If a poisoned arrow's piercing damage is reduced to 0, do you still get poisoned?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







14












$begingroup$


I have created a fighter, who is using heavy armor and has the Heavy Armor Master feat.



The Heavy Armor Master feat (PHB, p. 167) states that:




While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from nonmagical weapons is reduced by 3.




This character was shot and hit, by a longbow loaded with a poison arrow. The attack did 2 piercing and 5 poison damage. Because of the HAM feat, the piercing was reduced to 0.



Because the arrow did not pierce (presumably because the armor absorbed the hit), would the character still be affected by the poison damage?



The shooter was a yuan-ti pureblood; presumably neither the longbow, arrow, or poison was "magical".










share|improve this question









New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
    $endgroup$
    – Someone_Evil
    21 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I think knowing what kind of poison is important here. I havent played 5th but in 3.x there were different kinds of poison, so a contact poison would still take effect, but injury poison would not, but again, thats for 3.x
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    17 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Fering sadly it does not say, in the bio it seems to just say "They often poisoned their blades and arrows", leaving it up to the DM to decide what poison it is.
    $endgroup$
    – weboy
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Weboy Well, they decided to unhelpfully leave it vague then, lol. Perhaps then it means that they can use whichever poisons they want and leave it upto the poison equipment
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Realted: If a monk reduces damage to 0 using Deflect Missiles, does the attack still hit?
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    15 hours ago


















14












$begingroup$


I have created a fighter, who is using heavy armor and has the Heavy Armor Master feat.



The Heavy Armor Master feat (PHB, p. 167) states that:




While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from nonmagical weapons is reduced by 3.




This character was shot and hit, by a longbow loaded with a poison arrow. The attack did 2 piercing and 5 poison damage. Because of the HAM feat, the piercing was reduced to 0.



Because the arrow did not pierce (presumably because the armor absorbed the hit), would the character still be affected by the poison damage?



The shooter was a yuan-ti pureblood; presumably neither the longbow, arrow, or poison was "magical".










share|improve this question









New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
    $endgroup$
    – Someone_Evil
    21 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I think knowing what kind of poison is important here. I havent played 5th but in 3.x there were different kinds of poison, so a contact poison would still take effect, but injury poison would not, but again, thats for 3.x
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    17 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Fering sadly it does not say, in the bio it seems to just say "They often poisoned their blades and arrows", leaving it up to the DM to decide what poison it is.
    $endgroup$
    – weboy
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Weboy Well, they decided to unhelpfully leave it vague then, lol. Perhaps then it means that they can use whichever poisons they want and leave it upto the poison equipment
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Realted: If a monk reduces damage to 0 using Deflect Missiles, does the attack still hit?
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    15 hours ago














14












14








14





$begingroup$


I have created a fighter, who is using heavy armor and has the Heavy Armor Master feat.



The Heavy Armor Master feat (PHB, p. 167) states that:




While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from nonmagical weapons is reduced by 3.




This character was shot and hit, by a longbow loaded with a poison arrow. The attack did 2 piercing and 5 poison damage. Because of the HAM feat, the piercing was reduced to 0.



Because the arrow did not pierce (presumably because the armor absorbed the hit), would the character still be affected by the poison damage?



The shooter was a yuan-ti pureblood; presumably neither the longbow, arrow, or poison was "magical".










share|improve this question









New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I have created a fighter, who is using heavy armor and has the Heavy Armor Master feat.



The Heavy Armor Master feat (PHB, p. 167) states that:




While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take from nonmagical weapons is reduced by 3.




This character was shot and hit, by a longbow loaded with a poison arrow. The attack did 2 piercing and 5 poison damage. Because of the HAM feat, the piercing was reduced to 0.



Because the arrow did not pierce (presumably because the armor absorbed the hit), would the character still be affected by the poison damage?



The shooter was a yuan-ti pureblood; presumably neither the longbow, arrow, or poison was "magical".







dnd-5e feats damage poison damage-reduction






share|improve this question









New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 7 hours ago









V2Blast

26.3k591161




26.3k591161






New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 21 hours ago









weboyweboy

7315




7315




New contributor




weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






weboy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
    $endgroup$
    – Someone_Evil
    21 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I think knowing what kind of poison is important here. I havent played 5th but in 3.x there were different kinds of poison, so a contact poison would still take effect, but injury poison would not, but again, thats for 3.x
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    17 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Fering sadly it does not say, in the bio it seems to just say "They often poisoned their blades and arrows", leaving it up to the DM to decide what poison it is.
    $endgroup$
    – weboy
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Weboy Well, they decided to unhelpfully leave it vague then, lol. Perhaps then it means that they can use whichever poisons they want and leave it upto the poison equipment
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Realted: If a monk reduces damage to 0 using Deflect Missiles, does the attack still hit?
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    15 hours ago














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
    $endgroup$
    – Someone_Evil
    21 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I think knowing what kind of poison is important here. I havent played 5th but in 3.x there were different kinds of poison, so a contact poison would still take effect, but injury poison would not, but again, thats for 3.x
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    17 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Fering sadly it does not say, in the bio it seems to just say "They often poisoned their blades and arrows", leaving it up to the DM to decide what poison it is.
    $endgroup$
    – weboy
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Weboy Well, they decided to unhelpfully leave it vague then, lol. Perhaps then it means that they can use whichever poisons they want and leave it upto the poison equipment
    $endgroup$
    – Fering
    16 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Realted: If a monk reduces damage to 0 using Deflect Missiles, does the attack still hit?
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    15 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
$endgroup$
– Someone_Evil
21 hours ago




$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
$endgroup$
– Someone_Evil
21 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
I think knowing what kind of poison is important here. I havent played 5th but in 3.x there were different kinds of poison, so a contact poison would still take effect, but injury poison would not, but again, thats for 3.x
$endgroup$
– Fering
17 hours ago




$begingroup$
I think knowing what kind of poison is important here. I havent played 5th but in 3.x there were different kinds of poison, so a contact poison would still take effect, but injury poison would not, but again, thats for 3.x
$endgroup$
– Fering
17 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Fering sadly it does not say, in the bio it seems to just say "They often poisoned their blades and arrows", leaving it up to the DM to decide what poison it is.
$endgroup$
– weboy
16 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Fering sadly it does not say, in the bio it seems to just say "They often poisoned their blades and arrows", leaving it up to the DM to decide what poison it is.
$endgroup$
– weboy
16 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Weboy Well, they decided to unhelpfully leave it vague then, lol. Perhaps then it means that they can use whichever poisons they want and leave it upto the poison equipment
$endgroup$
– Fering
16 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Weboy Well, they decided to unhelpfully leave it vague then, lol. Perhaps then it means that they can use whichever poisons they want and leave it upto the poison equipment
$endgroup$
– Fering
16 hours ago












$begingroup$
Realted: If a monk reduces damage to 0 using Deflect Missiles, does the attack still hit?
$endgroup$
– Ruse
15 hours ago




$begingroup$
Realted: If a monk reduces damage to 0 using Deflect Missiles, does the attack still hit?
$endgroup$
– Ruse
15 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















24












$begingroup$

Yes



Well, technically you don't get poisoned (which is a condition), but you take poison damage. You could argue that it doesn't make sense because the armor "absorbed the hit", but that is not what Heavy Armor Master implies.



Not getting hit is already determined by your armor class, the fact that the attack hit but the damage was then lowered a bit means the poison arrow did, in fact, get past your character's armor, your character is just tough enough to shrug off a bit of the piercing damage. The same can not be said for the poison damage.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 11




    $begingroup$
    If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
    $endgroup$
    – Dale M
    21 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
    $endgroup$
    – Vaelus
    15 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
    $endgroup$
    – Wazoople
    10 hours ago



















5












$begingroup$

You take the poison damage regardless



The Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack states:




Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




Which means that you take the poison damage on a hit, regardless of whether you take piercing damage.



Crawford answered a similar question on Twitter:




Q: If the Battlemaster maneuver parry, reduce the weapon Drow damage to zero, the poison damage still work?



A: Drow poison in the DMG is delivered by piercing/slashing damage (0 dmg = 0 poison). Poison in the MM's drow is delivered by hitting.




Many drow have an attack with the exact same wording as the Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack, for example the Drow Elite Warrior's shortsword attack:




Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage plus 10 (3d6) poison damage.




Injury poison does nothing if the piercing damage is 0



There are poisons that behave the way you expected. These are injury poisons and are explained on page 257 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:




Injury poison can be applied to weapons, ammunition, trap components, and other objects that deal piercing or slashing damage and remains potent until delivered through a wound or washed off. A creature that takes piercing or slashing damage from an object coated with the poison is exposed to its effects.




However, these rules are meant for players and don't seem to apply to monsters. For example, the "drow poison in the DMG" which Crawford mentioned is an injury poison, which means piercing or slashing damage must occur for the poison to take effect, yet many drow have a hand crossbow attack that delivers an effect identical to the drow poison on a hit, regardless of the piercing damage.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    13 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    12 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    12 hours ago



















3












$begingroup$

Yes, Damage is damage - but you aren't poisoned.



The Yuan-Ti Pureblood can use a shortbow to attack. The stat block defines that attack as:




Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




What you have is a successful hit causing both piercing damage and poison damage. The feat will reduce the piercing damage by 3HP, but it has no effect on the poison damage and that delivers as normal as the hit was still successful.



The Heavy Armor feat reduces nonmagical piercing damage and no more. It doesn't negate the hit.



The damage is just delivered on a successful hit via two different damage types and your feat helps reduce one of those types - it doesn't stop the hit so any remaining damage is still delivered.



See this related on question Does a zero damage attack still count as a hit?



Even if you wanted to tie the damage to a specific poison type and delivery mechanism, the fact that it did no damage to you from piercing doesn't mean that it didn't break skin. I don't think I'd say a small cut would be an equivalent to 1hp of damage, but I'm still cut and the poison could still be delivered.



You have gotten poison damage, but you aren't poisoned



I just want to clarify that getting poison damage isn't the same as being under the poisoned condition. That is a separate mechanic and is only active if something says it does that. Poison damage doesn't automatically impart the condition, it's just a damage type.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    -2












    $begingroup$

    Poison is a Separate Damage Type



    As Theik's answer pointed out, the poison damage here is not negated by the Damage Reduction of the HAM ability. That's what HAM gives you here: Damage Reduction 3 vs. bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing.



    Even though the piercing damage is reduced to nothing by HAM, the attack still connected. You’ll find that explained in this question about zero-damage attacks.



    You may also find this question about Damage Reduction useful.






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$



    Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










    • 3




      $begingroup$
      Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
      $endgroup$
      – Someone_Evil
      21 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
      $endgroup$
      – doppelgreener
      19 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
      $endgroup$
      – Sdjz
      18 hours ago








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
      $endgroup$
      – SevenSidedDie
      16 hours ago






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
      $endgroup$
      – mxyzplk
      6 hours ago












    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "122"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    weboy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144839%2fif-a-poisoned-arrows-piercing-damage-is-reduced-to-0-do-you-still-get-poisoned%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    24












    $begingroup$

    Yes



    Well, technically you don't get poisoned (which is a condition), but you take poison damage. You could argue that it doesn't make sense because the armor "absorbed the hit", but that is not what Heavy Armor Master implies.



    Not getting hit is already determined by your armor class, the fact that the attack hit but the damage was then lowered a bit means the poison arrow did, in fact, get past your character's armor, your character is just tough enough to shrug off a bit of the piercing damage. The same can not be said for the poison damage.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 11




      $begingroup$
      If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
      $endgroup$
      – Dale M
      21 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
      $endgroup$
      – Vaelus
      15 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
      $endgroup$
      – Wazoople
      10 hours ago
















    24












    $begingroup$

    Yes



    Well, technically you don't get poisoned (which is a condition), but you take poison damage. You could argue that it doesn't make sense because the armor "absorbed the hit", but that is not what Heavy Armor Master implies.



    Not getting hit is already determined by your armor class, the fact that the attack hit but the damage was then lowered a bit means the poison arrow did, in fact, get past your character's armor, your character is just tough enough to shrug off a bit of the piercing damage. The same can not be said for the poison damage.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$









    • 11




      $begingroup$
      If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
      $endgroup$
      – Dale M
      21 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
      $endgroup$
      – Vaelus
      15 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
      $endgroup$
      – Wazoople
      10 hours ago














    24












    24








    24





    $begingroup$

    Yes



    Well, technically you don't get poisoned (which is a condition), but you take poison damage. You could argue that it doesn't make sense because the armor "absorbed the hit", but that is not what Heavy Armor Master implies.



    Not getting hit is already determined by your armor class, the fact that the attack hit but the damage was then lowered a bit means the poison arrow did, in fact, get past your character's armor, your character is just tough enough to shrug off a bit of the piercing damage. The same can not be said for the poison damage.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Yes



    Well, technically you don't get poisoned (which is a condition), but you take poison damage. You could argue that it doesn't make sense because the armor "absorbed the hit", but that is not what Heavy Armor Master implies.



    Not getting hit is already determined by your armor class, the fact that the attack hit but the damage was then lowered a bit means the poison arrow did, in fact, get past your character's armor, your character is just tough enough to shrug off a bit of the piercing damage. The same can not be said for the poison damage.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 21 hours ago









    TheikTheik

    14.9k6382




    14.9k6382








    • 11




      $begingroup$
      If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
      $endgroup$
      – Dale M
      21 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
      $endgroup$
      – Vaelus
      15 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
      $endgroup$
      – Wazoople
      10 hours ago














    • 11




      $begingroup$
      If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
      $endgroup$
      – Dale M
      21 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
      $endgroup$
      – Vaelus
      15 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
      $endgroup$
      – Wazoople
      10 hours ago








    11




    11




    $begingroup$
    If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
    $endgroup$
    – Dale M
    21 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    If it helps, the OP can think of it as reducing the hit from the arrow sinking into the flesh to just scratching the skin. Just enough for the poison to get in.
    $endgroup$
    – Dale M
    21 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
    $endgroup$
    – Vaelus
    15 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Follow up question, does the poison damage get reduced by 1, since there was only 2 piercing damage?
    $endgroup$
    – Vaelus
    15 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    May also be helpful to note that AC is not necessarily mean that the hit didn't get past armor - it' s just that it didn't do enough to actually hurt you.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
    $endgroup$
    – Wazoople
    10 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @Vaelus The feat only affects bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, so poison damage would not be reduced.
    $endgroup$
    – Wazoople
    10 hours ago













    5












    $begingroup$

    You take the poison damage regardless



    The Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack states:




    Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




    Which means that you take the poison damage on a hit, regardless of whether you take piercing damage.



    Crawford answered a similar question on Twitter:




    Q: If the Battlemaster maneuver parry, reduce the weapon Drow damage to zero, the poison damage still work?



    A: Drow poison in the DMG is delivered by piercing/slashing damage (0 dmg = 0 poison). Poison in the MM's drow is delivered by hitting.




    Many drow have an attack with the exact same wording as the Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack, for example the Drow Elite Warrior's shortsword attack:




    Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage plus 10 (3d6) poison damage.




    Injury poison does nothing if the piercing damage is 0



    There are poisons that behave the way you expected. These are injury poisons and are explained on page 257 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:




    Injury poison can be applied to weapons, ammunition, trap components, and other objects that deal piercing or slashing damage and remains potent until delivered through a wound or washed off. A creature that takes piercing or slashing damage from an object coated with the poison is exposed to its effects.




    However, these rules are meant for players and don't seem to apply to monsters. For example, the "drow poison in the DMG" which Crawford mentioned is an injury poison, which means piercing or slashing damage must occur for the poison to take effect, yet many drow have a hand crossbow attack that delivers an effect identical to the drow poison on a hit, regardless of the piercing damage.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      12 hours ago












    • $begingroup$
      Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      12 hours ago
















    5












    $begingroup$

    You take the poison damage regardless



    The Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack states:




    Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




    Which means that you take the poison damage on a hit, regardless of whether you take piercing damage.



    Crawford answered a similar question on Twitter:




    Q: If the Battlemaster maneuver parry, reduce the weapon Drow damage to zero, the poison damage still work?



    A: Drow poison in the DMG is delivered by piercing/slashing damage (0 dmg = 0 poison). Poison in the MM's drow is delivered by hitting.




    Many drow have an attack with the exact same wording as the Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack, for example the Drow Elite Warrior's shortsword attack:




    Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage plus 10 (3d6) poison damage.




    Injury poison does nothing if the piercing damage is 0



    There are poisons that behave the way you expected. These are injury poisons and are explained on page 257 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:




    Injury poison can be applied to weapons, ammunition, trap components, and other objects that deal piercing or slashing damage and remains potent until delivered through a wound or washed off. A creature that takes piercing or slashing damage from an object coated with the poison is exposed to its effects.




    However, these rules are meant for players and don't seem to apply to monsters. For example, the "drow poison in the DMG" which Crawford mentioned is an injury poison, which means piercing or slashing damage must occur for the poison to take effect, yet many drow have a hand crossbow attack that delivers an effect identical to the drow poison on a hit, regardless of the piercing damage.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      12 hours ago












    • $begingroup$
      Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      12 hours ago














    5












    5








    5





    $begingroup$

    You take the poison damage regardless



    The Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack states:




    Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




    Which means that you take the poison damage on a hit, regardless of whether you take piercing damage.



    Crawford answered a similar question on Twitter:




    Q: If the Battlemaster maneuver parry, reduce the weapon Drow damage to zero, the poison damage still work?



    A: Drow poison in the DMG is delivered by piercing/slashing damage (0 dmg = 0 poison). Poison in the MM's drow is delivered by hitting.




    Many drow have an attack with the exact same wording as the Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack, for example the Drow Elite Warrior's shortsword attack:




    Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage plus 10 (3d6) poison damage.




    Injury poison does nothing if the piercing damage is 0



    There are poisons that behave the way you expected. These are injury poisons and are explained on page 257 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:




    Injury poison can be applied to weapons, ammunition, trap components, and other objects that deal piercing or slashing damage and remains potent until delivered through a wound or washed off. A creature that takes piercing or slashing damage from an object coated with the poison is exposed to its effects.




    However, these rules are meant for players and don't seem to apply to monsters. For example, the "drow poison in the DMG" which Crawford mentioned is an injury poison, which means piercing or slashing damage must occur for the poison to take effect, yet many drow have a hand crossbow attack that delivers an effect identical to the drow poison on a hit, regardless of the piercing damage.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    You take the poison damage regardless



    The Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack states:




    Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




    Which means that you take the poison damage on a hit, regardless of whether you take piercing damage.



    Crawford answered a similar question on Twitter:




    Q: If the Battlemaster maneuver parry, reduce the weapon Drow damage to zero, the poison damage still work?



    A: Drow poison in the DMG is delivered by piercing/slashing damage (0 dmg = 0 poison). Poison in the MM's drow is delivered by hitting.




    Many drow have an attack with the exact same wording as the Yuan-ti Pureblood's shortbow attack, for example the Drow Elite Warrior's shortsword attack:




    Hit: 7 (1d6 + 4) piercing damage plus 10 (3d6) poison damage.




    Injury poison does nothing if the piercing damage is 0



    There are poisons that behave the way you expected. These are injury poisons and are explained on page 257 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:




    Injury poison can be applied to weapons, ammunition, trap components, and other objects that deal piercing or slashing damage and remains potent until delivered through a wound or washed off. A creature that takes piercing or slashing damage from an object coated with the poison is exposed to its effects.




    However, these rules are meant for players and don't seem to apply to monsters. For example, the "drow poison in the DMG" which Crawford mentioned is an injury poison, which means piercing or slashing damage must occur for the poison to take effect, yet many drow have a hand crossbow attack that delivers an effect identical to the drow poison on a hit, regardless of the piercing damage.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 7 hours ago

























    answered 13 hours ago









    RuseRuse

    7,31211760




    7,31211760












    • $begingroup$
      In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      12 hours ago












    • $begingroup$
      Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      12 hours ago


















    • $begingroup$
      In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      13 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
      $endgroup$
      – Ruse
      12 hours ago












    • $begingroup$
      Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
      $endgroup$
      – NautArch
      12 hours ago
















    $begingroup$
    In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    In this case, OP has stated this was the attack of a Yuan-ti Pureblood which has a specific damage effect. Can you address that in your answer?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    13 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @NautArch I edited the last paragraph, but I don't have anything say that is specific to Yuan-ti Purebloods.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    13 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Would you treat this damage differently if it wasn't poison, but fire? It's just two different damage types on one attack, no?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    13 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    12 hours ago






    $begingroup$
    @NautArch "Damage types have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as damage resistance, rely on the types." To be more accurate I am treating the piercing/slashing damage differently. I am applying the injury poison rules to the piercing/slashing damage. I understand now why you pointed me to the Yuan-ti pureblood, it is not clear that the Yuan-ti are using an injury (or contact) poison with an effect that is just the poison damage. I need to improve my answer to justify that leap.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruse
    12 hours ago














    $begingroup$
    Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    12 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Sounds good! I'm very interested to see if you can apply the poison damage as a result of the piercing damage and the differences between a successful hit and 0 damage.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    12 hours ago











    3












    $begingroup$

    Yes, Damage is damage - but you aren't poisoned.



    The Yuan-Ti Pureblood can use a shortbow to attack. The stat block defines that attack as:




    Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




    What you have is a successful hit causing both piercing damage and poison damage. The feat will reduce the piercing damage by 3HP, but it has no effect on the poison damage and that delivers as normal as the hit was still successful.



    The Heavy Armor feat reduces nonmagical piercing damage and no more. It doesn't negate the hit.



    The damage is just delivered on a successful hit via two different damage types and your feat helps reduce one of those types - it doesn't stop the hit so any remaining damage is still delivered.



    See this related on question Does a zero damage attack still count as a hit?



    Even if you wanted to tie the damage to a specific poison type and delivery mechanism, the fact that it did no damage to you from piercing doesn't mean that it didn't break skin. I don't think I'd say a small cut would be an equivalent to 1hp of damage, but I'm still cut and the poison could still be delivered.



    You have gotten poison damage, but you aren't poisoned



    I just want to clarify that getting poison damage isn't the same as being under the poisoned condition. That is a separate mechanic and is only active if something says it does that. Poison damage doesn't automatically impart the condition, it's just a damage type.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$


















      3












      $begingroup$

      Yes, Damage is damage - but you aren't poisoned.



      The Yuan-Ti Pureblood can use a shortbow to attack. The stat block defines that attack as:




      Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




      What you have is a successful hit causing both piercing damage and poison damage. The feat will reduce the piercing damage by 3HP, but it has no effect on the poison damage and that delivers as normal as the hit was still successful.



      The Heavy Armor feat reduces nonmagical piercing damage and no more. It doesn't negate the hit.



      The damage is just delivered on a successful hit via two different damage types and your feat helps reduce one of those types - it doesn't stop the hit so any remaining damage is still delivered.



      See this related on question Does a zero damage attack still count as a hit?



      Even if you wanted to tie the damage to a specific poison type and delivery mechanism, the fact that it did no damage to you from piercing doesn't mean that it didn't break skin. I don't think I'd say a small cut would be an equivalent to 1hp of damage, but I'm still cut and the poison could still be delivered.



      You have gotten poison damage, but you aren't poisoned



      I just want to clarify that getting poison damage isn't the same as being under the poisoned condition. That is a separate mechanic and is only active if something says it does that. Poison damage doesn't automatically impart the condition, it's just a damage type.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$
















        3












        3








        3





        $begingroup$

        Yes, Damage is damage - but you aren't poisoned.



        The Yuan-Ti Pureblood can use a shortbow to attack. The stat block defines that attack as:




        Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




        What you have is a successful hit causing both piercing damage and poison damage. The feat will reduce the piercing damage by 3HP, but it has no effect on the poison damage and that delivers as normal as the hit was still successful.



        The Heavy Armor feat reduces nonmagical piercing damage and no more. It doesn't negate the hit.



        The damage is just delivered on a successful hit via two different damage types and your feat helps reduce one of those types - it doesn't stop the hit so any remaining damage is still delivered.



        See this related on question Does a zero damage attack still count as a hit?



        Even if you wanted to tie the damage to a specific poison type and delivery mechanism, the fact that it did no damage to you from piercing doesn't mean that it didn't break skin. I don't think I'd say a small cut would be an equivalent to 1hp of damage, but I'm still cut and the poison could still be delivered.



        You have gotten poison damage, but you aren't poisoned



        I just want to clarify that getting poison damage isn't the same as being under the poisoned condition. That is a separate mechanic and is only active if something says it does that. Poison damage doesn't automatically impart the condition, it's just a damage type.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Yes, Damage is damage - but you aren't poisoned.



        The Yuan-Ti Pureblood can use a shortbow to attack. The stat block defines that attack as:




        Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) piercing damage plus 7 (2d6) poison damage.




        What you have is a successful hit causing both piercing damage and poison damage. The feat will reduce the piercing damage by 3HP, but it has no effect on the poison damage and that delivers as normal as the hit was still successful.



        The Heavy Armor feat reduces nonmagical piercing damage and no more. It doesn't negate the hit.



        The damage is just delivered on a successful hit via two different damage types and your feat helps reduce one of those types - it doesn't stop the hit so any remaining damage is still delivered.



        See this related on question Does a zero damage attack still count as a hit?



        Even if you wanted to tie the damage to a specific poison type and delivery mechanism, the fact that it did no damage to you from piercing doesn't mean that it didn't break skin. I don't think I'd say a small cut would be an equivalent to 1hp of damage, but I'm still cut and the poison could still be delivered.



        You have gotten poison damage, but you aren't poisoned



        I just want to clarify that getting poison damage isn't the same as being under the poisoned condition. That is a separate mechanic and is only active if something says it does that. Poison damage doesn't automatically impart the condition, it's just a damage type.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 11 hours ago

























        answered 12 hours ago









        NautArchNautArch

        62.1k8223411




        62.1k8223411























            -2












            $begingroup$

            Poison is a Separate Damage Type



            As Theik's answer pointed out, the poison damage here is not negated by the Damage Reduction of the HAM ability. That's what HAM gives you here: Damage Reduction 3 vs. bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing.



            Even though the piercing damage is reduced to nothing by HAM, the attack still connected. You’ll find that explained in this question about zero-damage attacks.



            You may also find this question about Damage Reduction useful.






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$



            Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
              $endgroup$
              – Someone_Evil
              21 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
              $endgroup$
              – doppelgreener
              19 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              18 hours ago








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
              $endgroup$
              – SevenSidedDie
              16 hours ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
              $endgroup$
              – mxyzplk
              6 hours ago
















            -2












            $begingroup$

            Poison is a Separate Damage Type



            As Theik's answer pointed out, the poison damage here is not negated by the Damage Reduction of the HAM ability. That's what HAM gives you here: Damage Reduction 3 vs. bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing.



            Even though the piercing damage is reduced to nothing by HAM, the attack still connected. You’ll find that explained in this question about zero-damage attacks.



            You may also find this question about Damage Reduction useful.






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$



            Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.










            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
              $endgroup$
              – Someone_Evil
              21 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
              $endgroup$
              – doppelgreener
              19 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              18 hours ago








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
              $endgroup$
              – SevenSidedDie
              16 hours ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
              $endgroup$
              – mxyzplk
              6 hours ago














            -2












            -2








            -2





            $begingroup$

            Poison is a Separate Damage Type



            As Theik's answer pointed out, the poison damage here is not negated by the Damage Reduction of the HAM ability. That's what HAM gives you here: Damage Reduction 3 vs. bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing.



            Even though the piercing damage is reduced to nothing by HAM, the attack still connected. You’ll find that explained in this question about zero-damage attacks.



            You may also find this question about Damage Reduction useful.






            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$



            Poison is a Separate Damage Type



            As Theik's answer pointed out, the poison damage here is not negated by the Damage Reduction of the HAM ability. That's what HAM gives you here: Damage Reduction 3 vs. bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing.



            Even though the piercing damage is reduced to nothing by HAM, the attack still connected. You’ll find that explained in this question about zero-damage attacks.



            You may also find this question about Damage Reduction useful.







            share|improve this answer










            New contributor




            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 4 hours ago





















            New contributor




            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.









            answered 21 hours ago









            AeytAeyt

            535




            535




            New contributor




            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.





            New contributor





            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            Aeyt is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.



            Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.




            Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.









            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
              $endgroup$
              – Someone_Evil
              21 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
              $endgroup$
              – doppelgreener
              19 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              18 hours ago








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
              $endgroup$
              – SevenSidedDie
              16 hours ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
              $endgroup$
              – mxyzplk
              6 hours ago














            • 3




              $begingroup$
              Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
              $endgroup$
              – Someone_Evil
              21 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
              $endgroup$
              – doppelgreener
              19 hours ago






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
              $endgroup$
              – Sdjz
              18 hours ago








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
              $endgroup$
              – SevenSidedDie
              16 hours ago






            • 2




              $begingroup$
              This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
              $endgroup$
              – mxyzplk
              6 hours ago








            3




            3




            $begingroup$
            Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
            $endgroup$
            – Someone_Evil
            21 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. You want to clarify what you mean with the last sentence, as I'm not sure what DR means in D&D 5e. Good Luck and Happy Gaming!
            $endgroup$
            – Someone_Evil
            21 hours ago




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
            $endgroup$
            – doppelgreener
            19 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @PixelMaster DR/3 indicates "damage reduction of 3" rather than division.
            $endgroup$
            – doppelgreener
            19 hours ago




            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
            $endgroup$
            – Sdjz
            18 hours ago






            $begingroup$
            This notation is from previous editions of D&D and not present in 5e (as far as I'm aware) as the concept of "damage reduction" as a stat is also nonexistent in this edition. You can certainly use such a comparison but you should probably specify that you are doing so.
            $endgroup$
            – Sdjz
            18 hours ago






            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
            $endgroup$
            – SevenSidedDie
            16 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            Resistances works differently in 5e and have a specific effect rather than a number involved. You might want to revise the example further. If you need details, the rules for Damage Resistance and Vulnerability are online.
            $endgroup$
            – SevenSidedDie
            16 hours ago




            2




            2




            $begingroup$
            This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
            $endgroup$
            – mxyzplk
            6 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            This isn't really an answer, it's 3 comments ("+1," "related link," "related link.") To answer the question, please add stand-alone reasoning to this answer.
            $endgroup$
            – mxyzplk
            6 hours ago










            weboy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            weboy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            weboy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            weboy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144839%2fif-a-poisoned-arrows-piercing-damage-is-reduced-to-0-do-you-still-get-poisoned%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Bundesstraße 106

            Verónica Boquete

            Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten