Extra physical damage properties

[illithid]

It's been a while, and I'm unsure if I am right in thinking that a weapon with "+X" physical damage doesn't actually do the physical damage type but simply adds to the base damage type of the weapon.

e.g. a Dagger with bonus +2 slashing damage actually does 1d4 + 2 piercing damage? rather than 1d4 piercing + 2 slashing? And if it does the latter, is it resisted separately?

I'm not referring to the "extra damage type: slashing" which would bypass piercing and slashing resistance, but the addition of physical damage per hit.

[Passiflora]

Slashing will simply add two damage on your final damage. It will also give you slashing, for DR bypassing.

The best +physical damage to get on a weapon is bludgeonning, though.

[NeOmega]

Slashing will simply add two damage on your final damage. It will also give you slashing, for DR bypassing.

The best +physical damage to get on a weapon is bludgeonning, though.

The best to get is different than the original. A club with +1 bludgeon is not as cool as a crossbow with +1 bludgeon. Because the crossbow then bypasses piercing damage reduction with bludgeoning, and bludgeoning damage reduction with piercing.

And a halberd with extra bludgeoning will always bypass any physical damage reduction type of slashing, bludgeoning or piercing, because a halberd is already piercing + slashing, give it extra bludgeoning, and it bypasses everything.

[illithid]

So "a +2 slashing property" essentially acts as "+2 damage" and the "ExtraDamageType:Slashing" property as well?

[Passiflora]

So "a +2 slashing property" essentially acts as "+2 damage" and the "ExtraDamageType:Slashing" property as well?

Yes.

And yes your daggers are crazy. I've seen them! I WANT THEM! GIMME! GIIIMEE!

[dak12attack]

I used to have a +3 EB, Keen, Extra Damage: Bludgeoning Halberd!

[illithid]

Yes.

And yes your daggers are crazy. I've seen them! I WANT THEM! GIMME! GIIIMEE!

This was purely hypothetical Passi....

[illithid]

The top half of the combat log is with the dagger that is described in the character sheet (base damage type: piercing), the second half with a club (base damage type: bludgeoning)



Does this not suggest that having +1 bludgeoning does not infer "extra damage type: bludgeoning' also?

[Karond]

There was a bug, perhaps it's still active since I haven't heard it was fixed. Basically, if you have +D4 slashing on a slashing weapon, the damage won't be applied. It needs to be a of a different kind. Thus:

+D4 slashing on a scimitar = useless
+D4 piercing on a scimitar = D4 more damage

[NeOmega]

The top half of the combat log is with the dagger that is described in the character sheet (base damage type: piercing), the second half with a club (base damage type: bludgeoning)



Does this not suggest that having +1 bludgeoning does not infer "extra damage type: bludgeoning' also?

Yes, I was wrong, I think. Having +1 bludgeoning on a sword means you just add +1 bludgeoning damage, that, unfortunately, is added on after the slashing damage is applied, meaning skeletons absorb the slashing damage before the bludgeoning is applied, so it is basically just a +1 damage type.

However, I think some beasts are susceptible to some types of damage (undead, myconid to fire, constructs to bludgeoning), so the damage modifier vs them should be doubled... ...should be. Can't say it is.

[DM Nilbog]

There was a bug, perhaps it's still active since I haven't heard it was fixed. Basically, if you have +D4 slashing on a slashing weapon, the damage won't be applied. It needs to be a of a different kind. Thus:

+D4 slashing on a scimitar = useless
+D4 piercing on a scimitar = D4 more damage

I noticed this as well I think Karond is right the extra dmg has to be different than the base type.

+D4 slashing on a scimitar = useless
+D4 piercing on a Scimitar would work but makes little sense blame the game makers.

[Seventh Sister]

There was a bug, perhaps it's still active since I haven't heard it was fixed. Basically, if you have +D4 slashing on a slashing weapon, the damage won't be applied. It needs to be a of a different kind. Thus:

+D4 slashing on a scimitar = useless
+D4 piercing on a scimitar = D4 more damage

I'm not sure it's a bug but Karond is right and it still applies.

Damage works the same way as AC.
You have different types of damage like piercing, bludgeoning, slashing, fire, acid and so forth.
Different types will stack but it wont stack with another bonus' of it's own type.

So a weapon that does Bludgeoning damage as base damage with a damage bonus 1d4 (Bludgeoning) wont stack.

One thing I'm puzzled about however is that when I equip a longsword +4. The +4 damage bonus is physical rather than slashing.
Now I might remember wrong but a longsword is doing slashing damage as I recall. Where does the "physical" type come from?

[Karond]

One thing I'm puzzled about however is that when I equip a longsword +4. The +4 damage bonus is physical rather than slashing.
Now I might remember wrong but a longsword is doing slashing damage as I recall. Where does the "physical" type come from?

I think that's just how the game communicates through the character sheet. It will say physical, but it's really not since it's using the weapon type to define what to translate the physical into. Like, it says +15 physical on a longsword, it will still be slashing when the game engine counts it. You can test this against a slashing immune monster and see it. I'm just speculating though, I don't actually know the answer.

[Ivan38Rus]

There was a bug, perhaps it's still active since I haven't heard it was fixed. Basically, if you have +D4 slashing on a slashing weapon, the damage won't be applied. It needs to be a of a different kind. Thus:

+D4 slashing on a scimitar = useless
+D4 piercing on a scimitar = D4 more damage

100% true, been tested multiple times

[illithid]

---self necro's his own thread a second time---
---soon shall he attain lichdom---

Does this mean Fist of the Forest's 1d4 bludgeoning damage is useless? or coded differently?