Monstrous Regeneration vs. Harm: possible?

[hong]

Re: Re: Monstrous Regeneration vs. Harm: possible?

Wouldn't, or a least shouldn't work. All the energy forms should penetrate regeneration, they all create damage similar to fire or acid. Negative energy damage destroys either the life force or the living tissue, I don't see how that is any different from fire or acid.

Negative energy is not "energy" for the purposes of energy resistance, or indeed anything else.

 

[rhammer2]

Re: Re: Re: Monstrous Regeneration vs. Harm: possible?

Negative and positive energy are indeed energies, hence the name. What they are not is elemental energies that the standard elemental energy protections can stop.

Negative energy is not "energy" for the purposes of energy resistance, or indeed anything else.

 

[Hypersmurf]

That's not the point.

A troll only takes real damage from fire and acid.

Cold damage is Energy damage. Is it fire or acid? No. Does he have energy resistance? No. So he takes the full amount of Cold damage as subdual damage.

Sonic damage is Energy damage. Is it fire or acid? No. Does he have energy resistance? No. So he takes the full amount of Sonic damage as subdual damage.

Electrical damage is Energy damage. Is it fire or acid? No. Does he have energy resistance? No. So he takes the full amount of Electrical damage as subdual damage.

Negative Energy damage is Energy damage. Is it fire or acid? No. Does he have energy resistance? Doesn't matter. Negative Energy is not stopped by energy resistance. Does he have negative energy protection? No. So he takes the full amount of Negative Energy damage as subdual damage.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Monstrous Regeneration vs. Harm: possible?

Negative energy is not "energy" for the purposes of energy resistance, or indeed anything else.

Negative and Positive energy are indeed classed as two of the seven energy types. But most spells and feats that affect a certain type of energy are limited to selecting from the other five...

Which makes no difference where a troll is concerned, because it isn't fire or acid.

-Hyp.

 

[andargor]

Re: Re: Re: Monstrous Regeneration vs. Harm: possible?

Negative energy is not "energy" for the purposes of energy resistance, or indeed anything else.

I'm disappointed.

I didn't get the "Hong 'who are you calling negative' Ooi" I was expecting.

Andargor

 

[Dark Dragon]

Thanks for the input guys . I'd handle it as most of you proposed, but I wasn't sure about the rules.

Now lets hope that my DM accepts your arguments (or the PCs are certainly doomed...)

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Just ask you the DM if he uses the 3.5e Version of Harm. (10 points damage per level, max 150, will half, never below 1 HP).

 

[Dark Dragon]

Hmm, that would make things easier. The DM seems to be quite happy about some changes to the system in 3.5 (especially Haste...), perhaps he'll agree to the new version of Harm.