Damage type of Sneak Attack/Warlock's Curse/Hunter's Quarry

[Ryujin]

I thought the game didn't consider separate "bits" of damage anymore?

That all damage was summed, and then any damage types was just added onto that?

For example: if I somehow make an attack consisting of 1d8+4 fire damage, 1d6 untyped damage, and 2 points of radiant damage, and rolled a seven and a one on the dice, that would simply become 7+4+1+2=14 points of radiant fire damage, subject to whatever resistances and vulnerabilities the target has?

If the foe has Resist 10 Radiant then only 4 points of damage goes through.
If the foe has Vulnerable 10 Radiant then 24 points of damage it is.

Yes? No?

That's definitely one way to handle it. The rules specify that if an attack carries two or more keywords for damage type, the damage should be apportioned equally between those types. That would mean that regardless of how many individual points of damage were done via a fire/HQ attack, the damage would be divided 50/50 between fire/untyped. This is less bookkeeping for the DM, but doesn't necessarily do justice to the attacker.

It isn't directly spelt out that this is how it should be handled. It's more for powers like the Warlock's Witchfire, that carries both fire and psychic keywords. It is a viable way to handle it with minimal bookkeeping though.

 

[Kalbutt]

The rules specify that if an attack carries two or more keywords for damage type, the damage should be apportioned equally between those types.

Just for info, the passages of the PHB you reference have been errata'ed and replaced with the 'multiple keywords, minimum resistance' mechanic.

 

[Ryujin]

Just for info, the passages of the PHB you reference have been errata'ed and replaced with the 'multiple keywords, minimum resistance' mechanic.

Just read that. Presumably that means if you go with HQ, Warlock's Curse etc. being "untyped damage" and you use the idea that using them creates a multiple keyword attack, then odds are that damage resistance gets ignored for most such attacks.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Just read that. Presumably that means if you go with HQ, Warlock's Curse etc. being "untyped damage" and you use the idea that using them creates a multiple keyword attack, then odds are that damage resistance gets ignored for most such attacks.

I think that assumption is wrong because there is no such thing as "Resist Untyped X".

Furthermore, look at the Swordmage Daily 1 Burning Blade Power. You deal extra fire damage with your melee attacks. So your melee attacks do untyped damage + fire damage, by your reasoning you would have a multi keyword attack which would ignore fire res completely because the monster will not have res untyped y.
My take is that you have to track those two things seperately. Just like CS says you have for SA/HQ/WC.

 

[Klaus]

It's Untyped damage, which is resisted only when the traget has Resist All, or maybe is insubstantial.

 

[Ryujin]

I think that assumption is wrong because there is no such thing as "Resist Untyped X".

Furthermore, look at the Swordmage Daily 1 Burning Blade Power. You deal extra fire damage with your melee attacks. So your melee attacks do untyped damage + fire damage, by your reasoning you would have a multi keyword attack which would ignore fire res completely because the monster will not have res untyped y.
My take is that you have to track those two things seperately. Just like CS says you have for SA/HQ/WC.

Klaus has correctly stated what you need in order to resist untyped damage.

Actually my 'reasoning' is that the untyped damage be applied separately from the main power's damage, but I was offering an alternative for those who don't want to deal with that bookkeeping.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

It's Untyped damage, which is resisted only when the traget has Resist All, or maybe is insubstantial.

I know that to resist untyped damage you need 'resist all'. I wanted to show that there is no such thing as resist untyped which leads to a large number of attacks which could easily bypass 'elemental' resistances.

Insubstantial does not care about damage types, it halves damage all the time except for some feats/power/PP/etc. combinations.

Klaus has correctly stated what you need in order to resist untyped damage.

Actually my 'reasoning' is that the untyped damage be applied separately from the main power's damage, but I was offering an alternative for those who don't want to deal with that bookkeeping.

As I said in response to Klaus' answer. But ok I see now what you where talking about. Thanks for making that clear.

But throwing 'resist all' into the discussion is kinda useless because 'resist all' doesn't care about damage types at all, it it useful against zero stated damage types and against all together or any combination of damage types.

 

[Ryujin]

It would be so easy to deal with this on WotC's part. Simply state that additional "untyped" damage takes on the form of the power it is adding to, which makes good logical sense.

The flip side would be to make it dual typed, giving strikers one SERIOUSLY good hit per round against creatures with resistance. I think that anything other than these two would be too convoluted to be conducive to quick game play.

(...while I still think that my original comment is correct )

 

[Sunglare]

I'm more convinced now that SA/HQ/WC is not serperate. I looked up the page the CS referenced and it doesn't mention anywhere that those specific attacks are "untyped damage," it talks about untyped bonues but that is something completely different. If you read about SA/HQ/WC specifically it is considered "EXTRA" damage just like many other things like high crit weapons.
Cappnzapp is correct that everything is summed up together, and keywords listed in the power determine the damage type. Do not seperate SA/HQ/WC from your weapon damage, it's extra damage add added to it.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I have to agree with sunglare, even if it technically isn't RAW, it makes a LOT more sense. That way you just avoid the entire resistance problem and on top of that it is perfectly sensible. If the rogue uses an SA with his flaming sword then the SA damage is 'extra flaming sword damage' and has the fire keyword. Simple, straightforward, avoids nerfing resistances. Frankly I doubt that WotC CS fully appreciates the rules implications of making an attack like that multi keyword, and splitting it up is just a royal PITA.