Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 RedwoodElf Oct 06, 2014 15:53:34	OK, here's one my DM is claiming he "read somewhere", but I can't find it in the book, and he hasn't deigned to even try to point it out to me:   It says clearly in the book that if a number is being divided (as it is with Resistance) you ALWAYS round fractions down.   However, the DM is claiming that somewhere it says that damage can never be reduced to zero via resistance (which divides damage by 2)   Note that the particular character would be bitten by this too, as her Sprite always does 1 point with its weapons, so it could never hurt something with resistance unless it rolls a crit for 2 damage.
#2 AaronOfBarbaria Oct 06, 2014 16:55:38	There has in the past been a specific clause that states a successful attack cannot inflict less than 1 damage - I cannot find it in 5th edition, but am not sure whether that is because I don't know where to look or because it is actually absent.   Neither the description of resistance nor the description of damage rolls mention such a minimum.   However, resistance can be interpreted in such a way that 1 reduced by half is still 1 because of the always round down roll - treating the process as 1 minus (1 divided by 2, rounded down) rather than as 1 divided by 2, rounded down.
#3 WibbleNZ Oct 06, 2014 17:18:14	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#4 Grazel Oct 06, 2014 19:57:53	In 5e there is no "minimum damage is 1" type ruling and all discussions of damage modifiers use the standard "round down" rule so it's possible in 5e that you can do 0 damage on an attack due to resistance.   The DM might be thinking of older editions that restricted damage from ever being 0 (other than immunity) but in 5e there isn't such a restrictiion, at least yet. It's possible this is an oversight or they may be going way back to the early days when a modifier could reduce damage to 0 so even if you hit there's no guarantee you'll do damage (so you can't ping something to death).
(Reply to #4) AaronOfBarbaria	Grazel wrote:
#6 Timborama Oct 07, 2014 5:28:12	There is no minumum damage specified, but a DM is TOTALLY within his rights to say "Yeah, you still take 1 damage" leaving the only way to take 0 damage being immunity. I did this in 3.x and will likely do so in 5th!
#7 Noctaem Oct 07, 2014 5:41:32	Is the premise of this discussion even possible?  How would you ever get damage down to 0?  10,5,2,1,0   So if you round down, you would need 5 instances of dividing damage by half in order to even get to 0 from 10 damage, more the higher the damage value.  Is there even enough ways to split damage in half in the edition to do this?
#8 mellored Oct 07, 2014 6:47:13	Hmm...  if there's no minimum...   What if a wizard cast wish, and then had 2 Str.  And then he proceded to attack ally for 1 - 4 = -3 damage.   Does that ally then take negitive damage?
#9 RPGBG Oct 07, 2014 6:55:16	mellored wrote:
#10 Noctaem Oct 07, 2014 6:56:23	HAR HAR HAR!!
(Reply to #7) Clutchbone	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #11) Timborama	Clutchbone wrote:
#13 Noctaem Oct 07, 2014 10:25:48	I meant from a higher damage values.  Not just 1 or 2 damage increments.  More like 10 damage where you need 5 instances of half damage to cover it.  hence the example I gave.
#14 Bumamgar Oct 07, 2014 11:33:59	It's not possible nor does it matter for higher damage values, but not only is it possible, but it is also much more likely to matter, when dealing with low damage numbers.   What the OP is specifically asking about is a Sprite, which does 1 damage on a hit.  No die roll, not 'average damage' of 1, but simply 1.  Clearly this is in conjunction with 'Conjure Woodland Beings' and conjuring 8 fey creatures of CR 1/4 or lower.  This matters of course, because it's the difference between 8 points of damage and 0, and one could even argue negates a character concept entirely...   I actually think the DM is being generous in saying that resistance cannot reduce damage to 0.  It certainly seems logical to me that a creature with resistance to slashing would be unaffected by such a minor amount of slashing damage that it would only cause 1 hp to a non-resistant creature.  In my campaign the sprites would do no damage to a resistant creature.
#15 Plaguescarred1 Oct 07, 2014 13:17:02	Resisting 1 point of damage would effectively take 0 damage as there's no minimum damage dealing after rounding down. Any other effect resulting from the attack would still apply even if the damage was completly resisted though.
#16 RedwoodElf Oct 07, 2014 17:08:42	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #14) AaronOfBarbaria	Bumamgar wrote:
(Reply to #16) AaronOfBarbaria	RedwoodElf wrote:
#19 Trance-Zg Oct 07, 2014 23:58:37	In 3.5E you did minimum 1 damage with weapon attack only in terms of STR penalty for damage I.E. 1d4-3 was always 1 point of damage.   but it was stated in all DR entries that DR can reduce damage to 0, and it even blocks secondaray damage effects. Like applying injury poison. Contact poison was still applied as contact was made(succesfull attack roll).   3.5E rules were more clearly written, in 5e they are more loosely written which is both bane and boon of this edition.
#20 mellored Oct 08, 2014 5:04:09	So no one want's to confirm what happens if you hit for negitive damage?   (Besided the DM throwing dice at you for beeing a munchkin).
#21 Grazel Oct 08, 2014 5:16:26	mellored wrote: