Energy damage on Trip touch attack?

[Dannyalcatraz]

The reason the whip shouldnt deal extra damage on first glance is the fact that if you have a flaming longsword you cannot just make a touch attack with the weapon basicly trying to bypass armor to deal damage.

Where does it say that in the rules?

It has been the case (since 1Ed), for instance, that merely brushing flammables with a flaming sword will ignite them- you don't have to strike a parchment scroll, a pool of spilled oil, a bale of hay or a Web, for instance, to ignite any of them. Mere contact with the flame is sufficient to ignite flammables.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

To me, extra damage implies that there had to be damage in the first place.

If you are fighting a creature that has Damage Reduction 10 but is otherwise vulnerable to Cold (not DR 10/Cold, just not immune to Cold damage), and you strike it with a Dagger +1, Cold, you'll still do the Cold damage.

 

[Dross]

Okay, to further confuse/simplify the issue, if I have a frosty flail and I do a trip, do I deal the extra 1d6 cold damage on the trip attempt?

(As an aside, Artoomis wanted an answer not based on the whip, but a tripping weapon :\ )

 

[pawsplay]

The reason the whip shouldnt deal extra damage on first glance is the fact that if you have a flaming longsword you cannot just make a touch attack with the weapon basicly trying to bypass armor to deal damage.

That's only because there's no legal touch attack with a longsword. As a counter example, how about a rogue/master throw with a +1 flaming returning dagger using Weak Spot? Would you rule the Weak Spot doesn't get the flaming damage because it's a ranged touch spell?

Further, touch spells and rays can hit or miss, and can even crit.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

if I have a frosty flail and I do a trip, do I deal the extra 1d6 cold damage on the trip attempt?

Yep.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

From the 3.5 FAQ (page 55)
"a fighter wielding a +1 flaming sword can’t choose for the fire damage to be nonlethal (even if the base weapon damage is nonlethal)."

This at least implies:

1) that energy damage from a weapon is independent of the weapon doing damage.

2) merely touching someone with a flaming sword that is actually flaming should still do the energy damage

Extrapolated to whips, touch attacks, tripping weapons, etc., the answer remains the same- the enchantment, not the weapon, is doing the damage, and the energy damage is independent of the weapon actually harming the target.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If you are fighting a creature that has Damage Reduction 10 but is otherwise vulnerable to Cold (not DR 10/Cold, just not immune to Cold damage), and you strike it with a Dagger +1, Cold, you'll still do the Cold damage.

But with the dagger, you deal 1d4+1 Slashing (or Piercing) and +1d6 extra cold damage, and the creature ignores up to 10 points of the Slashing damage. There was damage dealt by the weapon to add the Cold damage to; it was just ignored.

With a Trip attack, there's no damage to start with, so what does the extra +1d6 get added to?

If a rogue trips a flat-footed creature, does her +3d6 extra damage from Sneak Attack apply? She's making an attack, and her foe is denied his Dex bonus to AC and thus 'unable to defend himself effectively from her attack'. Is there a difference between the Sneak Attack +3d6 extra damage when the rogue attacks, and the +1d6 extra cold damage when she successfully hits?

-Hyp.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

With a Trip attack, there's no damage to start with, so what does the extra +1d6 get added to?

To zero. The extra damage is triggered on a successful hit, not successfully dealing damage.

If a rogue trips a flat-footed creature, does her +3d6 extra damage from Sneak Attack apply?<snip>Is there a difference between the Sneak Attack +3d6 extra damage when the rogue attacks, and the +1d6 extra cold damage when she successfully hits?

I'd say no SA damage when tripping- Sneak Attack damage is precision damage based upon the rogue's knowledge of anatomy and vitals, and applying that knowledge by striking those vital areas.

The cold damage, in contrast, is merely the result of an enchantment doing its job. No special knowledge needed, no requirement of exact placement...just a successful hit.

 

[starwed]

Ah, but sneak attack deals the same type of damage as the base weapon. Since the type of damage in question is nonexistant, clearly the same applies to sneak attack. ^_^

On a related point, there are also some abilities which trigger on a successful hit. The feat from CompAdv that grants everyone a bonus when you hit with an AoO is an example of this.

 

[Hypersmurf]

To zero. The extra damage is triggered on a successful hit, not successfully dealing damage.

True, but it is extra damage, and it is +1d6, not 1d6. You're not dealing zero damage with your Trip, so why are you adding the +1d6 to zero?

I'd say no SA damage when tripping- Sneak Attack damage is precision damage based upon the rogue's knowledge of anatomy and vitals, and applying that knowledge by striking those vital areas.

The cold damage, in contrast, is merely the result of an enchantment doing its job. No special knowledge needed, no requirement of exact placement...just a successful hit.

The rogue has the knowledge of vital areas, she's making an attack, her opponent has a discernible anatomy, and her opponent is denied his Dex bonus to AC. The 'exact placement' is taken care of by those factors.

So given that both are extra damage, and the requirements for both are met, why should one work and not the other?

-Hyp.