Conjurations Damage spells and Damage resistance?

[incog64]

I know conjuration damage spells aren't effected by spell resistance but are they effected by damage resistance as they are real things?

Thanks

[Anthrowhale]

I know conjuration damage spells aren't effected by spell resistance but are they effected by damage resistance as they are real things?

They should be. Fire resistance works against mundane fire.

[Khedrac]

First up - check by spell if they are subject to Spell Resistance or not. It is not universal that they are not (e.g. quill blast).

Note: things like Fire Resistance are not "Damage Resistance/Reduction" - they are "Energy Resistance".

So, should a conjuration spell that is not subject to SR be affected by Damage Reduction?

The RAW answer is "no" - DR does not affect spells.

A more practical answer is "read the spell and decide for yourself" - some spells are clearly intended to be subject to DR - why else would they declare the damage type as "bludgeoning" etc.?
(This may make RAI easier to discern, but RAW is still no".)

[Tzardok]

So, should a conjuration spell that is not subject to SR be affected by Damage Reduction?

The RAW answer is "no" - DR does not affect spells.

A more practical answer is "read the spell and decide for yourself" - some spells are clearly intended to be subject to DR - why else would they declare the damage type as "bludgeoning" etc.?
(This may make RAI easier to discern, but RAW is still no".)

The RAW answer is "Sometimes". In Complete Arcane, there's a sidebar that spells that deal weapon type damages are subject to DR.

[Khedrac]

The RAW answer is "Sometimes". In Complete Arcane, there's a sidebar that spells that deal weapon type damages are subject to DR.

I was going to say "I'd completely forgotten about that - thank-you", but I have taken a look at my copy of Complete Arcane and cannot find it. Please can you supply a page number?

[Tzardok]

I'm sorry, I was mistaken.
The sidebar is in Complete Psionics, pg. 79, not in Arcane, and only deals with psionic powers, not spells.
I still think that it's intended for spells to work like that - Complete Arcane includes a spell that creates blades made of cold iron or silver, for chrissake! - but I need to retract my statement that it's RAW.

[Khedrac]

I'm sorry, I was mistaken.
The sidebar is in Complete Psionics, pg. 79, not in Arcane, and only deals with psionic powers, not spells.
I still think that it's intended for spells to work like that - Complete Arcane includes a spell that creates blades made of cold iron or silver, for chrissake! - but I need to retract my statement that it's RAW.

And that's why I think it is RAI. Your sidebar is a useful guide to help a DM do this though so thank-you.

[Fero]

And that's why I think it is RAI. Your sidebar is a useful guide to help a DM do this though so thank-you.

Would it be RAW if the DM used psionics/magic transparency?

[Biggus]

The RAW answer is "no" - DR does not affect spells.

A more practical answer is "read the spell and decide for yourself" - some spells are clearly intended to be subject to DR - why else would they declare the damage type as "bludgeoning" etc.?
(This may make RAI easier to discern, but RAW is still no".)

I'm sorry, I was mistaken.
The sidebar is in Complete Psionics, pg. 79, not in Arcane, and only deals with psionic powers, not spells.
I still think that it's intended for spells to work like that - Complete Arcane includes a spell that creates blades made of cold iron or silver, for chrissake! - but I need to retract my statement that it's RAW.

Thank you both, I'd houseruled that bludgeoning damage etc counted for DR but I had no idea there was any RAW support for that beyond the "why bother telling us if it isn't?" argument.