Swarm vs. Swarm

[Hypersmurf]

It's not weapon damage, it's automatic damage. I see this sort of like "unnamed bonuses", except it's "unnamed damage".

Is it reduced by DR?

Is a swarm of bats subject to a claw attack?

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Is it reduced by DR?

Is a swarm of bats subject to a claw attack?

-Hyp.

See my comment w/ Eldritch Blast. I would treat it similiar to that. Is EB subject to DR?

 

[Hypersmurf]

See my comment w/ Eldritch Blast. I would treat it similiar to that. Is EB subject to DR?

No... but Eldritch Blast doesn't contain text along the lines of "Damage reduction sufficient to reduce a swarm attack’s damage to 0, being incorporeal, and other special abilities usually give a creature immunity (or at least resistance) to damage from a swarm."

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus2]

No... but Eldritch Blast doesn't contain text along the lines of "Damage reduction sufficient to reduce a swarm attack’s damage to 0, being incorporeal, and other special abilities usually give a creature immunity (or at least resistance) to damage from a swarm."

-Hyp.

I am a little lost here, what has that text? The swarm or some attack form you are referring to?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I am a little lost here, what has that text? The swarm or some attack form you are referring to?

The Swarm subtype, under 'Swarm attack'.

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I am a little lost here, what has that text? The swarm or some attack form you are referring to?

From here:

Swarm Subtype: ...

A swarm’s attacks are nonmagical, unless the swarm’s description states otherwise. Damage reduction sufficient to reduce a swarm attack’s damage to 0, being incorporeal, and other special abilities usually give a creature immunity (or at least resistance) to damage from a swarm. Some swarms also have acid, poison, blood drain, or other special attacks in addition to normal damage.

 

[KarinsDad]

Well, only if the swarm attack does not deal weapon damage.

Now, DR reduces the 'damage from weapons and natural attacks'. The Swarm subtype makes reference to 'DR sufficient to reduce the swarm damage to 0', which implies that DR applies to the Swarm attack, which means that the swarm damage is 'damage from weapons or natural attacks'.

Now, if we assume that a swarm of bats is immune to both a longsword and a bear's claw attack as a consequence of its immunity to weapon damage, we know that immunity to weapon damage provides for immunity to the damage from weapons, and from natural attacks.

Since the DR evidence tells us that swarm damage is either damage from weapons or damage from natural attacks - both of which immunity to weapon damage protects against - we can see that immunity to weapon damage protects against swarm damage.

This conclusion is based on two assumptions:
1. DR applies to swarm damage.
2. Immunity to weapon damage protects against natural attacks.

DR is irrelevant to this topic and just adds complexity that is not needed. Swarms do not have DR and DR is not the only type of weapon defense that will stop a Swarm attack (e.g. Incorporeal will as well).

The only relevant things are that Immunity to Weapon Damage totally protects against weapons (with the exception of the swarm vulnerabilities), Natural Attacks are considered weapons, and a "Swarm" attack is a natural attack (both of these last two are found in the Attack section on page 6 of the Monster Manual).

 

[Hypersmurf]

DR is irrelevant to this topic and just adds complexity that is not needed.

DR was just being used to demonstrate that a Swarm attack is either a weapon or natural attack.

I'm away from my DMG, but if it's explicitly stated that a swarm attack is a natural attack, the DR path is no longer necessary.

-Hyp.

 

[Dimwhit]

I *think* I tend to side with Hyp here. However, that could really drag out a combat, so I'd probably allow the swarms to damage each other as they do regular creatures. Or something.

Swarms are nasty. Our DM has been kicking our butts with them lately. Good thing my Druid can shape into an air elemental and do a whirlwind...

 

[Rassilon]

Well, I was going to say just let the swarms damage each other, it's too cool - but that wouldn't be the 'rules', unless, perhaps we reference the rule about having fun. Oh well.

This conclusion is based on two assumptions . . .

No. No. No. One's respected opponent's conclusion relies on assumptions, one's own conclusion is argued from premises


Rassilon.