Kelrugem's extensions

[tahl_liadon]

If you don't agree (and that's perfectly fine too) as a GM, don't use it.

of course. i don't agree that "some creatures" get magical damage per this text. second and third sentence, to me, want to clarify the weapon against such creatures.

however, it's coded in fg to populate "dmgtype: magic" and i would have to remove it manually (a pain if there are lots of such npcs), or miss it completely if i don't pay attention when adding a bunch of npcs to combat tracker.

[Phixation]

I cant find the section of code that auto adds that line or i could give you a quick fix for that.

[Asgurgolas]

of course. i don't agree that "some creatures" get magical damage per this text. second and third sentence, to me, want to clarify the weapon against such creatures.

Rules, though, mention it:

Some monsters are vulnerable to magic weapons. Any weapon with at least a +1 magical enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls overcomes the damage reduction of these monsters. Such creatures’ natural weapons (but not their attacks with weapons) are treated as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.

And also

Some monsters are vulnerable to chaotic-, evil-, good-, or lawful-aligned weapons. When a cleric casts align weapon, affected weapons might gain one or more of these properties, and certain magic weapons have these properties as well. A creature with an alignment subtype (chaotic, evil, good, or lawful) can overcome this type of damage reduction with its natural weapons and weapons it wields as if the weapons or natural weapons had an alignment (or alignments) that match the subtype(s) of the creature.

Altough "Rule 0" always wins

[tahl_liadon]

Rules, though, mention it: ...Such creature's natural weapons...

hold that thought...

And also: Some monsters are vulnerable to chaotic-... A creature with an alignment subtype... can overcome this type of damage reduction...

thx for posting that, which helps to support my case: this is what i was referring to when i said the thing about r.a.w – the alignment is written in the creature's stats, so it make sense as well as being definitive that this particular aspect can overcome damage reduction.

the "Such creature's natural weapons..." line, where it's placed, is still awkward and ambiguous to me though:

"Some monsters are vulnerable to magic weapons. Any weapon with at least a +1 magical enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls overcomes the damage reduction of these monsters. Such creatures’ natural weapons (but not their attacks with weapons) are treated as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction."

it's as if i'm being asked to read it like this:

"Some monsters are vulnerable to magic weapons. Such creatures’ natural weapons (but not their attacks with weapons) are treated as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction." – 2nd sentence temporarily removed for continuity / clarity.

which from all feedback interpretations so far is saying "although it is not specifically stat'd that the creature's natural attacks is considered magical, but if it has dr: magic, it would then be indirectly stat'd to have magical natural attacks".

tl;dr
in other words, any creature stat'd with dr: [x] magic = it also by definition has natural attacks that do magic?

conclusion: i want to respect the original intent of this thread, and not continue to spam it. thx all for the feedback. feel free to start another thread if anyone wants to go into it further.

[tahl_liadon]

.
@kelrugem, confirming: there are advantage / disadvantage effects to atk, save, and init in your extension, correct?

i tested: skill and ability checks do not work, correct?

although advantage / disadvantage are 5e rules, they are perfect for pathfinder witch hexes. it would be great to have skill and ability checks work as well from your extension!

thx in advance

[Morenu]

EDIT*** nevermind, did not know I needed to add a damage type to the weapon.*** works with slashing added


Hey there Kel, Know your busy so not a complaint or rush.

I believe your extended automations and overlays breaks DR. DR Kel ext.PNG DR issue Kel ext.PNG

It says it is resisting damage but it doesn't block any damage

[Phixation]

Morenu, does it block slashing, piercing, and bludgeoning damage? cause untyped damage isnt affected by DR. Dunno why it says resisted in that case tho

[Morenu]

Morenu, does it block slashing, piercing, and bludgeoning damage? cause untyped damage isnt affected by DR. Dunno why it says resisted in that case tho

I did not know that. I tested it with No Extensions and DR worked with no damage type. I did not realize it was a feature added by Kel's extension... DR no extensions.PNG this shows with no extension, DR works without defining damage type.

Thanks, I thought I messed up the testing but I just didn't realize it added more specificity. and yes it worked when I added slashing

[Kelrugem]

Hi

Sorry for my silence, had to work a lot in the last days Next week I am in South Korea to give a talk and for attending a conference and after that everything should hopefully be normal again Then I can also play Pen&Paper etc

Just to make sure I didn't miss anything: All questions are answered now? (thanks for helping each other )

(my current position is only a temporary position, and so I have to write applications at the moment and I tried to finish projects for my applications. Thus, I am very busy )

[Phixation]

tahl_liadon had one for your extension about adv dis adv just a few posts back that never got answered but the rest got answered