"Shield Other" question

[Artoomis]

Well, you can be sure I'll ask my DM about this the next time I have some sort of resistance going and my mount (shielded) gets hit by that same kind of energy. It will be interesting to see what he thinks.

 

[Hypersmurf]

To me, it looks like the damage is cut in half right after it is rolled, but before it is applied to the victim. Half the damage goes to the victim and the other half (rounded up) goes to the cleric. Then each, independently, applies any defenses that they may have and takes the rest as damage. I don't see any reason that the damage would lose it's "type" specification anywhere in this process.

{snip}

Note that if the fighter were immune to fire but the cleric was not, then in my system the cleric would be hurt while in yours he would not.

Now, I think the way I interpret it is more generous than yours.

I would say that the damage is halved after defences are taken into account.

So if a fighter with DR 10/- is shielded by a cleric with DR 5/-, and the fighter is hit for 20 points of damage, his DR prevents 10 of it. Since he takes no wound from those 10 points, none of it is "shared". Of the remaining 10, he takes 5, and the other 5 are transferred to his buddy... and absorbed by the cleric's DR 5.

If you start halving damage before DR, Energy Resistance, etc are taken into account... then you should also halve damage from blows that fail to hit the fighter but do strike his armor.

IMO, a fighter with Fire Immunity should transfer no burn damage to the cleric shielding him, because no wound is ever incurred.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

The answer seems fairly simple.

The Cleric can be immune to fire all he wants, but he is not taking damage from a fire spell like the Fighter.

He is taking damage from a Shield Other spell.

Where does it say in the Shield Other spell that fire damage or attack damage or any other type of hit point damage is anything other than hit point damaged and lowered due to other protections or resistances?

It does not.

The Cleric is not getting hit with a Fireball, he is getting hit by hit point damage from a Shield Other spell. Protection From Fire does not protect against that type of hit point damage. Damage Reduction does not protect against that type of hit point damage.

Why is there confusion on this?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Why is there confusion on this?

I explained the confusion in the original post - the phrasing "Some of the subject's wounds are transferred to you".

I can visualise this - the fighter is chopped, the cleric beings to bleed. The fighter is punched, the cleric gets a black eye. The fighter falls into a bonfire, the cleric blisters.

The phrase "wounds are transferred" is where the confusion arises - because I see the cleric taking slashing damage, not just losing vital energy. Hence my initial question - is that sentence just flavour text?

Where does it say in the Shield Other spell that fire damage or attack damage or any other type of hit point damage is anything other than hit point damaged and lowered due to other protections or resistances?

As a related question - would you allow Endure Elements to reduce the damage caused by a Shadow Evocation : Fireball?

-Hyp.

 

[Albereth]

The answer seems fairly simple.

The Cleric is not getting hit with a Fireball, he is getting hit by hit point damage from a Shield Other spell. Protection From Fire does not protect against that type of hit point damage. Damage Reduction does not protect against that type of hit point damage.

Why is there confusion on this?

Greetings and welcome to the new board KD, I thought we might have lost ya

I have to completely agree with KD on this one. The cleric is NOT taking damage from the fireball but from the shield other spell. You roll the damage done to the shielded character, apply any resistance/buff reduction to it and then halve it with the greater half going to the cleric. It is not fire damage, cold damage, sonic damage, etc but just plain ole hit point damage.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I have to completely agree with KD on this one. The cleric is NOT taking damage from the fireball but from the shield other spell.

Do you have a take on the related question (above)?

-Hyp.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

I think that "The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by the character" makes relatively clear that the caster takes the damage, period. He/she is not 'affected by half of the attack'; he/she takes an "amount of damage." It is very explicit about hit points of damage, and I think the absence of specifics on damage type are not an oversight but a clue that Shield Other is dealing in raw hp of damage. No damage reduction, resistances, etc. need apply once you're looking at the cleric's share. Of course these things would apply to the original victim, because you need to take them into account to know how many hp of damage there are to start with.

JMO

 

[Hypersmurf]

It is very explicit about hit points of damage, and I think the absence of specifics on damage type are not an oversight but a clue that Shield Other is dealing in raw hp of damage.

All right. In that case -

If someone recognises that their opponent has a Shield Other spell on them, and that it will take them twice as long as normal to wear them down, can they switch to subdual attacking and have none of the subdual damage transferred to the warding cleric? Or would you say subdual damage is transferred also?

-Hyp.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

I'd go with splitting subdual damage, too. Subdual damage is still damage in hit points, and isn't a "type" in the way fire, acid, etc. are. In fact, for certain creatures, damage of certain "types" are or aren't subdual damage, so I'd say the issue of subdual vs. normal hp damage is orthogonal to the issue of damage type (fire/cold/etc) and damage reduction.

I'll quote the bulk of the SRD text because I think seeing it all in context really does suggest dealing with this at the level of "hit point damage"

This spell wards the subject and creates a mystic connection between the character and the subject so that some of the subject’s wounds are transferred to the character. The subject gains a +1 deflection bonus to AC and a +1 resistance bonus to saves. Additionally, the subject takes only half damage from all wounds and attacks (including those inflicted by special abilities) that deal it hit point damage. The amount of damage not taken by the warded creature is taken by the character. Forms of harm that do not involve hit points, such as charm effects, temporary ability damage, level draining, and disintegration, are not affected. If the subject suffers a reduction of hit points from a lowered Constitution score, the reduction is not split with the character because it is not hit point damage. When the spell ends, subsequent damage is no longer divided between the subject and the character, but damage already split is not reassigned to the subject.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd go with splitting subdual damage, too. Subdual damage is still damage in hit points, and isn't a "type" in the way fire, acid, etc. are.

Subdual damage is emphatically not hit point damage.

It counts up from zero instead of being subtracted from your current hit points. It heals at a completely different rate to hit point damage.

If a creature with 101 hit points is stabbed with a dagger and then hit with a targeted Power Word, Kill, it dies. If the same creature is instead pummeled for 100 points of subdual damage, the PWK has no effect.

-Hyp.