Nail said:
Except that both the close readings and the generalized reading can both give the same answer. The close reading does not preclude this.
A normal energy attack against a person DOES subtract any resistances or defenses (e.g. Evasion) before getting the final result. Why would this be different unless it explicitly called it out?
Even though I believed as you do (and I think this is important, I also thought from a more casual reading from long ago that acid and sonic attacks ignored hardness), I no longer believe that once I more carefully examined the book.
Not a single Acid spell in the PHB calls this out. Only one Sonic spell (our of about four) in the PHB calls this out and that is a sonic spell that does low damage (hence, the reason to ignore hardness, and of course, a spell only indicates the rules for that specific spell).
If not subtracting hardness was indeed an exception to the normal energy attack rules against objects, they would have explicitly called it out SOMEWHERE.
I couldn't find it anywhere.
So, we have to fall back on the generic rule since no specific rule exists that counteracts the generic rule. An omission is not the same as a counteraction of the rule.
Nail said:
I think this IS a clarification of the rule.
It is only a "new rule" when compared to the previous FAQ.
So although it was murky before (by your own admission "close reading will get you one answer, a more generalized reading will get you another"), now it is clarified correctly.
And Acid and Sonic damage STILL does more damage than Fire, Lightning, or Cold against objects (if it gets past hardness).
