Ongoing damage vs. Regeneration

[Otterscrubber]

The description says they both happen at the beginning of your turn, but if they both happen at the beginning, which one happens first? This is an important distinction the closer to 0hp you get.

 

[luide]

There have been huge fights about this one, whether the list of "start of turn" in PHB is ordered or not.

So RAW is unclear on this.

Personally, I let the player who is affected to choose the order he wants to proceed on them. For monsters it's obviously done by me as a DM.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Personally, I let the player who is affected to choose the order he wants to proceed on them. For monsters it's obviously done by me as a DM.

This is more or less how at least one of the WotC designers--I forget who, specifically--has said to handle it. Or more accurately, what he said (I think) was "Whichever order is most beneficial for the character whose turn it is."

 

[Mort_Q]

Whereas I would go with whatever the player wanted, wasn't there a FAQ that said they happen at the same time? That is you calculate the net change to the HP, and then apply it. I'll go snoop.

 

[Shazbot79]

I've always ruled that ongoing damage and regeneration kind of negate eachother.

So if a monster has regen 5 and is taking ongoing 2, then said monster effectively has regen 3 until the ongoing damage goes away.

As an aside, I think that ongoing damage is kind of better for monsters than players. Ongoing damage is a scary thing to a player, but having your big bad die from taking 5hp damage at the start of her round is a little anti-climatic.

In those instances, if ongoing damage reduces a monster to 0hp I usually just keep them around until someone hits her with an attack.

 

[DracoSuave]

but having your big bad die from taking 5hp damage at the start of her round is a

...result of a daily power, and probably shouldn't be messed with just because that individual element itself seems anticlimactic.

If I pissed away my daily on some guy and the damage that daily was designed to do, the reason I took it, didn't kill a guy and we had to waste another action, then I might feel that my power wasn't cool.

It's a daily. Let the daily be awesome.

 

[MrMyth]

Agreed - the damage might seem small, but part of the point is that it is there and can keep on ticking. And honestly, I think it a perfect way for an enemy to die: the barbarian lifts up his mighty axe, preparing to bring it down to cleave some skulls - and then blood pours forth from his mouth, as he collapses to the ground with a final, echoing thud.

 

[MarkB]

I've always ruled that ongoing damage and regeneration kind of negate eachother.

So if a monster has regen 5 and is taking ongoing 2, then said monster effectively has regen 3 until the ongoing damage goes away.

That's the way we play it - subtract the ongoing damage from the regeneration, and then apply the result.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

I'm in the most beneficial order for the char camp.

That's the way we play it - subtract the ongoing damage from the regeneration, and then apply the result.

As long as the char suffering both effects has no resistance against the ongoing damage that should be fine but as soon as he has resistance against the ongoing damage that approach seems rather unfair.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

The problem comes from the fact that Regeneration does not function if the creature (Monster or PC) is unconscious unless stated otherwise.

So you have to decide as a group perhaps if how you want it to work in your group.

If you allow Regen before Ongoing then it works the same for monsters and could bring about another round or more of damage to the characters.

If you allow Ongoing before Regen you are likely to lose a party member to unconsciousness and lose their powers to assist the party.