same as fire resistance (30)?

I really doubt it, that spell just absorbs fire damage, it doesn't reduce all damage that is NOT fire.

Thanks in advance.

Now, just so you know, I have never heard of 30/fire, but I am taking to mean (just like Damage Reduction) 30/fire is just like 30/+2 (for example) except rather then needing a +2 or better weapon you need fire to overcome the DR. Now I have to ask, what has 30/fire as a DR? Also, what a killer idea, I really like it.

By the way 30/- would mean something takes damage from ALL sources.

 

[Azazu]

It means that the first 30 poits of Fire Damage are negated.

If damage reduction is written like this 10/+1
it means that the first 10 points of damage are negated unless it is struck by a weapon greater than +1.

Hope this helps

 

[drnuncheon]

It means that the first 30 poits of Fire Damage are negated.

If damage reduction is written like this 10/+1
it means that the first 10 points of damage are negated unless it is struck by a weapon greater than +1.

Hope this helps

I don't think so...it seems to be in the same format as "15/silver" which means that silver (or better) weapons will hurt it.

Of course, since Damage Reduction usually is ineffective against energy anyway, I'm not sure why anyone would have this.

Where is the source?

J

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Damage reduction 30/fire

By the way 30/- would mean something takes damage from ALL sources.

Say...what? 30/- means the creatures absorbs 30 points of damage per attack from all blows, stabs, and cuts. Check out Damage Reduction in the DMG.

 

[graydoom]

It would mean that whoever made the monster didn't know how DR was supposed to work. DR is, by definition, effective only against physical attacks, so DR X/fire makes no sense.

 

[kreynolds]

It would mean that whoever made the monster didn't know how DR was supposed to work. DR is, by definition, effective only against physical attacks, so DR X/fire makes no sense.

I have to agree with you here, to a point. The only time I have seen anything like this was in The Book of Eldritch Might. Monte created Elemental Damage Reduction. Unlike elemental resistance, which absorbs so much per round, Monte's absorbed so much per attack, just like damage reduction.

However, a creature with 30/fire would basically mean that it ignored all blows, stabs, and cuts that dealt less than 30 points of damage per hit, no matter how enchanted the blade. It would still be susceptible to spells and energy attacks, like lightning, cold, acid, and most importantly, fire. So if its already susceptible to fire, why bother listing the DR as 30/fire? Just list it as 30/--. If you want the creature immune to everything but fire, list the DR as 30/-- and give it cold, acid, lightning, and sonic immunity.

 

[MythandLore]

Where did you find something with DR 30/fire?

It must be a typo.
I think it should be fire resistance 30.
i.e. Can take 30 points from a fire before taking fire damage.

 

[kreynolds]

Who are you asking, Myth?