Untyped Ongoing Damage

[Matt James]

Can someone help me with this, and include a citation from the rules?

I thought that you could stack untyped ongoing damage.

Page 224 of the Rules Compendium seems to contradict itself. Read the Different Types of Ongoing Damage section, then the Same Type of Ongoing Damage.

I'm reiterating the need to cite from published rules. Please refrain from conjecture or interpretation, if at all possible.

 

[Aulirophile]

It... doesn't contradict itself.

Untyped is a type of damage. So if someone is taking ongoing 10, untyped, and you give them ongoing 20, untyped, they are only taking ongoing 20, untyped.

It even explicitly points out, on the page you referenced, that untyped damage is a type of damage and therefore the rule applies.

 

[chitzk0i]

See the example for Same Type of Ongoing Damage. It specifically clarifies your question. All untyped damage counts as the same type. See also the (including no type) parentheticals that are meant to clarify this.

 

[Matt James]

Read the section Different Types of Ongoing Damage. It specifically cites 'no type'. Then it does the same in the Same Type of Ongoing Damage.

Edit: You guys rock for helping with this.

 

[Aulirophile]

Read the section Different Types of Ongoing Damage. It specifically cites 'no type'. Then it does the same in the Same Type of Ongoing Damage.

It says if you're taking multiple types of going damage (including no type), blah blah blah.

So it says no type, or untyped, is a type of damage. So if you're taking multiple types of ongoing damage...... untyped is a type of damage you can be taking. Yeah, no contradiction here.

Also the actual example under different ongoing types explicitly answers your question.

 

[Matt James]

Okay, I see now. It was weirding me out. Thanks guys.