Evard's Black Tentacles and DR

[Pinotage]

Is the damage from Evard's Black Tentacles bludgeoning only or magic as well, i.e. will it overcome the DR of a creature with DR 10/magic, for example?

Thanks

Pinotage

 

[Hypersmurf]

The more important question is "Is it spell damage, or not?"

"Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction."

-Hyp.

 

[Pinotage]

The more important question is "Is it spell damage, or not?"

"Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction."

-Hyp.

If it's spell damage, why mention that it's bludgeoning damage?

Pinotage

 

[jcfiala]

Every creature within the area of the spell must make a grapple check, opposed by the grapple check of the tentacles. Treat the tentacles attacking a particular target as a Large creature with a base attack bonus equal to your caster level and a Strength score of 19. Thus, its grapple check modifier is equal to your caster level +8. The tentacles are immune to all types of damage.

Once the tentacles grapple an opponent, they may make a grapple check each round on your turn to deal 1d6+4 points of bludgeoning damage. The tentacles continue to crush the opponent until the spell ends or the opponent escapes.

Doesn't sound like they have any enhancement bonuses - and it's a conjuration spell. I'd say it's probably not magical, and would not get through DR. However, DR doesn't protect your target from being grappled, and you can always drop a fireball on top of him now that he's not able to dodge it.

 

[KarinsDad]

If it's spell damage, why mention that it's bludgeoning damage?

Well, it is damage. And, it comes from a spell.

The easiest thing to do is to house rule away the rule Hyp quoted, or alternatively, to rule that if the spell states a type (like slashing or bludgeoning), it is that type and not spell damage, regardless of it coming from a spell.


As to your original question, spell damage is not magic damage (i.e. damage that cannot be stopped by DR 10/magic like that from a magic weapon). So, DR 10/magic would stop the bludgeoning damage of an EBT, assuming that you rule that bludgeoning damage from a spell is not spell damage.

 

[Infiniti2000]

If it's spell damage, why mention that it's bludgeoning damage?

The only possibility I can think of is if something has regeneration (bludgeoning).

 

[Dakhran the Dark]

The only possibility I can think of is if something has regeneration (bludgeoning).

Or DR 5/bludgeoning, such as most skeletal creatures...

 

[Infiniti2000]

Or DR 5/bludgeoning, such as most skeletal creatures...

No, per Hyp's quote. DR is the point of discussion since DR is bypassed by spells.

 

[KarinsDad]

No, per Hyp's quote. DR is the point of discussion since DR is bypassed by spells.

This is a tricky question though.

Would using Telekenisis to slam someone with a big rock result in the DR not working, but throwing that same big rock result in the DR working?

How about Reverse Gravity?

Some magic creatures have the supernatural ability to instantly heal damage from weapons or to ignore blows altogether as though they were invulnerable.

So, if you get hit by the spell damage from an Earthquake spell, even though it is Bludgeoning, DR 5 Slash will not stop it?


The point comes down to "What makes sense?". There are three possibilities:

1) Any damage caused by a spell, even indirectly (e.g. Summoned Monster), is spell damage.

2) Any damage directly caused by a spell (i.e. the spell states that it does this damage) is spell damage.

3) Any unnamed damage caused by a spell is spell damage. Named damage is not spell damage, rather it is damage of the named type.

Personally, I like interpretation #3 since mechanically, it is the easiest to adjudicate and it also makes the most sense (i.e. what good is DR 5 Bludgeoning if it does not minimize all Slash damage?).

PS. I also think that falling damage should be bludgeoning and be minimized by most types of DR.

 

[Infiniti2000]

This is a tricky question though.

Sure. But keep in mind my response was predicated on the clause from Pinotage, "If it's spell damage...."

I agree with Hyp that the real question is defining spell damage and you mention the main concerns in that regard.

Your #3 is a little lacking IMO because it would mean that a fireball does not deal spell damage. I can't think of a use for that off hand, but there might be other spells out there which could be more easily exploited. The fact is that we must all agree that a fireball is spell damage.

Perhaps you should amend it by saying that any spell that deals bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage is not considered spell damage for that portion unless the spell description explicitly says so. Thus, ice storm deals 3d6 bludgeoning non-spell damage and 2d6 cold spell damage.

That then only leaves the problem of having SR and DR/not bludgeoning. If your SR works, you take no damage, but if your SR doesn't work, your DR applies. Does this mean magical damage need not be spell damage? I think that's somewhat of an inconsistency.