resistance, vulnerability, and saves

[nhl_1997]

Is anyone aware of any official rules to handle this situation?

Suppose a frost giant (vulnerability to fire -- half again as much fire damage) with a ring of minor fire resistance (fire resistance 10) is in the area of a fireball dealing 20 points of damage (reflex save for half). The giant makes the reflex save. How much damage does the giant take?

a) 5 (save, vulnerability, resistance)
b) 0 (save, resistance)
c) 7 (resistance, vulnerability, save)
d) 10 (vulnerability, resistance, save)
e) 5 (vulnerability, save, resistance)
f) 7 (resistance, save, vulnerability)

My intuition says that the giant takes 5 points of damage (from logic "a" rather than logic "e").


My logic:

Energy resistance lessens the amount of damage the creature takes from that energy type. Before it can be applied, we first must determine how much damage the energy type deals. Thus, energy resistance is always the last modifier to be applied. The save comes before adding damage from vulnerability because if the save is successful, then part of the energy doesn't actually affect the creature (the creature partially dodged it for example.)

 

[Saeviomagy]

My intuition says that the giant takes 5 points of damage (from logic "a" rather than logic "e").

To me it's a or e. Which one it is is largely irrelevant - either you dodged the damage and the damage which you didn't dodge did more, OR There was more damage to dodge in the first place. Since they both give the same result in all circumstances, it doesn't matter which.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

Deja vu: http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=106462

Is anyone aware of any official rules to handle this situation?

Suppose a frost giant (vulnerability to fire -- half again as much fire damage) with a ring of minor fire resistance (fire resistance 10) is in the area of a fireball dealing 20 points of damage (reflex save for half). The giant makes the reflex save. How much damage does the giant take?

a) 5 (save, vulnerability, resistance)
b) 0 (save, resistance)
c) 7 (resistance, vulnerability, save)
d) 10 (vulnerability, resistance, save)
e) 5 (vulnerability, save, resistance)
f) 7 (resistance, save, vulnerability)

My intuition says that the giant takes 5 points of damage (from logic "a" rather than logic "e").


My logic:

Energy resistance lessens the amount of damage the creature takes from that energy type. Before it can be applied, we first must determine how much damage the energy type deals. Thus, energy resistance is always the last modifier to be applied. The save comes before adding damage from vulnerability because if the save is successful, then part of the energy doesn't actually affect the creature (the creature partially dodged it for example.)

 

[nhl_1997]

Deja vu: http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=106462

Thank you. I thought I had read something along those lines before it came up IOC a couple of days ago.

 

[FireLance]

For what it's worth, I would go for (b).

I generally rule that you apply saving throws before energy resistance, so if you got hit by a 20-point fireball and were wearing a minor ring of fire resistance, you'd take 10 points on a failed save and 0 points on a successful save instead of 10 points on a failed save and 5 points on a successful one.

I also generally apply vulnerabilities last. It seems to me that vulnerability should be a non-issue if you are protected by an effect that would completely shield you from the effects of an energy blast. For example, if you are hit by an 8-point burning hands while wearing a minor ring of fire resistance, why should the ring let some damage through if you're vulnerable to fire, and absorb all damage if you are not?

Or consider the case where two creatures, one vulnerable to fire and one with no special vulnerability, are both warded by identical protection from energy spells which will absorb 60 points of fire damage each, and then hit by the same three fireballs which do 20 points of damage each. Assuming both of them fail all their saving throws, why should the spell "wear out" faster for the fire-vulnerable creature (absorbs only the first two fireballs) compared to the normal one (absorbs all three)?

 

[Creeperman]

The giant takes 10 points of damage. The order of operations is as follows.
Fireball: 20 points of damage.
Reflex save: -10 points of damage, 10 points remaining.
Vulnerability: +10 points of damage, 20 points remaining.
Resistance: -10 points of damage, 10 points remaining.

Note the wording of the vulnerability description: "...It has vulnerability to fire, which means it takes half again as much (+50%) damage as normal from fire, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed, or if the save is a success or failure" (emphasis mine). A creature with a vulnerability always takes that extra 50% damage (barring resistances), from the base damage of the effect, even if it makes its save (and even if it has the evasion ability).

 

[FireLance]

Actually, I think the phrase "regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed, or if the save is a success or failure" is there to emphasize the difference between the current version of vulnerability and the previous version, where the vulnerable creature took double damage on a failed save or if a save was not allowed and half damage (as a normal non-vulnerable creature) on a successful save.

Against a 20-point fireball, a creature with the previous version of vulnerability would have taken 40 points of damage on a failed save and 10 points on a successful save. Now, a vulnerable creature takes 30 points of damage on a failed save and 15 points on a successful one.

 

[Diirk]

a and e are in fact the same. half of 30 then 50% extra is exactly the same as 50% extra on 30, then halved.. order of operations doesn't matter.

I'd pick this answer.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

Note the wording of the vulnerability description: "...It has vulnerability to fire, which means it takes half again as much (+50%) damage as normal from fire, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed, or if the save is a success or failure" (emphasis mine). A creature with a vulnerability always takes that extra 50% damage (barring resistances), from the base damage of the effect, even if it makes its save (and even if it has the evasion ability).

The quote gives no information about how to handle resistance. It only emphasizes that the +50% damage is irrespective of the saving throw, which given only vulnerability and save is moot anyway because it doesn't matter in what order you halve damage and multiply it by 1.5. I agree with Firelance because I believe that energy resistance does not instantly regenerate damage, but rather prevents a certain amount of energy from affecting the creature in the first place. If it were instant regen, then clearly +50% damage would apply first. But by blocking the damage, I reason that the blocked damage never reaches the target in the first place, so that vulnerabilities don't apply to it, only to the damage that gets through (if any). Here's an analogy: What difference does it make if you're highly allergic to beestings if you've got something that keeps them from stinging in the first place?

The subject gains energy resistance 10 against the energy type chosen, meaning that each time the creature is subjected to such damage (whether from a natural or magical source), that damage is reduced by 10 points before being applied to the creature’s hit points.

I don't believe this wording makes it absolutely clear either way, but it inclines me to believe that resistance applies before damage applies, which to me means vulnerability doesn't kick in until you subtract for resistance.

 

[Liquidsabre]

Talking about deja vu.

Yea, the text is hardly clear on this point. The best I can do is offer a bit of advice when thinking of how to handle vulnerability.

First you have to realize that for a creature/char with vulnerability (energy), attacks that have X (energy) amount of damage don't exist for a creature/char with this vulnerability. All that exists in the game-world for vulnerable (energy) creatures/chars is X*1.5 (energy) damage amounts, due to their vulnerability. So a creature/char with vulnerability (energy) will never see X (energy) damage ever during their existence, instead all they ever see is X*1.5 (energy) damage, no other amount of damage from that energy type exists for them. Thus, all X (energy) are multiplied by 1.5 automatically before any other rolls concerning the vulnerable creature are made. The energy type is just that much more harmful to the creature.

The only thing we could possibly find that would make it clear would be an example of the order damage and vulnerability/resistance are dealt on a creature, likely from an FAQ or some other sage article. Above is how how I have read the text we've quoted above (a few times now lol), and how I perceive the concept of vulnerability in game terms. Until we see something more on the topic folk will just have to use what they think works best for their game.