Advanced 3.5e and Pathfinder effects

[Kelrugem]

Just pushed a little fix: There was no bug but the chat message was wrong when one used the keen effect Keen was working correctly but the chat message was showing the old critical threat The other packages with that will now also be uploaded with the fixed chat message

[TrentLane]

• Remember, damage affecting effects have to be applied such that damage is minimized. Now also DR and Incorporeal (for pathfinder) are in correct order, i.e.

I ran into an issue with this in my last Iron Gods session, it works as intended in the extension (3.3.7 version), but RAW it's the wrong way around. My group ran into a robot that was vulnerable to electricity, but due to DR adamantine also has resist electricity.
So right now it applies the resistance first and then the vulnerability. But after checking again it's the wrong way around.
"You need to determine the total amount of damage the robot WOULD take before applying hardness and electricity resistance. So once the damage is determined, first thing you do is apply the vulnerability effect to get the total damage. Hardness and resistance kick in after that."

[Kelrugem]

I ran into an issue with this in my last Iron Gods session, it works as intended in the extension (3.3.7 version), but RAW it's the wrong way around. My group ran into a robot that was vulnerable to electricity, but due to DR adamantine also has resist electricity.
So right now it applies the resistance first and then the vulnerability. But after checking again it's the wrong way around.
"You need to determine the total amount of damage the robot WOULD take before applying hardness and electricity resistance. So once the damage is determined, first thing you do is apply the vulnerability effect to get the total damage. Hardness and resistance kick in after that."

Oh, that means that robots are an exception? So they do not count as objects anymore (for objects it is indeed the other way around but in FG object damage has to be applied manually since there is basically not automation for them) but still have some properties of being objects?

I can not find it anymore but I am pretty sure that the damage is minimized for creatures such that resistance is applied before vulnerability, when I find the link to the official answers of WotC and Paizo again then I link it here However your link is also about that one of the official authors mentioned now something different for robots only... Sorry, I was not thinking about robots (in 3.5e are no robots, just constructs), I can try to change that. Is robot already a monster type for FG in Pathfinder such that I could try to put a different code for robots?

PS: Oh man, why do authors change the rules sometimes?

EDIT: but why it has also RESIST against electricity by havin a DR? the DR code already respects that energy damage types are not affected by DR. Or is this also some robot thingy? So, they have separate resistance? (then I misunderstood your text)

[Kelrugem]

Okay, for 3.5e I found it here: https://archive.wizards.com/default....d/er/20070731a (the main FAQ)

There you can find on page 113 (yup, the FAQ is very big , especially see the last paragraph):

If a monster has resistance and vulnerability to the same kind of damage (such as fire), which effect is applied first? And when does the saving throw come in?
Always roll a saving throw before applying any effects that would increase or reduce the damage dealt. For example, if a frost giant is struck by a fireball that would deal 35 points of damage, it would roll its Reflex save, then apply its vulnerability to fire after determining how much damage the fireball would normally deal. If the save failed, the frost giant would take 52 points of damage: 35 + one-half of 35 (17.5, rounded down to 17). A successful save would mean the frost giant suffered only 25 points of damage: one-half of 35 rounded down (17), plus one-half of 17 rounded down (8).

If the creature has both resistance and vulnerability to the same kind of damage, apply the resistance (which reduces the damage dealt by the effect) before applying the vulnerability (which increases the damage taken by the creature). For example, imagine our frost giant wore a ring of minor fire resistance (granting resistance to fire 10). If the save failed, the frost giant would take 37 points of fire damage: 35 (fireball) – 10 (resistance to fire 10) = 25, plus one-half of 25 (12.5, rounded down to 12). If the save succeeded, the frost giant would take only 10 points of damage: 17 (half damage from the fireball, rounded down) – 10 (resistance to fire 10) = 7, plus one-half of 7 (3.5, rounded down to 3).

As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s most beneficial to the creature. In the case of damage, this typically means applying any damage-reducing effects first, before applying any effects that would increase damage.

I did not find the Paizo answer yet but I am pretty sure they took the same ansatz. (I hope, otherwise I have to change the Pathfinder extension) The problem is that the last paragraph allows other rules by "whenever the rules don’t stipulate an order of operations for special effects" so authors are allowed that this can be changed and seemingly that happened to robots in your adventure Do you want that I change that? It could take some time until I have found out to fix that, I never used monster types in my code yet. So I have to see how to call the monster type in that code

[TrentLane]

EDIT: but why it has also RESIST against electricity by havin a DR? the DR code already respects that energy damage types are not affected by DR. Or is this also some robot thingy? So, they have separate resistance? (then I misunderstood your text)

The resist electricity is only in there because hardness is a thing, and afaik the only way to handle hardness in FG is to apply DR X adamantine, and then resistance X to everything else. This is really the special edge case where my player has a non-adamantine electricity weapon. If only DR adamantine is applied, any type of energy dmg breaks it, which should not happen, because hardness.

Oh, that means that robots are an exception? So they do not count as objects anymore (for objects it is indeed the other way around but in FG object damage has to be applied manually since there is basically not automation for them) but still have some properties of being objects?

Yes, robots are their own seperate thing, and they are a seperate creature type in FG. But as far I can tell this vulnerability interaction should apply to everything. It's not stated in the Universal Monster Rules, but in the affliction/curse Vulnerability and I guess this is the RAI for all cases:

The target becomes vulnerable to a single energy type, taking 50% more damage than normal from that energy type. If the target is immune or already vulnerable to the damage type, the curse has no effect. If the target has resistance to or protection from the energy type, apply the vulnerability before the resistance or protection.

In that case it wouldn't be necessary to just implement it for robots, since it would work the same for everything.

[Kelrugem]

In that case it wouldn't be necessary to just implement it for robots, since it would work the same for everything.

Oooh, okay, that means that it is seemingly different in Pathfinder (sorry, I do not play Pathfinder, maybe I found a wrong answer about that for Pathfinder). But funnily, to change the code to work differently in Pathfinder than in 3.5 is easier than to change the code just for robots. Do you know then if HRESIST is applied before or after RESIST in Pathfinder? (also a rare situation, but I rather like an universal code)

Thanks So, seemingly I have to check Pathfinder a bit more often, there are more differences than I thought

EDIT: But your link is about the curse vulnerability, not about the condition itself. I hope that this curse is not an exception, too..

[TrentLane]

Oooh, okay, that means that it is seemingly different in Pathfinder (sorry, I do not play Pathfinder, maybe I found a wrong answer about that for Pathfinder). But funnily, to change the code to work differently in Pathfinder than in 3.5 is easier than to change the code just for robots. Do you know then if HRESIST is applied before or after RESIST in Pathfinder? (also a rare situation, but I rather like an universal code)

Thanks So, seemingly I have to check Pathfinder a bit more often, there are more differences than I thought

EDIT: But your link is about the curse vulnerability, not about the condition itself. I hope that this curse is not an exception, too..

No worries, there are so many weird edge cases in PF, and finding that specific answer is especially hard because paizo didn't put out any kind FAQ on that topic.
I would assume it is similar with HRESIST. Apply that one first, and then normal resistance kicks in; couldn't find a source for that though. But it always seems to be the case to determine the actual DMG first and then apply resistances.

Thanks for your awesome work!

EDIT: If you change the VULN/Resist in the extension, could you put up a version still compatible with 3.3.7? Since there is no ETA on 3.3.8, and robots are kind of a constant in Iron Gods

[Kelrugem]

No worries, there are so many weird edge cases in PF, and finding that specific answer is especially hard because paizo didn't put out any kind FAQ on that topic.
I would assume it is similar with HRESIST. Apply that one first, and then normal resistance kicks in; couldn't find a source for that though. But it always seems to be the case to determine the actual DMG first and then apply resistances.

Thanks for your awesome work!

Thanks

Yeah, that seems to be reasonable to put HRESIST before RESIST since both are positive for the defender such that one can assume that the order is such that damage is minimized

I go to the grocery now and then I try to fix that. In some hours should be a new version for Pathfinder It will be already in 3.3.8, I hope that this is okay (since 3.3.8 is already coming next week).

[TrentLane]

Thanks

Yeah, that seems to be reasonable to put HRESIST before RESIST since both are positive for the defender such that one can assume that the order is such that damage is minimized

I go to the grocery now and then I try to fix that. In some hours should be a new version for Pathfinder It will be already in 3.3.8, I hope that this is okay (since 3.3.8 is already coming next week).

Had no idea 3.3.8 will be coming that early, so obviously no need for a 3.3.7 version . Perfect timing since our next week session had to be cancelled. Thank you very much.

[Kelrugem]

Had no idea 3.3.8 will be coming that early, so obviously no need for a 3.3.7 version . Perfect timing since our next week session had to be cancelled. Thank you very much.

Yes, there a small delay but the release is on Monday together with the Alpha version of FGU

I have now updated the extension, it should now work for Pathfinder as intended I apologize to all the robots which die now due to that! I will update all the other packages with the other extensions in the next minutes.

I.e.

• VULN is now applied before HRESIST for Pathfinder. 3.5e is still as usual