5
\$\begingroup\$

This is relevant for effects that trigger when damage is taken such as if the shield guardian is wearing another shield guardian's amulet.

If the guardian is within 60 feet of the amulet's wearer, half of any damage the wearer takes (rounded up) is transferred to the guardian.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I don't know if I'm missing part of this, but I don't understand how there is a question here. It seems like an obvious "yes" to me, but I don't want to answer incorrectly \$\endgroup\$ – goodguy5 Mar 5 '18 at 19:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ @goodguy5 It says damage is transferred not damage is taken. These types of questions have come.up before regarding resistances etc. \$\endgroup\$ – David Coffron Mar 5 '18 at 19:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ ah, I see. okay then. Will post an answer. \$\endgroup\$ – goodguy5 Mar 5 '18 at 19:26
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Just FYI that “title says it all” is something to avoid. The question body should be used to ask the question and spell out any important details, and the title should just be relied on as a summary for display on various pages and search results. “Title says it all” drives editors up the wall. :) \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Mar 5 '18 at 19:36
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @goodguy5 I don't think so. That is a separate bottle entirely \$\endgroup\$ – David Coffron Mar 5 '18 at 19:48
5
\$\begingroup\$

It counts as damage

Damage does not have a precise definition in the rules, but there is no reason to believe that damage transferred from one creature to another is not still just damage. Creature A is taking damage and half of that damage is taken by the Shield Guardian. As a result the Shield Guardian's hitpoints drop. Sound, looks, and smells a lot like damage to me.

There are many effects where damage is taken by multiple creatures from the same effect. This case is no different.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Do you could chain a bunch of shield guardians together, yes? \$\endgroup\$ – David Coffron Mar 5 '18 at 19:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ @DavidCoffron There is nothing in how the damage works that would prevent it at least. That sounds like another question to address in full though. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Mar 5 '18 at 19:28
3
\$\begingroup\$

Yes

Damage is Damage is Damage. 5th edition has often explained to go with "common English interpretation" rather than specific wording.

If damage is transferred from one target to another, that damage is "dealt" to the second (or third in the case of your shield guardian chain).

You can look at Cloakers and Rugs of Smothering (they have the "Damage Transfer" special quality) as examples.

Damage Transfer.
While attached to a creature, the cloaker takes only half the damage dealt to it (rounded down) and that creature takes the other half.

P.S. - I wonder who is the "causer" of the secondary damage, though...

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Regarding the PS about the cause of the secondary damage, I'd argue that the source of any transferred damage (barring specific rules that say otherwise) would be the same as the source of the original damage - even if some other ability/trait causes the damage to be transferred/duplicated to another creature besides the one that was originally targeted. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Mar 5 '18 at 19:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.