Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Orci 05-24-07, 09:01 PM	If I use Share Pain on someone with my Psicrystal taking all the damage, does his hardness reduce the damage he takes through this power? Why? Why not?
cymbolik 05-25-07, 05:43 AM	Share Powers (Su): At the owner’s option, he can have any power (but not any psi-like ability) he manifests on himself also affect his psicrystal. The psicrystal must be within 5 feet of him at the time of the manifestation to receive the benefit. If the power has a duration other than instantaneous, it stops affecting the psicrystal if it moves farther than 5 feet away, and will not affect the psicrystal again, even if it returns to its owner before the duration expires. Additionally, the owner can manifest a power with a target of “You” on his psicrystal (as a touch range power) instead of on himself. The owner and psicrystal cannot share powers if the powers normally do not affect creatures of the psicrystal’s type (construct). The target line for share pain does not include objects or constructs. You can't use share pain to share your damage with a granite slab any more than you can share it with your psicrystal. Share Pain Psychometabolism Level: Psion/wilder 2 Display: Material and mental Manifesting Time: 1 standard action Range: Touch Targets: You and one willing creature, or two willing creatures; see text Duration: 1 hour/level (D) Power Points: 3 This power creates a psychometabolic connection between you and a willing subject so that some of your wounds are transferred to the subject. You take half damage from all attacks that deal hit point damage to you, and the subject takes the remainder. The amount of damage not taken by you is taken by the subject. If your hit points are reduced by a lowered Constitution score, that reduction is not shared with the subject because it is not a form of hit point damage. When this power ends, subsequent damage is no longer divided between the subject and you, but damage already shared is not reassigned. If you and the subject move farther away from each other than close range, the power ends. You can manifest this power on two willing subjects, one of which you designate to share its damage with the other. Even if it were possible to share your damage with your psicrystal its hardness wouldn't reduce the amount it takes since this power specifically states in the bolded text that the sharing creature takes the other half and makes no provision for things such as damage reduction or energy resistance, since it is direct hit point damage. Bear in mind that hit point damage is applied after things like damage reduction and energy resistance are calculated.
Fafnir 05-25-07, 06:13 AM	A construct is by definition a creature. But no, hardness does not apply.
angellis_ater 05-25-07, 06:34 AM	The target line for share pain does not include objects or constructs. You can't use share pain to share your damage with a granite slab any more than you can share it with your psicrystal. First of all - you're wrong. A construct is a creature, just as much as an undead is a creature. Neither may be alive, but they are not objects. Is there even a need to discuss this? Do you sunder Stone Golems? Or use Shatter to waste a Warforged?
crizhII 05-25-07, 07:04 AM	Even if it were possible to share your damage with your psicrystal its hardness wouldn't reduce the amount it takes since this power specifically states in the bolded text that the sharing creature takes the other half and makes no provision for things such as damage reduction or energy resistance, since it is direct hit point damage. Bear in mind that hit point damage is applied after things like damage reduction and energy resistance are calculated. I'm inclined to disagree with your reasoning there. If you look at the text of Empathic Transfer it contains some pretty clear cut text to the effect of your quoted opinion. Empathic Transfer, Hostile contains the exact same text cut and pasted from Empathic Transfer. Share Pain does not. It clearly could do, the designers obviously recognised the need for such a mechanism in other similar powers but chose not to implement the pre-existing 'boiler-plate' for such powers in Share Pain. They did not insert it in the errata, ergo a target creatures special qualities do apply to the damage shared with Share Pain. Unless you have a better argument than 'it doesn't say they do' I don't think your position holds water.
crizhII 05-25-07, 07:05 AM	A construct is by definition a creature. But no, hardness does not apply. Why not?
cymbolik 05-25-07, 08:46 AM	First of all - you're wrong. A construct is a creature, just as much as an undead is a creature. Neither may be alive, but they are not objects. Is there even a need to discuss this? Do you sunder Stone Golems? Or use Shatter to waste a Warforged? Do you use this condescending tone in response to every apparent misinterpretation or is that just your way of pointing out that you're infallible and, therefore, completely justified in taking such a belittling tone? If you're going to converse/argue with me, I suggest you take a less passive-aggressive stance. You'll find I respond positively to positive approaches, and vice versa. I was/am under the impression that the construct creature type exemplifies it from any effect that does not also affect objects, so please refer me to the construct creature type and point out how I have misinterpreted the definitions there and I will gladly (publicly) retract my previous post as being in error. By your reasoning cure light wounds and their ilk function for constructs too, since the spell's target line is creature touched. I'm inclined to disagree with your reasoning there. If you look at the text of Empathic Transfer it contains some pretty clear cut text to the effect of your quoted opinion. Empathic Transfer, Hostile contains the exact same text cut and pasted from Empathic Transfer. Share Pain does not. It clearly could do, the designers obviously recognised the need for such a mechanism in other similar powers but chose not to implement the pre-existing 'boiler-plate' for such powers in Share Pain. They did not insert it in the errata, ergo a target creatures special qualities do apply to the damage shared with Share Pain. Unless you have a better argument than 'it doesn't say they do' I don't think your position holds water. I've just recently had a discussion with Racinate about the fallibility of the SRD and the XPH in terms of RAI and RAW. Hardness applies to damage dealt directly to the creature or object that has hardness. It is an amount it can automatically ignore due to the fact that it is structurally more able to absorb damage. This power simply transfers half the damage the manifester takes directly to the hit points of the target through a metabolic process. The psicrystal wouldn't actually sustain an attack that needs to overcome its ability to ignore a certain amount of physical punishment. instead it takes a number of hitpoints through this metabolic process and makes the damage its own.
Scion of Coldshard 05-25-07, 10:17 AM	I was/am under the impression that the construct creature type exemplifies it from any effect that does not also affect objects Constructs are immune to effects that have fortitude saves but do not effect objects or have the harmless tag. For share pain there is no save, you have to be a willing creature, and nothing here makes the psicrystal immune by default. It can both be willing and is a creature. By your reasoning cure light wounds and their ilk function for constructs too, since the spell's target line is creature touched. They can be touched by it but the effects only happen for living creatures or undead creatures. Constructs are neither of those. I agree about hardness not applying to the damage though. The main creature takes half and the secondary creature takes the other half.
cymbolik 05-25-07, 11:44 AM	Thanks, Scion. I've looked at the construct subtype again and have revised my position. My apologies, Orci, for the mistaken interpretation re: constructs.
munin 05-25-07, 02:21 PM	By your reasoning cure light wounds and their ilk function for constructs too, since the spell's target line is creature touched. In 3.5, there is no rule that constructs are immune to Healing effects or positive or negative energy effects (the construct type description only mentions that they "cannot heal damage on their own", referring to the ability of living creatures to heal a number of hit points equal to their character level when they rest). However most effects of that sort specifically exclude constructs, either explicitly, or by limiting their effects to living creatures. The cure spells can target constructs, but they have no effect on a construct because the spell description only describes effects when living or undead creatures are targeted. The heal spell and the mass cure spells can affect constructs, because they do not specify living creatures in their Target lines or their spell descriptions.
Racinante 05-25-07, 02:46 PM	In 3.5, there is no rule that constructs are immune to Healing effects or positive or negative energy effects (the construct type description only mentions that they "cannot heal damage on their own", referring to the ability of living creatures to heal a number of hit points equal to their character level when they rest). However most effects of that sort specifically exclude constructs, either explicitly, or by limiting their effects to living creatures. The cure spells can target constructs, but they have no effect on a construct because the spell description only describes effects when living or undead creatures are targeted. The heal spell and the mass cure spells can affect constructs, because they do not specify living creatures in their Target lines or their spell descriptions. Actually, the full text of that quote from the wizards online glossary is Cannot heal damage on their own, but often can be repaired by exposing them to a certain kind of effect (see the creature's description for details) or through the use of the Craft Construct feat (see page 303). A construct with the fast healing special quality still benefits from that quality. Not healed, but repaired. "by exposing them to a certain kind of effect (see the creature's description for details)" implies that standard healing methodologies do not work and only what listed in that entry will work. Furthermore the rules of the game articles on constructs clarifies A construct's unliving body cannot heal damage on its own unless the construct also has the fast healing special quality. However, one could repair damage to a construct through the Craft Construct feat (see below). The various cure wounds spells from the Player's Handbook don't work on constructs.a Specific spells or effects noted in the construct's description can restore hit points a construct has lost. For example, fire heals damage an iron golem has suffered. Certain arcane spells, such as the repair damage spells from the Complete Arcane, also can remove damage from a construct.b aThis would preclude mass versions of the cure spells as well. bThis implies that outside of what is mentioned in the construct's monster entry, only Craft Construct (mentioned above) and the repair damage spells can mend a construct. I do agree that in most cases you have described, they can be targetted, but they gain no benefit from the effect. This is handy when using an Astral Construct in melee. You can have the cleric target the AC (if he is in the middle of the combat) and have all of the PCs healed.
Orci 05-25-07, 03:07 PM	CustServ gave me this answer: 1) If I use Share Pain on someone with my Psicrystal taking all the damage, does his hardness reduce the damage he takes through this power? No. The reason being is that when you Share Pain with the Psicrystal you are actually transferring the damage to it via the psychometabolic link that you have established. Hardness, by mechanic, is generally only applied when you are using physical objects or actually striking the object that has hardness. Share Pain is "mental damage" and circumvents this reduction.
munin 05-25-07, 03:15 PM	... "by exposing them to a certain kind of effect (see the creature's description for details)" implies that standard healing methodologies do not work and only what listed in that entry will work. I disagree. It's a huge leap to go from "can be repaired" to "can't be healed". I'm visualizing the Venn diagram. This would preclude mass versions of the cure spells as well. The Rules of the Game article only mentions the non-mass cure spells, because those are the only spells which specifically only describe effects for living creatures and undead, excluding constructs. The heal and mass cure spells have their own spell descriptions, not based on the cure spell descriptions, which do not exclude constructs, and so are not mentioned in the article. The repair spells exist to allow arcane casters a way to heal their constructs without muscling too far into the cleric's prerogative. Edit: It would have been the easiest thing for the authors of the rules to include "effects with the Healing descriptor, and positive and negative energy effects" in the long list of things to which constructs are immune. They didn't. Instead they made a couple spells specifically exclude constructs and others not. Edit #2: The warforged's "resistance" to healing spells supports your interpretation of RAI, though that may just be due to their complex nature (both living and construct), rather than due to their being construct.
Racinante 05-25-07, 05:31 PM	I disagree. It's a huge leap to go from "can be repaired" to "can't be healed". I'm visualizing the Venn diagram. I can agree to disagree. The Rules of the Game article only mentions the non-mass cure spells, Actually, the Rules of the Game article mentions cure wounds spells in general, and not specifically the single target spells. The D&D Glossary defines a cure spell as any spell with the word cure in its name. Specifically: Any spell with the word "cure" in its name, such as cure minor wounds, cure light wounds, or mass cure critical wounds. because those are the only spells which specifically only describe effects for living creatures and undead, excluding constructs. Is there a special insight you have into the mind of Skip Williams that allows you to provide this reasoning? The heal and mass cure spells have their own spell descriptions, not based on the cure spell descriptions, which do not exclude constructs, and so are not mentioned in the article. See above for information related to mass cure spells. As for heal, this spell provides two sets of benefits. First it removes adverse conditions (most of which constructs are immune to) and then it cures 10 hit points of damage per level. Note that it did not say repairs, recovers or more importantly heals the damage. I understand your argument, however it does not hold for mass cure spells, and is not rock solid on heal. The repair spells exist to allow arcane casters a way to heal their constructs without muscling too far into the cleric's prerogative. I doubt if the repair spells would have been added if not for the effigies in Complete Arcane. Also the repair spells are all transmutations. If heal and mass cures were allowed for constructs, why wouldn't these repairs spells be Conjuration (Healing)? Edit: It would have been the easiest thing for the authors of the rules to include "effects with the Healing descriptor, and positive and negative energy effects" in the long list of things to which constructs are immune. They didn't. Instead they made a couple spells specifically exclude constructs and others not. I agree with the first part of this. What are the couple of spells that specifically exclude constructs? Spells that require living targets are more likely designed to exclude undead, as there are far more undead than constructs. Also, spells that have one effect for living and one for undead are not specifically excluding constructs, they just didn't take them into account.
munin 05-25-07, 11:04 PM	You make a good argument and you may right, RAI. But it's all inferences -- "even though the rule isn't written anywhere it must exist because of these points" (quote marks implying an interpreted summation of your argument, not a direct quote). RAW, the construct type description does not grant immunity to healing and the heal and mass cure spells do not exclude constructs from their effects.