evasion and pocketed friends - what would you do?

[Plane Sailing]

OK, here is the situation. The rogue is scouting and the druid is wildshaped into a tiny animal and going along in one of his pockets. The rogue sets off a fireball trap - makes his save and evades all damage.

Does the druid

a) ignore all damage because he was in the pocket of the rogue who evaded

b) make a saving throw as normal because he is just another entity in the spread radius

c) something else

?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I've seen arguments both ways.

1. The druid has full cover due to the shirt, and we know that the shirt can only take damage under certani circumstances including the rogue rolling a 1 on his save, so in all likelihood, the druid will not be subject to the spell.

2. But that means that someone with a sheet over his head would never take damage from a fireball either!

-Hyp.

 

[CronoDekar]

Interesting situation... I think I'd allow the druid to also avoid the blast. I was going to say I'd have the druid roll a reflex save as if with Improved Evasion, but then I realized that if he's in the pocket then he's got minimal line of sight and minimal maneuverability -- plus that's what'd make the most sense to me. As long as it doesn't get too abusable, anyway.

 

[Vrecknidj]

If all the similarly-sized items on the rogue's person don't have to make a save if the rogue saves, then it doesn't make any sense, in terms of physical consistency, to say that the similarly-protected tiny animal would have to save.

As a matter of fact, I think that given the way saves work for objects generally, if the tiny animal were not a polymorphed or wild shaped PC, but just a plain old toad, then no one would even question it.

Dave

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Only if:
A. The sheet is intelligent, makes its save, and has enough hit points to block the damage.

B. The sheet otherwise counts as an attended object attended by someone other than the person hiding under it.

As far as I can tell, if the person hiding under it tries to claim the sheet as an attended object, (which would therefore only take damage if he rolled a 1 on his saving throw), it would then count as part of him and he would no longer be able to take cover behind it. If, OTOH, he's trying to take cover under the sheet, then the fireball does damage to the sheet and any extra damage spills over onto what's behind it. (In this case, the person taking cover underneath it).

So, taking cover under a fireproof blanket: yes. Taking cover under an ordinary sheet: not in any relevant manner.

It doesn't seem counter-intuitive after all.

2. But that means that someone with a sheet over his head would never take damage from a fireball either!

 

[FireLance]

A sheet is a somewhat silly example. Consider the effect of a tower shield instead:

Shield, Tower: This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as you are. In most situations, it provides the indicated shield bonus to your AC. However, you can instead use it as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so. The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else.

Total Cover: If you don’t have line of effect to your target he is considered to have total cover from you. You can’t make an attack against a target that has total cover.

A fighter gives up his attacks and uses his tower shield as total cover just before a red dragon uses his breath weapon on him.

1. Does the fighter take any damage?
2. What happens to the tower shield?

 

[Plane Sailing]

A fighter gives up his attacks and uses his tower shield as total cover just before a red dragon uses his breath weapon on him.

1. Does the fighter take any damage?
2. What happens to the tower shield?

If it is a burst, no. If it is a spread, yes, because it goes around corners.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I ask the question because it came up yesterday. My on-the-spot ruling was (b) make a separate saving throw, on the basis of a paladins horse gets evasion but we don't say that the paladin avoids the damage just because the horse saves.

In a related vein familiars are often carried around by their owners, yet have evasion... I would normally expect familiars to make their own save unless they were in some kind of magical pocket of some sort.

(the PC in question failed his save against the fireball, took 50 damage exactly and then failed his save against massive damage. Oops.)

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I treat familiars and companions in pockets as items. They -- familiars in particular -- are fragile enough, even with that break. Ruling that they have to save for themselves, while attended by their masters, will lead to spellcasters no longer taking familiars.

As far as taking total cover behind a shield as the dragon breathes ...

(1) As someone already said, if a dragon's breath is a spread, it finds a way around cover.

That said, and granting that I'm not certain, I don't think a dragon's breath is a spread, so I'd rule:

(2) The shield absorbs damage based on hardness and hit points, to the point of destruction, and the cowering fighter sucks up anything left. I'd still give him credit for cover on his Reflex save.

 

[Laurel]

Not sure if this works....

OK, here is the situation. The rogue is scouting and the druid is wildshaped into a tiny animal and going along in one of his pockets. The rogue sets off a fireball trap - makes his save and evades all damage.

Does the druid

a) ignore all damage because he was in the pocket of the rogue who evaded

b) make a saving throw as normal because he is just another entity in the spread radius

c) something else

?

I'd go with A.

The pocketed PC only makes the save after the rogue does his thing.

If the rogue fails his save: The pocketed PC makes a save as normal. This gives the chance that even within the pocket it can avoid the damage, but also the chance for full damage.

If the rogue makes his save: The rogues twisting, turning, or whatever is letting him avoid total damage also includes the pocket that he is wearing. The pocketed PC shouldn't have to make any saves. If the rogue can completely clear the damage, something that is a part of him shouldn't be able to take full damage.

I'd say an item (this case a PC) in someones pocket is different then fighting from horse back. In one your waist to the top of head is exposed and can be hit without hitting the horse, while something tiny inside someone's pocket can't be hit without the larger creature being hit.