Evasion vs. Reflex Partial spells/effects

[StreamOfTheSky]

Simple question. Does Evasion help against stuff that has a save entry of "Reflex Partial"?


I want the answer to be yes, or at least occasionaly yes. I really want it to be yes. Mettle kinda came along after Evasion was written and had the unfortunate distinction of being completely and utterly better. Not only because it works on twice the saves and the two "most important" saves at that (fort and will), but also because it works against Half and Partial. All this time I thought Evasion just got shafted, but I saw a thread recently where a poster pointed out something interesting in the text of Evasion:
"If she makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, she instead takes no damage."

Which would/could mean that a spell that was Reflex partial because a save halved the damage AND averted a condition would be rendered completely null by Evasion. Do you agree? As long as the Reflex save halves the damage, Evasion applies, even if the entry isn't actually "Reflex Half"?

 

[Ahnehnois]

Evasion (Ex)

At 2nd level or higher if a monk makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, she instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if a monk is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless monk does not gain the benefit of evasion.

If a successful reflex save would result in half damage, evasion negates that damage, even if it has a "reflex partial" entry. I'd say that's both the way it's written and the way it should work.

As written, evasion doesn't help if the effect still imposes some non-damaging effect even on a successful save, but maybe it should.

I don't know a lot of spells that actually have "reflex partial" entries, but there must be some.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Nope! Evasion does not help against such spells - unless part of the "partial" is half damage, in which case only the damage part is affected.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I guess part of it is just a common sense analogy type deal. Special attacks like poison don't work if the attack does no damage. So if your spell does no damage, why should any rider effects still trigger?

Also, even if you don't agree with that "interpretation," do you think it would be unbalanced to just update/upgrade Evasion to simply stop dead any Reflex half/partial effect, damaging or otherwise? Again, in a game where classes with Mettle (ie, any game with splatbooks) are already prevalent?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I guess part of it is just a common sense analogy type deal. Special attacks like poison don't work if the attack does no damage. So if your spell does no damage, why should any rider effects still trigger?

Because "it's magic."

 

[Dross]

I guess part of it is just a common sense analogy type deal. Special attacks like poison don't work if the attack does no damage. So if your spell does no damage, why should any rider effects still trigger?

Also, even if you don't agree with that "interpretation," do you think it would be unbalanced to just update/upgrade Evasion to simply stop dead any Reflex half/partial effect, damaging or otherwise? Again, in a game where classes with Mettle (ie, any game with splatbooks) are already prevalent?

While I do agree that Evasion only covers the HP damage by RAW, I don't think that it is unbalanced to also prevent the other effects.

Try it and see (just in case there is a hidden outcome we haven't thought of).