'Resist All' vs Attacks with multiple damage types?

[Pyrex]

This came up in our session this weekend and I thought I'd check if anyone knew of a rules citation since we couldn't find one.

Our Paladin activated his Shield of Protection granting himself "Resist 10 to all Damage until the end of your next turn."

The opponent hit the Pally with his Lightning Weapon, and activated it's daily power, dealing 1[w] untyped damage + 1d6 Lightning damage.

The player of the Pally believed the "Resist All" should reduce the damage types seperately, while I was of the opinion that the resistance should only apply once as it's only one attack.

The text on Resistance in the PHB is pretty slim, anyone have a reference?

 

[webrunner]

IIRC the current rule is that if you have multiple damage types then the lowest resistance applies- the lowest resistance to "resist all" is whatever the number is (in this case 10)

 

[Mort_Q]

The text on Resistance in the PHB is pretty slim, anyone have a reference?

Did you check the Errata?

 

[N0Man]

Webrunner's recollection of the multiple damage types is correct but I don't think it applies to your particular case.

When there are multiple damage sources, such as a spell that says it does "2D6 Fire and Lightning Damage", then the Webrunner is correct in citing that the lowest resist between the two is used.

However, your example is a different case. First of all, the damage is technically coming from 2 sources. I think where you are mistaken is that the attack isn't really dealing "1[w] untyped damage + 1d6 Lightning damage."

In reality, the melee attack is dealing 1[w] untyped (melee) damage, and then a Daily power is expended (as a Free Action) that can only be activated when you hit with a weapon, deals 1d6 Lightning damage. It doesn't *increase* the weapon's damage by 1d6, it is a power that deals 1d6 damage.

These are 2 different sources, and he regains resist 10 to the melee attack, and resist 10 to the lightning based daily power from the item. In this case, he would be completely immune to the damage, since 10 is greater than the possible damage from either 1d6.

 

[fba827]

my initial reaction is to say take the lower of the resistances and apply that. but then i realized, i don't think that's what you're asking ... right?

situation 1: a target takes 15 points of "combined thunder and lightning damage" but has resist 5 thunder and resist 10 lightning.
vs.
situation 2: a target takes 5 points of thunder and 10 points of lightning damage

The PHB (and it's errata on the topic) address situation 1 (in such that situation, the lower of the resistances to the combined damage is what is in effect leaving the target to take 10 damage).

But I don't think I've seen anything address situation 2 (which is what I think you're asking).

My "simple" answer would to your question be to just call all such situations "combined" total damage and then treat it like situation 1. And then be consistent in that for the rest of the campaign. So in this case, I'd call it (1W+1d6) combined lightning and unnamed damage, of which you would then resist 10 and take the rest.

My "complicated" answer would be to treat them as separate damage sources, thus 1W and resist 10, and then 1d6 of which you resist 10.


Of course, I am tired, so if I am misunderstanding your question, or if my rambled answer is hard to follow, I apologize.

 

[Pyrex]

Right. Situation 1 (damage with two types) is pretty clearly handled; use the smaller resistance.

Situation 2 is (debatably) what I'm looking at.

I think N0Man might be correct though. In the example I posted there are technically two damage sources. The melee strike and the (free-action) daily power activation. Two damage sources means resistance is resolved individually.

So as long as there aren't any attacks that deal two seperate buckets of damage with two different types (off hand I don't know of any) we're covered.

 

[FireLance]

So as long as there aren't any attacks that deal two seperate buckets of damage with two different types (off hand I don't know of any) we're covered.

There are: a red dragon's bite attack deals untyped damage plus fire damage, a blue dragon's bite attack deals untyped damage plus lightning damage, and a white dragon's bite attack deals untyped damage plus cold damage.

I personally would allow damage of each type to be resisted separately. This makes dealing 1d6 fire plus 1d6 lightning inferior to dealing 2d6 fire and lightning, even when the target has resistance to both fire and lightning.

 

[Saeviomagy]

In this particular example, the resistances apply seperately, because the damage is coming from two seperate attacks.

For dragon attacks (or any other attack that is written as a single attack that does two seperate types of damage), I'd probably just say that they are "untyped and element X" attacks for simplicity's sake.

 

[eamon]

In this particular example, the resistances apply seperately, because the damage is coming from two seperate attacks.

For dragon attacks (or any other attack that is written as a single attack that does two separate types of damage), I'd probably just say that they are "untyped and element X" attacks for simplicity's sake.

The only point of having 2 separate "pools" of damage is that each of these pools is affected separately by resistances and vulnerabilities. I'd say it's clearly the intent and RAW that an attack (even the dragon attacks) that deal two separate quantities of damage can separately be resisted.