Dragon Shaman aura argument - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Dragon Shaman aura argument

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
razielskorp
Apr 18, 2009 9:43:34 Right then. My GM and I have been having a discussion / argument about the energy shield aura that a dragon shaman can use. (Before anyone says it, I know that the GM is god and his rules are law, but logical argument can win the day. Sometimes. If you are lucky. And the GM's drunk)

Anyway, the crux of the discussion is this:
The description in PH2 for the energy shield states that "any creature striking you or your ally with a natural attack or a non-reach weapon is dealt 2 points of energy damage for each point of your aura bonus"
By my reasoning, that means that, if I am attacked, and the attacker rolls above my touch attack armour class, but below my total armour class, that counts as being struck, despite the fact that no damage is taken.
The GM is currently going with the fact that damage needs to be delt for it to activate, but i think thats incorrect.
Has anyone else come across this one and how would you play it?
For me, it boils down to the fact that if you attack someone and roll higher than their touch attack armour class, they have not been able to dodge your blow, and are then relying on their armour to "turn" the blow, preventing damage.

What's your views people?

(also, as i said, i know the GM's word is law, and if thats the way it has to be, fine, but if i can show a precedent, who knows! :D)
#2
Kerrus
Apr 18, 2009 9:54:42 Striking you RAW means hitting you. Overcoming your AC. If it rolls under your AC, by raw, it's not hitting, and no amount of theoretical reasoning will change that.

Now, it's all well and good to homebrew that it does, but now you're applying real physics to DnD, and that results in things like the commoner railgun.

Essentially you're in a position of Fluff vs Mechanics, with you on the fluff side.
#3
razielskorp
Apr 18, 2009 11:18:51 I can see what you are saying, but i'm not convinced it works like that. The implication i got from PH2 was that it works kinda like a passive, reverse touch attack, in that if contact is made, they get a jolt.
I agree that RAW means if you don't roll over the AC, no damage is done, but thats not neccesarily because they missed. It's just as likely that your armour has absorbed the blow.
#4
crossblade
Apr 18, 2009 11:36:26 I too see what you're saying; but it would be slightly over powered if it was used like that. Granted it'd help the PC's, which has no downside, and is thus an argument FOR it to be used; but it's not how the skill is intended.
The ability is intended for contact "ON SKIN", not armor. Yes, you can hurt someone without touching their skin, but to do so, you'd have to make a closer press against them to equivantly touch it.

Ok... too wordy. Um... basically, it's the character generating the damage, not the character's items; otherwise it could be argued that things like Two-Weapon Defence can be added to this 'touch ac' as well.... and who knows what else ontop of that! (Shield AC, mage armor AC, defensive auras from spells... where does it end, as they could all be extentions of yourself that register as a hit without damage done)
#5
Arcane_Guyver
Apr 18, 2009 14:41:35 "Striking" means hitting, as in overcoming AC. It does not necessarily mean damaging, as the target could theoretically have sufficient DR, energy resistance, or some other effect that negates the damage dealt.

If this ability worked as you surmise, it would have been explicitly described as such "Even if a creature misses you, but hits your Touch AC, it is affected by your energy aura."

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 razielskorp Apr 18, 2009 9:43:34	Right then. My GM and I have been having a discussion / argument about the energy shield aura that a dragon shaman can use. (Before anyone says it, I know that the GM is god and his rules are law, but logical argument can win the day. Sometimes. If you are lucky. And the GM's drunk) Anyway, the crux of the discussion is this: The description in PH2 for the energy shield states that "any creature striking you or your ally with a natural attack or a non-reach weapon is dealt 2 points of energy damage for each point of your aura bonus" By my reasoning, that means that, if I am attacked, and the attacker rolls above my touch attack armour class, but below my total armour class, that counts as being struck, despite the fact that no damage is taken. The GM is currently going with the fact that damage needs to be delt for it to activate, but i think thats incorrect. Has anyone else come across this one and how would you play it? For me, it boils down to the fact that if you attack someone and roll higher than their touch attack armour class, they have not been able to dodge your blow, and are then relying on their armour to "turn" the blow, preventing damage. What's your views people? (also, as i said, i know the GM's word is law, and if thats the way it has to be, fine, but if i can show a precedent, who knows! :D)
#2 Kerrus Apr 18, 2009 9:54:42	Striking you RAW means hitting you. Overcoming your AC. If it rolls under your AC, by raw, it's not hitting, and no amount of theoretical reasoning will change that. Now, it's all well and good to homebrew that it does, but now you're applying real physics to DnD, and that results in things like the commoner railgun. Essentially you're in a position of Fluff vs Mechanics, with you on the fluff side.
#3 razielskorp Apr 18, 2009 11:18:51	I can see what you are saying, but i'm not convinced it works like that. The implication i got from PH2 was that it works kinda like a passive, reverse touch attack, in that if contact is made, they get a jolt. I agree that RAW means if you don't roll over the AC, no damage is done, but thats not neccesarily because they missed. It's just as likely that your armour has absorbed the blow.
#4 crossblade Apr 18, 2009 11:36:26	I too see what you're saying; but it would be slightly over powered if it was used like that. Granted it'd help the PC's, which has no downside, and is thus an argument FOR it to be used; but it's not how the skill is intended. The ability is intended for contact "ON SKIN", not armor. Yes, you can hurt someone without touching their skin, but to do so, you'd have to make a closer press against them to equivantly touch it. Ok... too wordy. Um... basically, it's the character generating the damage, not the character's items; otherwise it could be argued that things like Two-Weapon Defence can be added to this 'touch ac' as well.... and who knows what else ontop of that! (Shield AC, mage armor AC, defensive auras from spells... where does it end, as they could all be extentions of yourself that register as a hit without damage done)
#5 Arcane_Guyver Apr 18, 2009 14:41:35	"Striking" means hitting, as in overcoming AC. It does not necessarily mean damaging, as the target could theoretically have sufficient DR, energy resistance, or some other effect that negates the damage dealt. If this ability worked as you surmise, it would have been explicitly described as such "Even if a creature misses you, but hits your Touch AC, it is affected by your energy aura."