Should Holy weapons deal holy damage?

Discussion in 'The Temple of Elemental Evil' started by taltamir, Apr 24, 2010.

Remove all ads!
  1. taltamir

    taltamir Established Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do holy weapons deal holy, untyped, or physical damage?
    http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#holy

    Logic and the name of the enhancement indicates that the damage is holy.

    The writing does not indicate a type (thus, untyped)

    However, it could also just be assumed to be physical damage of the same type as the base weapon (as the +1 and +2 etc enhancements do) because this is damage whose type is unspecified that comes from a weapon, not a spell.

    Currently in TOEE Holy Weapons deal physical damage of the same type as the base weapon.

    [​IMG]

    I have raised the issue in two hardcore rules forums and I await to see what they have to say about the subject (I specifically asked for them to cite the RAW for it)

    http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=7902.msg261037#msg261037
    http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8361532#post8361532
     
  2. taltamir

    taltamir Established Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    well, it seems that while thematically most people think it should deal some type of holy damage... the actual text is consistent with the +1 through +5, bane, and sneak attack. All of which provide additional physical damage, not untyped or holy damage.

    This means that the implementation as currently is, is correct.

    EDIT: seems like that is not as settled as I thought after all:

    someone in brilliant gameologists pointed this out to me:
    skydragonknight: "Vicious was ruled as "energy damage" in the FAQ, so DR doesn't stop you from hurting yourself."

    Me: Could you please explain how vicious ties into the current discussion? I am not seeing the connection.

    skydragonknight: "It also adds 2d6 damage, which was clarified in the 3.5 FAQ to be untyped energy damage. Just providing evidence that some weapon properties add untyped energy damage, so it might be possible with holy."

     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2010
  3. General Ghoul

    General Ghoul Established Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    953
    Likes Received:
    6
    In the end, does it really matter? As long as the total damage and DR work, isn't it just semantics on the detail screen.
     
  4. erkper

    erkper Bugbear Monk Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,191
    Likes Received:
    6
    Taltamir,

    The difference I see between vicious and Holy/Unholy et al is that the description for vicious specifically classes the damage as "disruptive energy" while alignment damage is not called anything other than "extra damage." Energy damage definitely bypasses physical DR, but the same cannot be automatically assumed for unnamed damage, especially if it is consistent with other damage types that add physical damage such as sneak attack.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2010
  5. taltamir

    taltamir Established Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    0
    its not semantics. because if it was holy damage then it would IGNORE the DR. and deal more damage to any creature with DR.

    Also, vicious was originally physical as well, but they later explained its "untyped energy" to prevent players from "abusing" it by giving themselves DR. (I don't see how its abusive at all).
    So if anything, the way it unfolded shows that it should be physical damage.
     
Our Host!