"Shield Other" question

[Markn]

Troll Cleric

So a troll cleric casting this is pretty beastly according to your ruling. As the damage is neither fire nor acid, the troll only takes it as non-lethal damage.

Well, yes...and no. First off, spells are designed with player use in mind (or NPC use but not the consequences of beastial creatures using spells for their own purpose - This is and always will be a drawback to any game that allows monsters to operate in a similar manner to PC's). So to answer your question, yes the troll cleric will be frickin' tough and this 'combo' if you will is an example of a loophole in the system. Does this make the troll any tougher? No, the troll just gets the ability to shrug off damage dealt to his ally but not normal damage done to him. In a situation like this you must adapt your tactics. Target the troll cleric first, then attack his allies.

 

[Egres]

If the transferred damage is magic in source, why did WotC specify something like this:

Empathic Transfer
Psychometabolism
Level: Egoist 2, psychic warrior 2
Display: Auditory and material
Manifesting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Willing creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Power Points: 3

You heal another creature’s wounds, transferring some of its damage to yourself. When you manifest this power, you can heal as much as 2d10 points of damage. The target regains a number of hit points equal to the dice result, and you lose hit points equal to half of that amount. (This loss can bring you to 0 or fewer hit points.) Powers and abilities you may have such as damage reduction and regeneration do not lessen or change this damage, since you are taking the target’s pain into yourself in an empathic manner. The damage transferred by this power has no type, so even if you have immunity to the type of damage the target originally took, the transfer occurs normally and deals hit point damage to you.

By your reasoning this specification would be useless, since DR never applies against magical sources.

 

[Markn]

Egres

I don't use psionics and so I can't really answer that question definitively.

One thing I can suggest is this - The damage from the Empathic Transfer spell is itself and since you are doing damage with your OWN spell/source it needs to be stated that DR/regeneration can't overcome this damage. This is extremely important for preventing rule abuse - preventing healing of others wounds and then soaking up the damage you are supposed to take into DR.

On the other hand Shield Other damage is indirect and not a result of the casting of the spell. The damage is not defined as a type and as such is not subject to any DR, etc, and therefore there is no need to state what is stated in Empathic Transfer.

To summarize (and explain more thorougly), the psionic spell is the source of the damage while the Shield Other is not the source. You could go so far as to say that Shield Other doesn't care what the source is. The differences in these spells is subtle but I can see the distinction for one spell pointing out that DR/Regen does not work while the other doesn't.

 

[Egres]

To summarize (and explain more thorougly), the psionic spell is the source of the damage while the Shield Other is not the source.

This means that the source of the damage trasnferred is the original source.

 

[Markn]

Not really

This means that the source of the damage trasnferred is the original source.

Not really. Unless source or a type is specified then it isn't. At best the source ONLY counts to the person it is being done to - and therefore would apply for the original taker of the damage (the fighter). After that the source is no longer checked and damage is dealt.

In addition, I think the spell would go on to describe that any resistences you have could be applied to the damage you are taking but it doesn't. It just says you take half the damage that they would have taken. There is a leap of faith there that you are taking that IMO does not exist.

 

[Egres]

Not really. Unless source or a type is specified then it isn't. At best the source ONLY counts to the person it is being done to - and therefore would apply for the original taker of the damage (the fighter). After that the source is no longer checked and damage is dealt.

In addition, I think the spell would go on to describe that any resistences you have could be applied to the damage you are taking but it doesn't. It just says you take half the damage that they would have taken. There is a leap of faith there that you are taking that IMO does not exist.

There's nothing that implies that the transferred damage is different in source from the original damage.

Heck, it's the same damage..transferred.

 

[Markn]

Not the same

There's nothing that implies that the transferred damage is different in source from the original damage.

Heck, it's the same damage..transferred.

There's nothing that states its the same damage though. It's just....well, damage. To me it is logical to say 'the amount AND TYPE of damage is taken by you" but that the capitalized part is not in there. Simply, you just take damage. It may seem logical to say that if the recipient takes fire damage then you take fire damage but that is making an assumption that is not in the spell. Furthermore, if the spells intent were to allow any buffs you had on to reduce damage that the cleric would take I would think it would be in there. To have the intent of being able to reduce damage and NOT including the text in the spell would be a huge ommission. Therefore, intent seems to lean the other way and since the actual text says otherwise I would think that these would strongly support my position of damage type NOT carrying over. If there is something I am missing please show me.

PS - I can see the logistics of your side but again there is a lot of assumptions IMO and I believe I have the support of wording of the spell as well as its intent.

 

[dvvega]

Reading the SRD description of the Spell it would seem to me that the priest takes damage, nothing more. Thus the damage is untyped.

As a reference look at the Psionic Power Share Pain. It is identical to Shield Other.

However examine Share Pain, Forced. It indicates that if you are immune to the damage being dealt the target does not suffer any damage.

This would imply that the damage done at the source would be reduced/handled by the target creature, and whatever filters through to the Cleric is just damage, as in hit points.

So it is up to the target of the attack to handle the damage before it filters to the Cleric.

So in the fireball case, a Fighter with Fire Resistance 5 taking a full 28 points from a Fireball would take 23 before halving. However because the damage has been adjusted for Resistance already, the split is purely based on hit point damage.


D

 

[Egres]

To have the intent of being able to reduce damage and NOT including the text in the spell would be a huge ommission.

Nope.

If there's nothing that negates it, you can reduce the damage dealt, cause the source is the original one.

 

[Caliban]

Nope.

If there's nothing that negates it, you can reduce the damage dealt, cause the source is the original one.

It looks to me like the source would be the Shield Other spell, since that is what is dealing the damage to the cleric.