My 5e Ancestral Guardian Barb has access to Spirit Shield now, which reduces damage taken of any creature by 2d6. I've already cleared up through prior investigation this can also be used on self (believe this was covered via tweet by JC)
The issue is. When it kicks in as its a reaction VS Rage mitigation.
Rage halves all piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing...but NOT other types such as Fire etc. So how does one handle MIXED damage attacks? Normally reductions from reactions would happen before damage, but that doesnt work in this case:
For example, say a weapon attack would deal 10 Slashing & 10 Fire. Then a raging barb would take 5 Slashing & 10 Fire.
The only logical approach would be the damage HAS to be resolved first (in my example 15 total) before further reducing by 2d6, as Spirit Shield doesnt specify which damage type is reduced.
Thoughts on the correctness of this folks?
Ypu cant apply SS first as you couldnt know whether its the fire OR the slashing thats reduced by 2d6...and that matters due to Rage mitigation, so can only wrap it up after.
My 5e Ancestral Guardian Barb has access to Spirit Shield now, which reduces damage taken of any creature by 2d6. I've already cleared up through prior investigation this can also be used on self (believe this was covered via tweet by JC)
This is incorrect. The ability says: "If you are raging and another creature you can see"
"Another creature" always means not you.
(If Crawford did indeed say otherwise, he was mistaken.)
Now, because you could still use it on another barbarian, I'll continue on to the question.
The issue is. When it kicks in as its a reaction VS Rage mitigation.
Rage halves all piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing...but NOT other types such as Fire etc. So how does one handle MIXED damage attacks? Normally reductions from reactions would happen before damage, but that doesnt work in this case:
Somewhere in the books (I don't remember, and couldn't find it), there's a guideline that simultaneous abilities are (IIRC) resolved in the order chosen by the person whose turn it is.
In this particular case, that's probably the DM, who could choose to resolve the spirit shield first, then the rage reduction. But they shouldn't. (And see below for why it might not matter.)
Another way (and, IMO, a better one) to think about it is that there's a pool of damage reduction, and somebody, presumably the person receiving damage, chooses how to apply it. Or possibly the controller of each damage-reduction ability chooses how to apply their own. Either approach ought to avoid wasting damage reduction.
Essentially, we're in the realm of "the rules don't have a firm answer on this", but, unless the DM wants it to work otherwise, there's no reason to make it not work.
My impression is that this is one of those things that comes up so rarely in actual play that they've decided it's not worth the effort to design an official rule for it.
My 5e Ancestral Guardian Barb has access to Spirit Shield now, which reduces damage taken of any creature by 2d6. I've already cleared up through prior investigation this can also be used on self (believe this was covered via tweet by JC)
This is incorrect. The ability says: "If you are raging and another creature you can see"
"Another creature" always means not you.
(If Crawford did indeed say otherwise, he was mistaken.)
Now, because you could still use it on another barbarian, I'll continue on to the question.
The issue is. When it kicks in as its a reaction VS Rage mitigation.
Rage halves all piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing...but NOT other types such as Fire etc. So how does one handle MIXED damage attacks? Normally reductions from reactions would happen before damage, but that doesnt work in this case:
Somewhere in the books (I don't remember, and couldn't find it), there's a guideline that simultaneous abilities are (IIRC) resolved in the order chosen by the person whose turn it is.
In this particular case, that's probably the DM, who could choose to resolve the spirit shield first, then the rage reduction. But they shouldn't. (And see below for why it might not matter.)
Another way (and, IMO, a better one) to think about it is that there's a pool of damage reduction, and somebody, presumably the person receiving damage, chooses how to apply it. Or possibly the controller of each damage-reduction ability chooses how to apply their own. Either approach ought to avoid wasting damage reduction.
Essentially, we're in the realm of "the rules don't have a firm answer on this", but, unless the DM wants it to work otherwise, there's no reason to make it not work.
If two or more things happen at the same time on a turn, the person at the game table—player or DM—whose turn it is decides the order in which those things happen. For example, if two effects occur at the start of a player character’s turn, the player decides which of the effects happens first.
Honestly, this kind of interaction is one of my eternal personal doubts, so I'm here to learn as well.
One way could be to distribute the damage types proportionally (1:2 in your example, but see below about modifiers to damage, maybe Spirit Shield goes first) (EDIT3: I've been ruling it this way)
But I think the correct maybe another approach is to use the Simultaneous Effects rule? (EDIT3: see discussion below)
If two or more things happen at the same time on a turn, the person at the game table—player or DM—whose turn it is decides the order in which those things happen. For example, if two effects occur at the start of a player character’s turn, the player decides which of the effects happens first.
I also have a couple of comments:
- If Spirit Shield is a bonus, shouldn't it be applied first? And after that, damage resistance from Rage:
Modifiers to damage are applied in the following order: adjustments such as bonuses, penalties, or multipliers are applied first; Resistance is applied second; and Vulnerability is applied third.
I think the tweet you're referring to is this one:
@Downminator can the spirit shield on the Path of the ancestral guardian be used on himself? He's a creature and he can see himself... @JeremyECrawford You are a creature. Can you see yourself? If yes, you can choose yourself if you must target a creature you can see.
EDIT: uh... ninja'd by a lot of folks... it seems I left the tab open without sending the message for a long time :D
Ambiguity by JC aside for the moment (i'll need DM consultation on that one perhaps), I'm not sure the simultaneous effects rule would apply as its not a penalty to the roll.
The ability states (chopped to the relevant sentence) "...takes damage, you can use your reaction to reduce that damage"
This implies that the damage needs to be 'known and resolved' first (ready to apply). So full fire plus half slashing, and THEN you reduce by 2d6?
Modifiers to damage are applied in the following order: adjustments such as bonuses, penalties, or multipliers are applied first; Resistance is applied second; and Vulnerability is applied third.
You're right. I was remembering Rage as a linear reduction, not resistance. (Yes, I was doing the thing I just criticized Crawford for above.) Spirit Shield is functionally a penalty to the damage, so it goes first.
This leads to the question of which damage gets reduced, and we have nothing to go on from the rules.(It's not a simultaneous effect question.) IMO:
Whatever ordering is used must be consistent -- it shouldn't matter whose turn it is, nor if a PC or a monster is doing the damage
It should feel fair to the player
It shouldn't lead to weird results
I think we really have only two options:
Attacker picks (AKA, reduce damage in the least advantageous way possible)
Defender picks (AKA, reduce damage in the most advantageous way possible)
I think "defender picks" better fits the criteria I gave above, but you're not wrong for preferring "attacker picks".
This is correct for the text he was given. You are a creature you can see. But you aren't another creature you can see.
This sort of thing is why Crawford should not have been answering rules questions on social media.
A missed opportunity to correct itself further in the conversation after the word ANOTHER is finally brought up;
@BardicDave I think people are asking because one sentence specifies "allies" but another specifies "creature you can see". Design intent unclear.
@JeremyECrawford Yes, that's on our list of things to clarify.
@kiwihutt The wording for ancestral guardian specifies an ally you can see, though - not a creature. Usually an ally means not yourself, right...?
@Cured_MadnessCan I get a clear a answer? The ability says "If you are raging and *ANOTHER* creature you can see within 30 feet you takes damage...". So does the use of "another" here imply not on yourself like it sounds like it does?
@twattersux67812 Wait so we are just going to ignore the “another“ portion of the description? If a spell says range “self“ can I cast it on someone else they are a self as well?
Ambiguity by JC aside for the moment (i'll need DM consultation on that one perhaps), I'm not sure the simultaneous effects rule would apply as its not a penalty to the roll.
The ability states (chopped to the relevant sentence) "...takes damage, you can use your reaction to reduce that damage"
This implies that the damage needs to be 'known and resolved' first (ready to apply). So full fire plus half slashing, and THEN you reduce by 2d6?
As commented in the thread, Spirit Shield should go first. A good ruling for resolving reduction from Rage after that is the one proposed by jl8e in #8.
TBH, I proposed Simultaneous Effect, but I wasn't fully confident :(
As to wether damage reduction is applied before or after Resistance, the rules makes it clear it's before:
Damage Resistance and Vulnerability: Resistance and then vulnerability are applied after all other modifiers to damage. For example, a creature has resistance to bludgeoning damage and is hit by an attack that deals 25 bludgeoning damage. The creature is also within a magical aura that reduces all damage by 5. The 25 damage is first reduced by 5 and then halved, so the creature takes 10 damage.
I appreciate that RAW from the Order of Application, it would appear the damage reduction from the Spirit Shield would occur first, and then resistance to BPS damage from Rage second, but DANG does that feel absolutely backwards. To me an effect that applies a blanket reduction in "damage" with no specificity would make the most sense to be applied last, after all the resistances and vulnerabilities to specific damage types are taken into consideration. That way you would have something simple like: Damage Type A Total + Damage Type B Total + Damage Type C Total = X Total Damage. X Total Damage - Spirit Shield 2d6 = Final Damage. That just seems so much cleaner to me to figure out each individual damage type first (Fire and Radiant and Bludgeoning for example), and then do any blanket reductions that just apply to "damage" after the fact.
Can anyone think of a scenario in which addressing each specific damage type first before applying any blanket damage reductions or increases would be bad or misused or problematic? It would certainly eliminate questions such as the OP's where you have to try to decide which damage type to apply a blanket reduction to first. Any insight as to why they might have chosen the order they did?
I appreciate that RAW from the Order of Application, it would appear the damage reduction from the Spirit Shield would occur first, and then resistance to BPS damage from Rage second, but DANG does that feel absolutely backwards. To me an effect that applies a blanket reduction in "damage" with no specificity would make the most sense to be applied last, after all the resistances and vulnerabilities to specific damage types are taken into consideration. That way you would have something simple like: Damage Type A Total + Damage Type B Total + Damage Type C Total = X Total Damage. X Total Damage - Spirit Shield 2d6 = Final Damage. That just seems so much cleaner to me to figure out each individual damage type first (Fire and Radiant and Bludgeoning for example), and then do any blanket reductions that just apply to "damage" after the fact.
Can anyone think of a scenario in which addressing each specific damage type first before applying any blanket damage reductions or increases would be bad or misused or problematic? It would certainly eliminate questions such as the OP's where you have to try to decide which damage type to apply a blanket reduction to first. Any insight as to why they might have chosen the order they did?
For example, the outcome would be different in the next interaction (and in the one proposed in this thread, really). With the ruling you're suggesting, you would always take damage. But I think you're proposing to change the "Order of Application" depending on whether the damage includes mixed damage types? Like giving the DM or players the two options?
If a monk uses superior defense does that get applied before they use a reaction to deflect the attack? Or do they use the deflect attack and any damage left is mitigated further by superior defense?
Going by the order of operations in the damage section I would say that Deflect Attack comes first (because it is a bonus) and Superior Defense comes second (because it gives resistance).
Modifiers to damage are applied in the following order: adjustments such as bonuses, penalties, or multipliers are applied first; Resistance is applied second; and Vulnerability is applied third.
Also the Deflect Attacks feature says that you "reduce the attack’s total damage against you" which would also point towards it applying first.
I appreciate that RAW from the Order of Application, it would appear the damage reduction from the Spirit Shield would occur first, and then resistance to BPS damage from Rage second, but DANG does that feel absolutely backwards. To me an effect that applies a blanket reduction in "damage" with no specificity would make the most sense to be applied last, after all the resistances and vulnerabilities to specific damage types are taken into consideration. That way you would have something simple like: Damage Type A Total + Damage Type B Total + Damage Type C Total = X Total Damage. X Total Damage - Spirit Shield 2d6 = Final Damage. That just seems so much cleaner to me to figure out each individual damage type first (Fire and Radiant and Bludgeoning for example), and then do any blanket reductions that just apply to "damage" after the fact.
Can anyone think of a scenario in which addressing each specific damage type first before applying any blanket damage reductions or increases would be bad or misused or problematic? It would certainly eliminate questions such as the OP's where you have to try to decide which damage type to apply a blanket reduction to first. Any insight as to why they might have chosen the order they did?
The rules we have are just concerned with setting the addition/subtraction vs multiplication/division ordering, because changing the ordering on those makes a big difference to how much damage one takes.
The question of damage types, and specifically how to handle type-specific reductions when taking multi-type damage, is left up to the DM, but we still don't want to be changing the order of operators there.
Modifiers to damage are applied in the following order: adjustments such as bonuses, penalties, or multipliers are applied first; Resistance is applied second; and Vulnerability is applied third.
Yeah, the example given in that section makes it clear Spirit Shield would apply first, before any Resistance
For example, a creature has Resistance to all damage and Vulnerability to Fire damage, and it’s within a magical aura that reduces all damage by 5. If it takes 28 Fire damage, the damage is first reduced by 5 (to 23), then halved for the creature’s Resistance (and rounded down to 11), then doubled for its Vulnerability (to 22).
As far as I know, there's no guidance given in the rules on how DMs are supposed to do that for split damage types, so it's really their call. They have at least four options though:
split the damage reduction evenly
Let's say the incoming attack does 5 fire damage and 10 slashing damage, and you roll a 6 for Spirit Shield. Splitting that evenly (3 and 3 to each type) would result in a final damage total of 2 fire plus 3 slashing (rounded down) = 5
split the reduction proportionally
Instead of 3 and 3, the Spirit Shield would eliminate 4 slashing and 2 fire, and the final damage total would = 6
split in favor of the attacker
All 6 points from Spirit Shield would go toward slashing damage, and the final damage total would = 7
split in favor of the defender
The fire damage would be completely erased, with 1 extra point applied to slashing. Final damage total would = 4
At small numbers, the difference isn't that great. Against, say, a meteor swarm though...
There's no RAW answer here. You just have to decide what makes sense for your table
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I appreciate that RAW from the Order of Application, it would appear the damage reduction from the Spirit Shield would occur first, and then resistance to BPS damage from Rage second, but DANG does that feel absolutely backwards.
You have to take the damage before your rage can allow you to shrug it off. Spirit Shield prevents you from taking the damage.
Can anyone think of a scenario in which addressing each specific damage type first before applying any blanket damage reductions or increases would be bad or misused or problematic? It would certainly eliminate questions such as the OP's where you have to try to decide which damage type to apply a blanket reduction to first. Any insight as to why they might have chosen the order they did?
Applying the resistance before the damage reduction would effectively double the effectiveness of Spirit Shroud. Is it broken and abusive? I don't know. However, that is the impact of changing the order.
This also would allow flat damage modifiers to ignore resistance. That could be problematic.
While RAW is clear that reductions to damage occur before damage resistance, what it does not say is which damage should be reduced. As such, unless the ability specifies, I would allow the victim to decide.
While RAW is clear that reductions to damage occur before damage resistance, what it does not say is which damage should be reduced. As such, unless the ability specifies, I would allow the victim to decide.
Simultaneous Effects says that it would be decided by whoever's turn it is. Normally, this would mean that the attacker decides. Damage on your turn from a Reaction would be an exception. That is RAW, but I prefer the consistency of your ruling.
Heres a question hoping to get validation on:
My 5e Ancestral Guardian Barb has access to Spirit Shield now, which reduces damage taken of any creature by 2d6. I've already cleared up through prior investigation this can also be used on self (believe this was covered via tweet by JC)
The issue is. When it kicks in as its a reaction VS Rage mitigation.
Rage halves all piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing...but NOT other types such as Fire etc. So how does one handle MIXED damage attacks? Normally reductions from reactions would happen before damage, but that doesnt work in this case:
For example, say a weapon attack would deal 10 Slashing & 10 Fire. Then a raging barb would take 5 Slashing & 10 Fire.
The only logical approach would be the damage HAS to be resolved first (in my example 15 total) before further reducing by 2d6, as Spirit Shield doesnt specify which damage type is reduced.
Thoughts on the correctness of this folks?
Ypu cant apply SS first as you couldnt know whether its the fire OR the slashing thats reduced by 2d6...and that matters due to Rage mitigation, so can only wrap it up after.
This is incorrect. The ability says: "If you are raging and another creature you can see"
"Another creature" always means not you.
(If Crawford did indeed say otherwise, he was mistaken.)
Now, because you could still use it on another barbarian, I'll continue on to the question.
Somewhere in the books (I don't remember, and couldn't find it), there's a guideline that simultaneous abilities are (IIRC) resolved in the order chosen by the person whose turn it is.
In this particular case, that's probably the DM, who could choose to resolve the spirit shield first, then the rage reduction. But they shouldn't. (And see below for why it might not matter.)
Another way (and, IMO, a better one) to think about it is that there's a pool of damage reduction, and somebody, presumably the person receiving damage, chooses how to apply it. Or possibly the controller of each damage-reduction ability chooses how to apply their own. Either approach ought to avoid wasting damage reduction.
Essentially, we're in the realm of "the rules don't have a firm answer on this", but, unless the DM wants it to work otherwise, there's no reason to make it not work.
My impression is that this is one of those things that comes up so rarely in actual play that they've decided it's not worth the effort to design an official rule for it.
pronouns: he/she/they
Here's the Simultaneous Effects rules glossary entry, but this isn't new to 2024 rules, as it also appears in Xanathar's Guide to Everything pretty much verbatim
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Honestly, this kind of interaction is one of my eternal personal doubts, so I'm here to learn as well.
One way could be to distribute the damage types proportionally (1:2 in your example, but see below about modifiers to damage, maybe Spirit Shield goes first) (EDIT3: I've been ruling it this way)
But
I think the correctmaybe another approach is to use the Simultaneous Effects rule? (EDIT3: see discussion below)I also have a couple of comments:
- If Spirit Shield is a bonus, shouldn't it be applied first? And after that, damage resistance from Rage:
- I'm not sure about using Spirit Shield on yourself (EDIT2: I agree with what jl8e said here), the feature says "another creature you can see within 30 feet of you takes damage". This thread discusses this kind of wording: Does Interception Fighting Style also apply to the player?
I think the tweet you're referring to is this one:
EDIT: uh... ninja'd by a lot of folks... it seems I left the tab open without sending the message for a long time :D
Ambiguity by JC aside for the moment (i'll need DM consultation on that one perhaps), I'm not sure the simultaneous effects rule would apply as its not a penalty to the roll.
The ability states (chopped to the relevant sentence) "...takes damage, you can use your reaction to reduce that damage"
This implies that the damage needs to be 'known and resolved' first (ready to apply). So full fire plus half slashing, and THEN you reduce by 2d6?
I agree with jl8e RAW Spirit Shield can't be used on you but another creature despite that the tweet said, which can be found below;
This is correct for the text he was given. You are a creature you can see. But you aren't another creature you can see.
This sort of thing is why Crawford should not have been answering rules questions on social media.
You're right. I was remembering Rage as a linear reduction, not resistance. (Yes, I was doing the thing I just criticized Crawford for above.) Spirit Shield is functionally a penalty to the damage, so it goes first.
This leads to the question of which damage gets reduced, and we have nothing to go on from the rules.(It's not a simultaneous effect question.) IMO:
I think we really have only two options:
I think "defender picks" better fits the criteria I gave above, but you're not wrong for preferring "attacker picks".
I'd lean toward "defender picks" simply because it's the defender's ability that's causing it to happen, though I agree both are valid.
pronouns: he/she/they
A missed opportunity to correct itself further in the conversation after the word ANOTHER is finally brought up;
As commented in the thread, Spirit Shield should go first. A good ruling for resolving reduction from Rage after that is the one proposed by jl8e in #8.
TBH, I proposed Simultaneous Effect, but I wasn't fully confident :(
As to wether damage reduction is applied before or after Resistance, the rules makes it clear it's before:
I appreciate that RAW from the Order of Application, it would appear the damage reduction from the Spirit Shield would occur first, and then resistance to BPS damage from Rage second, but DANG does that feel absolutely backwards. To me an effect that applies a blanket reduction in "damage" with no specificity would make the most sense to be applied last, after all the resistances and vulnerabilities to specific damage types are taken into consideration. That way you would have something simple like: Damage Type A Total + Damage Type B Total + Damage Type C Total = X Total Damage. X Total Damage - Spirit Shield 2d6 = Final Damage. That just seems so much cleaner to me to figure out each individual damage type first (Fire and Radiant and Bludgeoning for example), and then do any blanket reductions that just apply to "damage" after the fact.
Can anyone think of a scenario in which addressing each specific damage type first before applying any blanket damage reductions or increases would be bad or misused or problematic? It would certainly eliminate questions such as the OP's where you have to try to decide which damage type to apply a blanket reduction to first. Any insight as to why they might have chosen the order they did?
For example, the outcome would be different in the next interaction (and in the one proposed in this thread, really). With the ruling you're suggesting, you would always take damage. But I think you're proposing to change the "Order of Application" depending on whether the damage includes mixed damage types? Like giving the DM or players the two options?
The rules we have are just concerned with setting the addition/subtraction vs multiplication/division ordering, because changing the ordering on those makes a big difference to how much damage one takes.
The question of damage types, and specifically how to handle type-specific reductions when taking multi-type damage, is left up to the DM, but we still don't want to be changing the order of operators there.
Yeah, the example given in that section makes it clear Spirit Shield would apply first, before any Resistance
As far as I know, there's no guidance given in the rules on how DMs are supposed to do that for split damage types, so it's really their call. They have at least four options though:
Let's say the incoming attack does 5 fire damage and 10 slashing damage, and you roll a 6 for Spirit Shield. Splitting that evenly (3 and 3 to each type) would result in a final damage total of 2 fire plus 3 slashing (rounded down) = 5
Instead of 3 and 3, the Spirit Shield would eliminate 4 slashing and 2 fire, and the final damage total would = 6
All 6 points from Spirit Shield would go toward slashing damage, and the final damage total would = 7
The fire damage would be completely erased, with 1 extra point applied to slashing. Final damage total would = 4
At small numbers, the difference isn't that great. Against, say, a meteor swarm though...
There's no RAW answer here. You just have to decide what makes sense for your table
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Thank you AntonSirius for the examples using values.
I've been ruling it as "split the reduction proportionally", but I like the idea of letting the attacker or the defender choose.
(I'll update my first answer because, reading it now, I think I didn't express myself very well...)
You have to take the damage before your rage can allow you to shrug it off. Spirit Shield prevents you from taking the damage.
Applying the resistance before the damage reduction would effectively double the effectiveness of Spirit Shroud. Is it broken and abusive? I don't know. However, that is the impact of changing the order.
This also would allow flat damage modifiers to ignore resistance. That could be problematic.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
While RAW is clear that reductions to damage occur before damage resistance, what it does not say is which damage should be reduced. As such, unless the ability specifies, I would allow the victim to decide.
Simultaneous Effects says that it would be decided by whoever's turn it is. Normally, this would mean that the attacker decides. Damage on your turn from a Reaction would be an exception. That is RAW, but I prefer the consistency of your ruling.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.