Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7286675" data-attributes="member: 6778044">I don't see how "one relevant resistance" could be read "all relevant resistances, but only one application of each one," I think it's pretty clear. But to dig a bit further:The fact that it says "any" relevant damage immunity (so if you are attacked with fire and lightning, and have immunity to both, both apply); "any" additions and subtractions (again, all apply), and then switches to "one" relevant damage resistance gives me the impression that even if there are several relevant resistances, you only pick one. The reason is that based on this description, the expectation is that the damage from a single attack is treated as a single pool of damage.For example, an attack that causes 8 points fire and 8 points slashing, and you're resistant to fire and slashing, is addressed by:Totaling the damage (16) applying immunity and modifiers (none), and one source of resistance (halve the damage), which leaves you with 8 points of damage.The other method, treat each separately, ends up with the same result: 8 fire halved (4) + 8 slashing halved (4) = 8.Or the OP numbers: half of 6 (3) + half of 4 (2) and you end up with the same amount as 10 halved. It's just easier to total the numbers and divide by half.Note that the actual math can vary if you're only resistant to one thing (as normal). So, 9 fire 1 slashing, resistant to fire = 5 points of damage. However, 1 fire 9 slashing is also only 5 poits of damage, even though the resistance was "really" against 1 point of fire damage. [MENTION=6801228]Chaosmancer[/MENTION] - The real problem is that your shield blocks x amount of damage. That type of DR is a 3e thing, not 5e, which uses resistance to halve the damage caused by a specific type of damage. So you're stuck on the idea that there's "wasted" DR. In 5e terms, the shield could provide resistance to everything. In that case, you'd simply take half damage from every attack. This, as far as I know, was intentional in the design of 5e. They seem to be of the opinion that if an attack hits, it should generally do some damage, and not be negated because of DR. There are some exceptions, of course, but in most cases they stuck with the resistance approach rather than DR.However, now that I look at it, the official answer comes to your rescue because of that very fact. Point #2 says you apply ANY additions and subtractions to damage. That means that you apply the 10 point reduction to damage. The attack would still be figured with all damage types added together first. I suspect that your DM won't like that, and the better answer would be to simply switch the shield to resistance instead of the DR approach.</blockquote>

Verification