PDA

View Full Version : New Feat: Immune Immunity



togapika
2008-12-14, 11:39 PM
Immune Immunity
This feat can only be taken by a character with immunity, such as immunity to fire, or immunity to fear.
Benefit:
This feat makes any immunity possessed by the character not able to be overcome by any means Especially any damn feats, class abilities, or the like that were only made for overcoming something that shouldn't be able to be overridden.

Self serving?
Yes.

Totally right?
Yes!

Jasdoif
2008-12-14, 11:41 PM
Totally bitter?

Agrippa
2008-12-14, 11:42 PM
I like it.

Primal Fury
2008-12-14, 11:45 PM
What feats can get around immunities exactly?

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-14, 11:49 PM
Why are you making this? What does it bring to the game?

Also, this smells of adversarial DMing, which just leads to a bad experience for all involved.

Samurai Jill
2008-12-14, 11:56 PM
What happens if someone takes Immune Immunity WRT Immune Immunity?

Knaight
2008-12-15, 12:11 AM
Penetrate Immunity
Benifit: One Immune Immunity affect can be ignored per time this feat is taken.
Normal: Immune Immunity actually makes immunities count as being immune.
:smallsmile:
Arms race time. That said, Immune Immunity would be a good idea for when you just really, really need to emphasize the immunity. Sure you can burn a red dragon, sorry the fire elemental is still out.

AmberVael
2008-12-15, 12:14 AM
What feats can get around immunities exactly?

Searing Metamagic. Piercing Cold metamagic.

Innis Cabal
2008-12-15, 12:14 AM
What feats can get around immunities exactly?

A wide varity thanks to Sandstorm and Frostburn

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 04:23 AM
I like the idea, but I generally find that the stupidest 'workarounds' are the Orb spells (see strips 518 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0518.html) and 519 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0519.html)).

So wizards and sorcerers now have a spell that can hit almost anything. With no defence except an attack roll. While they do a lot less damage than a typical single-target spell of their level, it doesn't get around the question - how can they justify ignoring SR?

It might help to extend it to make sure that any spell which directly affects you is subject to any Spell Resistance you posses, rather than just when the spell writer feels like it.

Shpadoinkle
2008-12-15, 04:49 AM
I like the idea, but I generally find that the stupidest 'workarounds' are the Orb spells (see strips 518 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0518.html) and 519 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0519.html)).

So wizards and sorcerers now have a spell that can hit almost anything. With no defence except an attack roll. While they do a lot less damage than a typical single-target spell of their level, it doesn't get around the question - how can they justify ignoring SR?

It might help to extend it to make sure that any spell which directly affects you is subject to any Spell Resistance you posses, rather than just when the spell writer feels like it.

It gets around SR because, apparently according to WotC (Note that I am not endorsing this, I think it's incredibly ****ing stupid myself): Since they're Conjuration spells instead of Evocation spells (like they should be), you're not really sending MAGIC energy at the target, but instead you're sending NORMAL energy that you've just brought from somewhere else.

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 05:19 AM
Since they're Conjuration spells instead of Evocation spells (like they should be), you're not really sending MAGIC energy at the target, but instead you're sending NORMAL energy that you've just brought from somewhere else.


Yeah, that's kind of the way I guessed they thought it worked.

I think maybe WotC should have brushed up on pseudo-physics though. They are expecting something that should not be able to sustain itself by mundane means to travel at least 9 metres to strike a target.

When it cannot sustain itself by mundane means...!?

How do they pull that one off?

An Acid Arrow is justified in bypassing SR. Not an Orb of Fire.

I'm guessing the Batman issue had got out of hand by the time the spells were written, hence the 'bypass-everything-with-a-touch-attack' rule - after all, they couldn't recall all the PHBs just because someone figured out that combining the right non-blaster spells = 'Win D&D' - but that rule is still not a good idea.

I need to start thinking of all the catgirls...

Athaniar
2008-12-15, 05:26 AM
Immune Immune Immunity
Prerequisite: Immune Immunity
Benefit: Your Immune Immunity cannot be overcome by Penetrate Immunity.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 05:46 AM
Like it was mentioned in one of the above posts, making this would be like an Arms Race. However, the rule on conjurations, is valid. However, you should not be allowed to conjure certain things. If you look at the PHB, I believe that most damaging conjuration spells, are acid. After all, it is a chemical reaction that can be self-sustaining. Orb of Acid, is just that, an orb of conjured chemicals being magically propelled to the target. An orb of sonic, I can't see it.

There's my 2 cp.

Dairun Cates
2008-12-15, 05:56 AM
For the record, I think he's also going with things like the rogue feat that allows you to sneak attack undead and constructs.

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 06:09 AM
Sorry, I should have been more specific about the spells I'm annoyed with - you're right, Orb of Acid should be OK. Orb of Fire and Orb of Sonic (and Orb of Force) should be right out. I think extending this feat to protect resistances from sneakarounds like this should be OK though. That would give:

Protect Resistance [General]
Prerequisites: You must have some form of immunity or resistance
Benefit: This feat protects you from strange workarounds to your magical defenses. If you have Spell Resistance, then it applies to any targeted or area spell, and also to all effect spells which then direct energy against the target, even if they currently forbid it. This also prevents casters from gaining bonuses from non-Core anti-Spell Resistance spells.

Normal: Spells can disallow SR when it should apply for whatever reason they want, and you can have a spell that removes or grants bonuses against an opponent's spell resistance, completely defeating the point (frustrating as it is for a spell to fail)

EDIT:I'm not sure about blocking Sneak Attack vs. Undead feats and the like, because I'm not sure if I agree with that immunity. Especially when you also have Leather Armour of Anti-Sneak Attack Fortification for all those druids as well.

Kantolin
2008-12-15, 06:13 AM
I am confused. Two people have said that acid arrow does not overcome spell resistance.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/acidArrow.htm

Are we looking at the same Acid Arrow? O_o

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 06:17 AM
Yeah, I was looking at the 3.0 PHB version, which allows SR. Sorry about the mistake, and thanks for pointing that out.

The Minx
2008-12-15, 06:44 AM
Immune Immunity
This feat can only be taken by a character with immunity, such as immunity to fire, or immunity to fear.
Benefit:
This feat makes any immunity possessed by the character not able to be overcome by any means Especially any damn feats, class abilities, or the like that were only made for overcoming something that shouldn't be able to be overridden.

Self serving?
Yes.

Totally right?
Yes!

If it is self-serving, then it is NOT right. :smallsmile:

Immunity is not something which shouldn't be able to be overridden. There is a reason why immovable barriers and irresistible forces should not be applicable under any and all circumstances.

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 06:53 AM
I think I'm of the opinion that immunities and resistances should have a very good reason to be bypassable, so this idea does make sense to me in general. I accept that it might not always be appropriate, however - examples of when immunity bypass is justified in balance terms are below, but in many cases the fluff for immunity bypass needs to be better. There are also some slightly idiotic workarounds out there which really just should not exist.

Shatter Mind Blank is good, because psions have real trouble against undead/mind-affecting-immunity types, more so than diviners or enchanters. Better still, this one isn't affected by the Feat above.

Feats that grant sneak attack vs. undead might be OK, because Sneak Attack is a defining feature of the rogue, and they are currently useless against undead.

However, for the rogue I still think a better idea would be to give them more options so that they can take down Undead by being creative instead of by handing out any enhanced abilities to sneak attack. Maybe alternative sneak attacks - a 'No Reflex Save' attack maybe so that they can sneak around and throw stuff.

Heliomance
2008-12-15, 06:54 AM
Actually, immovable barriers and irresistible forces are mutually exclusive. The presence of one in a universe means that the other cannot exist.

The Minx
2008-12-15, 07:02 AM
Actually, immovable barriers and irresistible forces are mutually exclusive. The presence of one in a universe means that the other cannot exist.

That was sort of my point. :smallwink:


I think I'm of the opinion that immunities and resistances should have a very good reason to be bypassable, so the feat does make sense to me. If a character class is completely dependent on a particular type of attack, then this feat could be unbalanced - examples of when immunity bypass is justified in balance terms are below, but in many cases the fluff for immunity bypass needs to be better.

You mean "doesn't", right? Because the other stuff you wrote seems to indicate that you meant that. :smalltongue:

Checkmate
2008-12-15, 07:11 AM
Actually, immovable barriers and irresistible forces are mutually exclusive. The presence of one in a universe means that the other cannot exist.

Your logic just made my day.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 07:11 AM
Seems like we have a good debate going on here. I think I'll lurk around a bit and see what happens. In the mean time, I'll have more rum. >_>

Checkmate
2008-12-15, 07:14 AM
I think this is just as interesting as the issue of whether or not a level 20 vampire monk is supposed to become an outsider or not.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 07:18 AM
That is interesting, but, for a level 20 monk, you become a Native Outsider. There really isn't anything special about being a native outsider, other than claiming that you are a native outsider. That, and (if yer mortal) yer immune to hold/dominate person. >_>

Oracle_Hunter
2008-12-15, 07:22 AM
Actually, immovable barriers and irresistible forces are mutually exclusive. The presence of one in a universe means that the other cannot exist.

But is an omnipotent being immune to paradoxes? If Ey is, then Ey could create both in a single universe.

If Ey isn't immune, then is Ey really omnipotent?

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 07:23 AM
You mean "doesn't", right? Because the other stuff you wrote seems to indicate that you meant that. :smallconfused:

The logic... it burns us, preciousssss!

On a serious note, I've edited the post to clarify what I meant. Sorry about the confusion.

Checkmate
2008-12-15, 07:25 AM
That is interesting, but, for a level 20 monk, you become a Native Outsider. There really isn't anything special about being a native outsider, other than claiming that you are a native outsider. That, and (if yer mortal) yer immune to hold/dominate person. >_>

Well, wouldn't a vampire monk become immune for turning and rebuking as she is treated as an outsider for the purpose of spells and magical effects and rebuking is a supernatural ability, and thus magical.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 07:28 AM
Actually, no, not really. There are some undead outsiders out there, I believe that the Nightwalker is one.

Checkmate
2008-12-15, 07:31 AM
But "She is forevermore treated as an outsider rather than as a humanoid (or whatever the monk’s creature type was) for the purpose of spells and magical effects.", wouldn't you just ignore the fact that she was an undead for the purpose of magical effects (such as rebuking)?

The Minx
2008-12-15, 07:38 AM
The logic... it burns us, preciousssss!

On a serious note, I've edited the post to clarify what I meant. Sorry about the confusion.

On another serious note, I'm altering the ":smallconfused:" to ":smalltongue:", the way it should have been. :smallwink:


Actually, no, not really. There are some undead outsiders out there, I believe that the Nightwalker is one.

Orcus went undead too.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 07:49 AM
But "She is forevermore treated as an outsider rather than as a humanoid (or whatever the monkís creature type was) for the purpose of spells and magical effects.", wouldn't you just ignore the fact that she was an undead for the purpose of magical effects (such as rebuking)?

Perchance. But, i think it would also depend on the DM. As for me, I would say that turn/rebuke would still work, but the because of the "transformation" i would give a +4 bonus to their turn resistance.

Checkmate
2008-12-15, 07:52 AM
Good point,

let's not steal the subject of this topic any more....

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 07:57 AM
Good point,

let's not steal the subject of this topic any more....

True. So... what was the OP about? o_O

togapika
2008-12-15, 09:47 AM
The original point of this feat, was not to screw over rogues regarding undead (any more than they already are). The point was to get back at those people (WOTC and homebrewers) who like a particular energy type or effect or whatever so much, that they make some feat or class ability that overrides immunity, something that is simply foolish.
Being able to overcome immunity defeats the purpose of having immunity in the first place!

Checkmate
2008-12-15, 10:29 AM
Being able to overcome immunity defeats the purpose of having immunity in the first place!

That is only true if the majority of attacks of that type have the ability to overcome immunity, right?

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 03:00 PM
Indeed. However, I would limit the ability to overcome immunity only to fire, cold and electricity. Anything more, and you are asking for trouble.

The reason why I am saying those three energies, is because those three are the most common energy descriptors in the D&D universe.

Innis Cabal
2008-12-15, 03:04 PM
The original point of this feat, was not to screw over rogues regarding undead (any more than they already are). The point was to get back at those people (WOTC and homebrewers) who like a particular energy type or effect or whatever so much, that they make some feat or class ability that overrides immunity, something that is simply foolish.
Being able to overcome immunity defeats the purpose of having immunity in the first place!

There might be a reason for such a thing though. If your guy is a fire mage or the like...and all his spells simply stop working against a creature made of WHAT HE USES that dosn't make sense.

It is, as someone already said, adviserial DMing. Which is more annoying then the precious monster you lost simply because the character wasted a feat slot to make sure he could deal with things he knew he was going to go agaist.

If I am playing a mage and going the damage route and know i'll be fighting demons, devils and red dragons for the rest of the game I for sure am going to take Blistering Spell.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 03:13 PM
Indeed. And I believe that there is a meta-feat that converts... 10 points of energy damage into non-typed damage... I think....

MeklorIlavator
2008-12-15, 04:45 PM
Indeed. And I believe that there is a meta-feat that converts... 10 points of energy damage into non-typed damage... I think....

Which is a pittance. Really, 10 damage?

Also, if I remember correctly, those feats aren't simply ignore imunity, but instead ignore part of said immunity, and the spell is a higher level. If 50% damage is too much for your monsters to take, learn some damn tactics so that they aren't crushed by really weak stuff.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 04:51 PM
Yes. Find ways that put PCs into unknown situations. Play to the monster's full strengths. Use Save or Dies if you have to. Make the party work for that XP and treasure.

Knaight
2008-12-15, 07:11 PM
Immune Immune Immunity
Prerequisite: Immune Immunity
Benefit: Your Immune Immunity cannot be overcome by Penetrate Immunity.

I do believe it can, you just have to take it once more often. Note the effect on stacking. And how I win.

lesser_minion
2008-12-15, 07:29 PM
Removed, because it only made things worse.

I'm not going to enter into the rest of this arms race.

Stormthorn
2008-12-15, 08:05 PM
Restore Balance
Universal [final]
Level: any caster 1, or 0 if the caster has access to 0 level spells.
Targets/Area: Anything with stats that lacks the Immunity to Arms Races feat, on any plane, sphere, planet, ANYWHERE!
Range: Anywhere the Penetrate Immunity feat is allowed
Casting Time: free (genuinely free) action
Save: none
Spell Resistance: none (ergo NO IMMUNITY!)
All targets are immediately, permanently and irrevocably destroyed. There can be no defense, resistance or immunity to this spell. The spell acts retroactively to destroy any that existed in the past, and proactively to erase any that exist in the future. This is the only spell that can exist which targets the beneficiaries of a specific game option (ie. feat, spell etc.)

Special: all casters automatically know this spell, have no requirements to prepare it and it doesn't count against any spell knowledge limits they have.

Feat: Immunity to Arms Races:
Prerequisites: gained automatically by every entity with stats, unless it posseses Penetrate Immunity or any similar feat. There is no way to bypass this requirement. At All.
Benefit. You are immune to any effect designed to target casters of the spell 'Restore Balance'.

You had to do it, didnt you.

Feat: Tilt
Prereq: Gained automaticly by every entity with stats that also posseses Immunity Immunity, Penetrate Immunity, or Immunity Immunity Immunity or any feat with those feats as a prerequisite.
Benefit: Automaticly targets for counterpelling all those who know Restore Balance anywere in reality. Also automaticly counters the spell Restore Balance if it is cast on any plane at any time in any sphere in any timeline. A sucessful counter (always automaticly succeeds) also causes the caster to forget all currently memorized spells (if any) and negates any immunity score they posess for 2d6 rounds.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-15, 11:47 PM
Can we say nuclear weapons people? Again, arms race. >_>

Rebonack
2008-12-16, 12:09 AM
Meta-magic effects that overcome element immunities are a good thing.

Why is blasting so weak?

Because it has all the limitations of many of the Save or Lose spells on top of the fact that it doesn't end the monster right then and there, on top of the fact that it has energy immunities and resistances to deal with.

Why would I want to use Fireball when I can just use Bands of Steel and have my fighter buddy Coup De Grace the bugger when the battle is over?

Me? Personally? I think immunities should be much less common. Fire elementals should be fire immune. Everybody else should have resistance.

And for the life of me I can't figure out why Evocations allow spell resistance. The magic is making a fireball and keeping it coherent. What would happen if the coherent-keeping magic is fizzled by spell resistance?

By Jove, I do believe the fireball would explode!

Axe the spell resistance on Evocations. Tone down the number of immunities. Maybe people might actually start using them.

Weeeeee! 2d6 rant damage!

The Minx
2008-12-16, 01:43 AM
The original point of this feat, was not to screw over rogues regarding undead (any more than they already are). The point was to get back at those people (WOTC and homebrewers) who like a particular energy type or effect or whatever so much, that they make some feat or class ability that overrides immunity, something that is simply foolish.
Being able to overcome immunity defeats the purpose of having immunity in the first place!

On further deliberation, I'm withdrawing some of my earlier objections.

Ironically, it is precisely things like undead getting sneak attacked that I am thinking about here. Consider a skeleton: what vital spot is the Rogue sneak attacking, exactly? So sometimes creatures should be immune to certain attack types, simply on account of the fact that the attack type isn't relevant to the situation.

Other types of immunity should be possible to negate, like immunity to certain energy types by such and such a creature, etc. Golems being "immune" to magic. Really? Even Epic spells? Or the Wall of Force being "immune" to damage. Really? Even a Death Star superlaser attack? Sounds pretty silly.

So rather than have an Immune Immunity feat and risk an arms race, replace "immunity" with "resistance", and only ever use immunity when the attack type genuinely isn't relevant as noted above. Golems could have SR equal to their HD + 10 or something outrageous but not insurmountable. Walls of Force to have DR 100 per caster level or some such, and hit points as other Force constructs, such as the (Bigby's) hand spells (why some force constructs are immune to damage on account of being force constructs while others are not is something I don't get).


And for the life of me I can't figure out why Evocations allow spell resistance. The magic is making a fireball and keeping it coherent. What would happen if the coherent-keeping magic is fizzled by spell resistance?

By Jove, I do believe the fireball would explode!

Axe the spell resistance on Evocations. Tone down the number of immunities. Maybe people might actually start using them.

I sort of get the impression that it is the magic that is keeping said energy in the physical universe, as opposed to having it wink back to whatever Elemental plane it was dragged from. But in fairness, if Conjuration allows no SR, then it seems a bit unjust for Evocation to do so.

Glooble Glistencrist
2008-12-16, 01:46 AM
Indeed. And I believe that there is a meta-feat that converts... 10 points of energy damage into non-typed damage... I think....


Alternately, just take energy subsititution. All your spells deal fire damage? Guess what, now they can all deal acid damage instead. You know who has immunity to acid?

Me neither. I can go look it up though. Or whatever.

Rebonack
2008-12-16, 02:06 AM
I sort of get the impression that it is the magic that is keeping said energy in the physical universe, as opposed to having it wink back to whatever Elemental plane it was dragged from. But in fairness, if Conjuration allows no SR, then it seems a bit unjust for Evocation to do so.

Ah, but if the magic is dragging the energy in from the elemental planes that would make it a Conjuration [Summoning] spell instead of Evocation now, wouldn't it?

Eh. I think the best bet is to just say that Conjuration [creation] spells can't create pure elemental energy forms (fire, lightning, sonic, and the like) to keep it from stepping on Evocation's toes without fear of SR. And since the Evocation spells is creating energy as stated by Da Rulz:


Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing. Many of these spells produce spectacular effects, and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage.

The primary effect of the magic (creating the energy) is already over and therefore disrupting the magic of the projectile will do little more than perhaps make it explode prematurely.

As for sneak attacking undead it's all in the fluff. A feat that represents training to recognize the magical nodes that an undead's negative energy spirit is bound to. Attack that and they de-animate. It isn't that hard to imagine.

magic_unlocked
2008-12-16, 03:35 AM
Indeed. It's all in the fluff.

The Minx
2008-12-16, 05:55 AM
Ah, but if the magic is dragging the energy in from the elemental planes that would make it a Conjuration [Summoning] spell instead of Evocation now, wouldn't it?

Eh. I think the best bet is to just say that Conjuration [creation] spells can't create pure elemental energy forms (fire, lightning, sonic, and the like) to keep it from stepping on Evocation's toes without fear of SR. And since the Evocation spells is creating energy as stated by Da Rulz:


Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing. Many of these spells produce spectacular effects, and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage.

The problem with Da Rulez is that in this case, they are utterly, completely silly even beyond what they usually are. :smallsmile:

Besides, the statement as given doesn't even make any sense, since it says that they "tap into an unseen source of power" to do this, which means they do NOT create something out of "nothing" anyway. And shouldn't "creating something" fall under Conjuration (Creation)? :smallconfused:

EDIT: evocation would produce "elemental" energy which requires magic to sustain it, conjuration would produce normal stuff which does not. For instance, on the Plane of Elemental Fire, you have fire burning constantly without fuel and without requiring continuous input of oxygen. It's not fire, but Elemental fire. Just one reason I didn't like the change from "Plane of Elemental Fire" to "Elemental Plane of Fire", since it is filled not with ordinary fire but the elemental essence of fire.

EDIT2 Yea, that leads to problems with Summonings. But these don't use elemental energy, but yank pseudo-avatars of creatures around. Come to think of it, Conjuration could use a little splitting up.


As for sneak attacking undead it's all in the fluff. A feat that represents training to recognize the magical nodes that an undead's negative energy spirit is bound to. Attack that and they de-animate. It isn't that hard to imagine.

Magical nodes, hmm. Sounds like making excuses, but in the interests of balance I guess that's OK. :smallwink: Naturally, you could simply give them some other ability to represent it. What "magical node" is there in Oozes for instance? It might be better to tie this feat to the given creature type it is supposed to affect, then it might be more plausible: magical nodes for undead, some other excuse for oozes or whatever.

bosssmiley
2008-12-16, 06:34 AM
Immune Immunity
This feat can only be taken by a character with immunity, such as immunity to fire, or immunity to fear.
Benefit:
This feat makes any immunity possessed by the character not able to be overcome by any means Especially any damn feats, class abilities, or the like that were only made for overcoming something that shouldn't be able to be overridden.

♪ Wah, Wah, WAAAAAAH ♫
(*hides trumpet*)

Daft feat turns the game into even more of an "Am not! Are so! Am not! Are so!"-fest. I presume you were being ironic?

I faced this problem myself a while back and ended up taking a couple of pointers from Sean K. Reynolds and from Upper_Krust's "Immortals Handbook". The heart of the solution:


There is no such thing as an absolute immunity. Ever. Not for epic characters, not for gods, not for nobody.

SKR suggested that racial/class immunities should instead be a flat +10 to the appropriate save. That might not seem much, but it's half an RNG (the equivalent of 20 levels of a Good save progression).

So, for example, your Druid's venom immunity class ability now grants an untyped +10 bonus to saves vs. poison. That's enough to laugh off most venoms without making him immune to the personal weapons of the God of Poison. Paladins get a +10 to saves vs. fear; enough to make them appropriately fearless when anything less than "DC = twelvetyseven" dragon fear or divine awe is on the table.

Upper_Krust talked about changing Energy Immunity to a degree of Energy Resistance based on the type of the creature. IIRC it worked something like flat immunity to an energy type = ER 50, something with energy immunity and the appropriate subtype gains ER 100, while something actually composed of an element gains ER 150. So:


Fire Giant = ER Fire 50
Red Dragon = ER Fire 100
Fire Elemental = ER Fire 150

Net result: Fire Giants walk through housefires and chuckle at fireballs, but still come away slightly scorched and duly chastened from a faceful of dragonfire. Red Dragons can happily lair in volcanoes, but even they can suffer a modicum of singeing if there's enough energy brought to bear at once. Fire elementals, they just chortle at any fire short of Epic/Divine proportions.

Elemental vulnerability? Stayed as written (+x% to damage). Ditto Evasion, Mettle and the like (they modify numbers, rather than negating conditions outright).

*Meh* It works for me. YMMV.

The Minx
2008-12-16, 06:59 AM
Fire Giant = ER Fire 50
Red Dragon = ER Fire 100
Fire Elemental = ER Fire 150

Net result: Fire Giants walk through housefires and chuckle at fireballs, but still come away slightly scorched and duly chastened from a faceful of dragonfire. Red Dragons can happily lair in volcanoes, but even they can suffer a modicum of singeing if there's enough energy brought to bear at once. Fire elementals, they just chortle at any fire short of Epic/Divine proportions.

Very nice. And in any case, why should fire creatures be entirely immune to fire, anyway? One would think that they need to be able to fight each other with their abilities somehow (*). Just to point out, humans are 75% water, that does not make us 75% immune to water effects. :smallsmile:


(*): As an rather extreme (off topic) example of how this might be a problem, consider the 3rd edition Warhammer 40000 Codex: Chaos Space Marines. Well, that book had several problems, but this one was sillier than most. To wit: the minions of Tzeentch, the Thousand Sons chaos space marines could not charge into assault at all, due to the early version of the Slow and Purposeful rule. Moreover, they had the "All is Dust" rule, which made them immune to ranged hits with Strength 4 or less. Unfortunately, since they were mindless constructs, the designers decided that they could not have any special or heavy weapons (meaning the Thousand Sons were mindless constructs, not the designers).

Result: when two sorcerer lords of Tzeentch faced off in battle against one another, they could only rely on their own spells and daemons as well as tanks and mercenaries. Other than that, they were forced to jump up and down shouting "why am I surrounded by such incompetent fools!"

At least elementals can still engage one another in fisticuffs, but still.

lesser_minion
2008-12-16, 07:08 AM
There is no such thing as an absolute immunity. Ever. Not for epic characters, not for gods, not for nobody.

SKR suggested that racial/class immunities should instead be a flat +10 to the appropriate save. That might not seem much, but it's half an RNG (the equivalent of 20 levels of a Good save progression).

So, for example, your Druid's venom immunity class ability now grants an
untyped +10 bonus to saves vs. poison. That's enough to laugh off most venoms without making him immune to the personal weapons of the God of Poison. Paladins get a +10 to saves vs. fear; enough to make them appropriately fearless when anything less than "DC = twelvetyseven" dragon fear or divine awe is on the table.


Nice idea. You hand out 'pseudoimmunities' to things which probably aren't really point-blank immune. You might allow some ability to bypass some resistances. I'm still not sure where that leaves Undead. Perhaps provide an 'Eternal' subtype which no longer has no vital parts to attack, but can only be destroyed in some specific way. I think there should be some immunities - chucking a bolt of fire at a beast of pure flame should probably heal it if anything. Admittedly, that's not immunity, it's absorption.

It also means that all those metamagic feats can disappear. I also like the way it headed off the Cheese Arms Race before it really got off the ground. So I'm not going to add the Pseudonatural template to my Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon Cleric 3/Mystic Theurge 30... yet

Knaight
2008-12-16, 08:12 AM
Upper_Krust talked about changing Energy Immunity to a degree of Energy Resistance based on the type of the creature. IIRC it worked something like flat immunity to an energy type = ER 50, something with energy immunity and the appropriate subtype gains ER 100, while something actually composed of an element gains ER 150. So:


Fire Giant = ER Fire 50
Red Dragon = ER Fire 100
Fire Elemental = ER Fire 150

Net result: Fire Giants walk through housefires and chuckle at fireballs, but still come away slightly scorched and duly chastened from a faceful of dragonfire. Red Dragons can happily lair in volcanoes, but even they can suffer a modicum of singeing if there's enough energy brought to bear at once. Fire elementals, they just chortle at any fire short of Epic/Divine proportions.

Elemental vulnerability? Stayed as written (+x% to damage). Ditto Evasion, Mettle and the like (they modify numbers, rather than negating conditions outright).

*Meh* It works for me. YMMV.
That said fire elementals should be able to shrug off epic fire, and divine fire does half divine damage anyways, and hurts them that way. Although the giant and dragon really shouldn't be immune.

Kizara
2008-12-16, 08:39 AM
Great feat. Not only is it a bit silly and pretty funny, but is actually very viable and useful.

Rebonack
2008-12-16, 10:09 AM
The problem with Da Rulez is that in this case, they are utterly, completely silly even beyond what they usually are. :smallsmile:

Besides, the statement as given doesn't even make any sense, since it says that they "tap into an unseen source of power" to do this, which means they do NOT create something out of "nothing" anyway. And shouldn't "creating something" fall under Conjuration (Creation)? :smallconfused:

EDIT: evocation would produce "elemental" energy which requires magic to sustain it, conjuration would produce normal stuff which does not. For instance, on the Plane of Elemental Fire, you have fire burning constantly without fuel and without requiring continuous input of oxygen. It's not fire, but Elemental fire. Just one reason I didn't like the change from "Plane of Elemental Fire" to "Elemental Plane of Fire", since it is filled not with ordinary fire but the elemental essence of fire.

Answered yer question right there. Of course, by the rules non-magical fire only deals 1d6 damage. And yet there are all these great conjuration spells (like Orb of Fire. Damage and dazing without SR? A little much, Wizards?) that deal quite a bit more than 1d6. It's all a vast conspiracy to make Evokers worse I tell you!


EDIT2 Yea, that leads to problems with Summonings. But these don't use elemental energy, but yank pseudo-avatars of creatures around. Come to think of it, Conjuration could use a little splitting up.

The spell schools are a little wonky here and there, I would agree.


Magical nodes, hmm. Sounds like making excuses, but in the interests of balance I guess that's OK. :smallwink: Naturally, you could simply give them some other ability to represent it. What "magical node" is there in Oozes for instance? It might be better to tie this feat to the given creature type it is supposed to affect, then it might be more plausible: magical nodes for undead, some other excuse for oozes or whatever.

Making excuses? No, more of giving an explanation regarding how undead work rather than just hand-waving it away as MAGIC! And yes, it would be a separate ability for different types of Crit immune critters. As for oozes, the target of choice would be major connecting points in their inter-cellular cyto-skeleton. There has to be some form of support structure in there unless they're just made of magic. And if they are made of magic than the same argument for undead applies to them.

For the rogue I favor allowing overcoming crit immunity via feats, as selectable 'special abilities' or as weapon enchantments. A different one is needed for each kind of monster that's crit immune. 'n Plant type creatures aren't crit immune in my games. Mostly because it doesn't make sense. If something is able to move around and has an Int score it's going to have organs that can be targeted.

The Minx
2008-12-16, 12:14 PM
Answered yer question right there.

Fnord?


Of course, by the rules non-magical fire only deals 1d6 damage. And yet there are all these great conjuration spells (like Orb of Fire. Damage and dazing without SR? A little much, Wizards?) that deal quite a bit more than 1d6. It's all a vast conspiracy to make Evokers worse I tell you!

Possibly because people have the idea that evokers are the most powerful, therefore they get the most limitations. There seems to be an unspoken tradition of associating power with fancy flash-bangs rather than utility.


Making excuses? No, more of giving an explanation regarding how undead work rather than just hand-waving it away as MAGIC!

Yes, but the point was that I felt that "magic nodes" seemed like a hand-wave just as much as "magic" in a sense (especially since it appeared in response to the need for sneak attack against undead). Why does the magic need to be concentrated in a "node" as opposed to being dispersed evenly throughout the undead creature? :smallwink:

Of course, since I generally don't approve of "immovable barriers", and my earlier post re: the relevance of sneak attack against undead was more because I felt that sneak attacks were intended for vital organs, I'm all for the fix - provided that it requires the expenditure of an extra feat. It wasn't a serious critique or anything. :smallsmile:


And yes, it would be a separate ability for different types of Crit immune critters. As for oozes, the target of choice would be major connecting points in their inter-cellular cyto-skeleton. There has to be some form of support structure in there unless they're just made of magic. And if they are made of magic than the same argument for undead applies to them.

Well, not necessarily, look at real world slime-molds. They're multi-cellular and lack structure. Yet, they move around. But simply declaring all oozes to be huge single celled life forms might work, I guess.


For the rogue I favor allowing overcoming crit immunity via feats, as selectable 'special abilities' or as weapon enchantments. A different one is needed for each kind of monster that's crit immune. 'n Plant type creatures aren't crit immune in my games. Mostly because it doesn't make sense. If something is able to move around and has an Int score it's going to have organs that can be targeted.

Anything with Int should be targetable, agreed. Weapon enchantments or acquired [Su] abilities could be applicable when no other solution is available.

Kesnit
2008-12-16, 12:32 PM
Ironically, it is precisely things like undead getting sneak attacked that I am thinking about here. Consider a skeleton: what vital spot is the Rogue sneak attacking, exactly? So sometimes creatures should be immune to certain attack types, simply on account of the fact that the attack type isn't relevant to the situation.


A Skeleton has DR 5/BLDG, which makes sense since it is just walking bones. But what about a vampire or lich? They look just like their base race (well, kind of), so why shouldn't they have internal organs or the like?

WRT Rogues taking a feat to SA undead, the feat is Epic and requires Cripping Strike. If there is a pre-Epic feat, please let me know, as my PnP Rogue would love to have it! :smallbiggrin:

The Minx
2008-12-16, 12:39 PM
A Skeleton has DR 5/BLDG, which makes sense since it is just walking bones. But what about a vampire or lich? They look just like their base race (well, kind of), so why shouldn't they have internal organs or the like?

They don't use them. Except for the vampire to some extent (which should be sneak-attackable since you can bring it down by impaling its heart)

BTW lichs have DR 15/bldg and magic. They are pretty skeletal, sometimes (just look at Xykon).


WRT Rogues taking a feat to SA undead, the feat is Epic and requires Cripping Strike. If there is a pre-Epic feat, please let me know, as my PnP Rogue would love to have it! :smallbiggrin:

Sadly, I don't know of a non-homebrew one. :(

magic_unlocked
2008-12-16, 02:38 PM
If we're still going on about sneak attacking things that ought not be sneak attacked, then I say it requires a feat per creature type that is not normally sneak attack-able and say that sneak attack damage itself is halved and have decent fluff behind the feat and be done with it.

Dairun Cates
2008-12-16, 02:55 PM
WRT Rogues taking a feat to SA undead, the feat is Epic and requires Cripping Strike. If there is a pre-Epic feat, please let me know, as my PnP Rogue would love to have it! :smallbiggrin:

They brought up a few alternatives in this thread.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67992

Devils_Advocate
2008-12-27, 12:03 AM
An interesting thing about instituting big bonuses to or against things instead of absolutes (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/variantfewerabsolutes1.html) is that it helps you to see just how crazy the normal rules can be. You get a plus infinity bonus to something! Further, anything that counters your absolute has a plus infinity bonus of its own, to cancel out yours.

Now, I have no problem with things just not working in cases where it makes no sense for them to work. You can't poison a golem for the same basic reason you can't perform open-heart surgery with the Open Lock skill: Things just don't work that way. But if you're going to have something non-applicable in some cases, have it non-applicable and leave it that way. A feat or spell that lets you poison a golem is ridiculous.

On the specific issue of trained-only skills: If your ability to swim, of all things, isn't quite dependent on enough practice to be represented by a skill rank, then no other skill should be either. Yeesh.


But is an omnipotent being immune to paradoxes? If Ey is, then Ey could create both in a single universe.

If Ey isn't immune, then is Ey really omnipotent?
Could an omnipotent being make a rock so green that Ey couldn't lift it?

Decahedral Tofu
2008-12-28, 01:44 AM
Penetrate Immunity
Sure you can burn a red dragon, sorry the fire elemental is still out.
So true! :D

Although scientifically, if you burned the combustible organic matter that was fueling the existence of a fire elemental, or made enough fire to deprive the region of oxygen, the fire elemental would be destroyed. :P
But who needs science when you've got flying lizards whose internal structures can regularly and passively endure temperatures of 15000 degrees Fahrenheit?

chiasaur11
2008-12-28, 02:02 AM
But is an omnipotent being immune to paradoxes? If Ey is, then Ey could create both in a single universe.

If Ey isn't immune, then is Ey really omnipotent?

I think Lewis said it best. Roughly:
Intrinsic impossibility is impossible for all agents. Nonsense doesn't stop being nonsense if you put "God can" in front of it.

So, yeah. I figure it'd still be a paradox with an omnipotent deity involved. Of course, I really have no idea here. No real firsthand experience with that sort of thing.

Poodle
2008-12-28, 04:17 AM
This is a problem with the spell mechanics of the game so trying to apply feats that work under those mechanics to try to fix it is not going to work.

And you should probably considerer immunities relevant to the creatures environment, consider a squirrel that lives on the plane of cold .... and has cold immunity, you assume he got this through a process of evolution, that does not mean that if someone made a area at 0 Kelvin he could walk in and survive,
the same that a red dragon could live in a volcano but not something as hot as letís say the core of a star
(workers better with heat since it extends of into infinity)

on sneak attacking... no sneak attacking creatures that lack a vital system !!

Can god propose a problem he can`t solve, makes a stone so heavy he cant lift it?, create a box with an unknown inside it, dance a little better each day

chiasaur11
2008-12-28, 02:26 PM
This is a problem with the spell mechanics of the game so trying to apply feats that work under those mechanics to try to fix it is not going to work.

And you should probably considerer immunities relevant to the creatures environment, consider a squirrel that lives on the plane of cold .... and has cold immunity, you assume he got this through a process of evolution, that does not mean that if someone made a area at 0 Kelvin he could walk in and survive,
the same that a red dragon could live in a volcano but not something as hot as letís say the core of a star
(workers better with heat since it extends of into infinity)

on sneak attacking... no sneak attacking creatures that lack a vital system !!

Can god propose a problem he can`t solve, makes a stone so heavy he cant lift it?, create a box with an unknown inside it, dance a little better each day

I believe Molly Hayes had the answer to this one (or a sandwich variant):

Yes, and then he'd eat it anyways.

Man, Runaways was awesome.

Fenris1010
2008-12-28, 03:46 PM
I'm always up for a good debate but I am at a bit of a loss. I'm not a hundred percent positve but it sounds like we arguing "Why can the Rook move from side to side, its a castle it shouldn't be able to move at all!"

In the end its a game. One that requires balance at some level. Even if we have to ignore teh physics of an imaginary force (ie magic).

Would you like to know why your character with SR is still affected by a conjuration spell? Because some scholar at the top of some wizards tower studied the arcane and devoted years to designing a spell that did JUST that. Every armor has a weekness and someone will exploit it. Once you thought you were immune to fire and now you find out that a study of magic has been dedicated to using a fire at a certain temperature, chemical compisiton, or from a certain plane of existance can be used to affect you.

But really, in the end, how ever you go about explaining it. In the end its a game, one with rules, and something it like to call balance. You can't drag logic into it.