overlap zone and aura damage stack?

[fba827]

Situation:

A PC starts his turn standing in two effects:

Monster Aura: A PC takes 5 necrotic damage if starting his turn in the aura or enters it.

Zone: Take 10 necrotic and fire damage if starting his turn in the zone.


I made an at table-ruling for the sake of time in the moment that they did stack. My main justification was that 1) they're from different sources (a zone vs. an aura) 2) they are different damage types (one being pure necrotic, the other being a mixture of necrotic and fire).

I'm fine with how I ruled it for this instance, but, having said that, in case it comes again... and it probably will ... am I just trying to see if I should look at it a different way for next time.

(if it matters, reference the lich in the MM1; but the cold & necrotic damage was changed to fire & necrotic damage for story reasons)

In contrast:
* if the PC was standing in the same auras of two creatures (i.e. next to two liches), I would not let it stack
* if the PC was standing in two of the exact same zones, I would not let it stack
* if the PC was standing in the aura and the zone and they both dealt the exact same type of damage (both just pure necrotic), I would (perhaps wrongly?) let it stack since in my head it's two different sources


Anyway, thoughts, references, etc on the topic?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Flipguarder]

I agree with everything... Even the lack in assuredness you have to your own ruling that suggests you should ask this forum its opinion.

 

[AngryMojo]

Yup, you've got it right. As long as it's from different sources, the damage stacks.

 

[DracoSuave]

The only thing that wouldn't stack here is a double-aura situation where both auras are the same. Zones don't care about that tho; You can stack all the zones you want. If two auras are not the same, from two different -kinds- of monsters, they'd stack as well.

 

[Kordeth]

Also worth pointing out that if the aura and the zone were both ongoing damage of the same type, they wouldn't stack.

 

[Flipguarder]

Kordeth do you have a citation for that? I know that ongoing damage from the same source or from the same attack from two different monsters doesn't stack but why would say a fire trap that causes ongoing fire damage and a redspawn firebletcher's attack not stack?

 

[JohnnyO]

Hmmm, maybe I played this wrong the other night then....

I just ran a fight with a large swarm of Kruthik's attacking the party, and I had each player take 2 damage/per kruthik they were adjacent to at the end of their turn. Reading it, it seemed that it made more sense, especially from a swarm creatures perspective. (i.e. the more creatures surrounding you, the harder it was to avoid getting hit)


It was a much more dynamic fight that way, so I'm happy how it turned out

 

[Hjorimir]

Flipguarder, see page 278 of the Player's Handbook - Ongoing Damaage (The Same Type of Ongoig Damage).

Basically, ongoing damages of the same type - regardless of source - do not stack.

 

[Flipguarder]

thankee kindly

 

[Markn]

MM2 has some updated wording on Aura. The last paragraph states

"If auras overlap and impose penalties to the same roll or game statistic, a creature affected by the overlapping aura is subject to the worst penalty; the penalties are not cumulative. Similarly, a creature in the overlapping area takes damage only from the aura that deals the most damage, regardless of damage type."

So, from this reading, I would have to say that DracoSauve's reading is wrong. Regardless of damage type, same monster or different, you only take damage from the most damaging aura. Thats how I interpret anyways.

Again, zone has updated wording as well in the MM2. The last paragraph is virtually identical to aura paragraph listed above.

FWIW, how you played it, is how we play it. A zone is a zone, an aura is an aura, a zone is therefore not an aura so we stack the two.