Fighting Wraiths aka how to annoy your players

[the8bitdeity]

I might need to read some rules again.

But personally I would never reduce the vulnerability damage on a creature, even if it was insubstancial, if its vulnerable it always takes the damage. This is my interpretation of the spirit of the rules (no wraith puns intended ).

If an insubstancial creature with vulnerability 10 takes 25 damage surely it should be:
25 halved = 12 damage, check to see if it is vulnerable (yes) +10 damage = 22 damage.

This is the way I do it.

Just for the record, here is the WotC official response on the item.
Ask Wizards: 11/10/2008

 

[Herschel]

I interpreted it pretty much the same as Rechan because if I didn't, whenever I run a encounter with wraiths, I would be sorely tempted to make them end their moves in a wall when they are bloodied, and wait until their regeneration healed them to full before sending them after the PCs again. Talk about annoying and grindy!

I tend to look at it like they are shifting between planes of existence. It's a flicker, not a full state otherwise the characters wouldn't encounter them. They are incorporeal enough to pass through something with (movement-wise) minor resistence, but they can't stay there. That's also why they take some damage even from mundane attacks.

 

[Mesh Hong]

Thanks for the pointer 8bitdeity

Q: What happens when damage is dealt to a creature with both insubstantial and vulnerability? For example, let’s say I deal 1 radiant damage to a specter (who has vulnerability 5 radiant). What happens?
A: You apply the vulnerability first, bringing the total up to 6 damage, then apply the insubstantial, cutting it by half for a final total of 3 damage. You would do the same with resistance, so a specter taking 12 necrotic damage first reduces it to 2, which then gets cut in half to 1 because it’s insubstantial.

Well I am always prepared to be wrong, I think I have just found my first house rule (keeping to my own interpretation, rather than RAW)

 

[SirKodiak]

I'm not saying that people shouldn't institute a house rule changing how vulnerability works with being insubstantial, but with a Wraith's reduced hit points, if you don't effectively halve the vulnerability - as in the default rules - then vulnerabilities are actually twice as potent as against normal creatures. If you halve hitpoints, halve damage, and halve vulnerability, it all works out to being the same as normal.

To give a quick example:
creature A has 100 HP and is vulnerable 5 radiant
creature B has 50 HP, is vulnerable 5 radiant, and is insubstantial

creature A gets hit for 15 radiant damage, and loses 20 (15+5) HP as a result, taking it to 80 HP remaining, 80% of its life
creature B gets hit for 15 radiant damage, and loses 10 ((15+5)/2) HP as a result, taking it to 40 HP remaining, 80% of its life

Percentage reduction in hitpoints is probably a more important yardstick than absolute damage taken, and that still works out.

 

[Mesh Hong]

I see what you are saying SirKodiak and yes it makes absolute sense.

I don't really have a rational or logical arguement as to why I will continue to interpret the rules differently (and yes, incorrectly) other than:

1: that is the way I have always done it.
2: I don't actually use many creatures from the MM prefering to make my own as needed. Because of this when I create insubstancial creatures I do not use the same maths as the MM. Generally I give them between 60-75% normal HPs, so it probably works out about the same, give or take. I rarely use the insubstancial trait, but when I do I want the players to know the creature is going to be a serious threat, but give them the moral boost that if they can hit its weakness its really going to feel it.

But otherwise I completely agree that my interpretation of the vulnerability/insubstancial rules would not be favourable to any creature from the MM. I will be sure to bear this in mind in the future.

Thanks

 

[haran.banjo]

Thanks for the pointer 8bitdeity

Well I am always prepared to be wrong, I think I have just found my first house rule (keeping to my own interpretation, rather than RAW)

Well Mesh, just for your records, I am using your same ruling.

 

[FireLance]

Because of this when I create insubstancial creatures I do not use the same maths as the MM. Generally I give them between 60-75% normal HPs, so it probably works out about the same, give or take.

Actually, the MM math isn't too far off from yours. Just checking the wraith entry, the sample wraiths all have hit points that are about 70-80% of what a "normal" creature of their role and level would have. This effectively gives them more hit points unless targeted by effects that specifically deal full damage to insubstantial creatures (such as the Inescapable Force feat).

 

[Quickleaf]

Slight tangent...When I notice the PCs are heading into a pitched fight I usually try to give them a chance to even the odds beforehand, especially if it's supposed to be an encounter of equal level.

What I've done with wraiths in the past is basically a skill challenge to appease them and keep them at bay long enough to escape or accomplish a task, or just reduce the number you must face. For example, a Religion check would reveal they are appeased by blood, while a Bluff check might convince them poured wine is blood.