Quick questions and answers - Page 1321 - Myth-Weavers


Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.


Quick questions and answers

   
I always took it to mean if you cast something like Aid and cast it a second time hoping for a better roll on the temporary HP, you had to take the result of the second casting.

It's ambiguous, but personally I'd rule that casting two different types of Resist/Protection from Energy is okay. After all, you're burning the spell slots and although it's the same type of spell, the applications of them (fire/cold) are different. If someone wants to burn five spell slots to protect themselves from all five main elemental damage types, good for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRajah View Post
3.5: Resist Energy question (again): a caster hits himself with two castings of Resist Energy for 2 different energy types (say fire & cold). Would the 2nd casting override the other or would the caster have resistance to both energy types for the duration?
I think TheFred has quoted the correct relevant rule, and I'd just like to expand on it:

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFred View Post
Ambiguous. I was always under the impression that it wouldn't, because of the Combining Magical Effects rules - in particular:
"Same Effect with Differing Results
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts."
What this rule says is that if you cast Resist Energy (Fire) on the target, and then cast Resist Energy (Cold) on the same target, then the Cold completely supercedes the Fire effect so the target only benefits from Resist Energy (Cold). But they are still separate effects, so if Cold is somehow dispelled, Fire will come online again if its duration has not yet expired.

This is the same principle used when casting Polymorph multiple times on the same target. Using Polymorph to change the target into a cat and then hitting it again to change it into a frog doesn't turn it into a cat-frog hybrid - it just stays a frog because it is the last spell in the series.

Of course, the rules ambiguity comes from the combination of A) the rule using the word 'usually' and B) unlike being a frog and being a cat, having both resistance to both Fire and Cold are not in fact mutually exclusive.

I'm sorry but from a RAW standpoint, this particular scenario is not ambiguous to me. I've handled it before, and I find that 3.5/Pathfinder is too crunchy/powergamey for me to allow possible Rules Exploits. I don't want players arguing "why'd you let this work for Spell X but not for Spell Y", so I just apply it to all spells.

Maybe my example of Polymorph (Frog) and Polymorph (Cat) is a bit difficult to imagine as something capable of blending. But then a player might argue Elf + Human = Half-Elf or Snake + Human = Yuan-Ti, and I don't think I'm ready to deal with whatever racial combo shenanigans people might come up with.

In any case, this is how I resolve this for Resist Energy from a RAW perspective:
  1. The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Resist Energy (Cold 10) and Resist Energy (Fire 10) are two instances of the same spell, and are producing different effects.
  2. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. There is nothing unusual in the wording of Resist Energy with regard to stacking with itself (although it does have special wording for stacking with Protection from Energy). I must take this to mean that this case falls under "Usually".
  3. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts. Nothing in 1 & 2 is countering this, so this happens.

A more challenging scenario for me would be something like: Resist Energy (Fire 20) is active, but Resist Energy (Fire 10) is cast on top of it so that the target is never without resistance once the first spell expires. In this case, I'd allow the larger/more beneficial magnitude to take effect so Fire 20 supersedes Fire 10 even though the latter is the last spell in the series.

That's not RAW. That is your interpretation of RAI. And that's fine, as is your reasoning of wanting to avoid precedent-setting. It's probably how I would rule it, too.
But the actual Rule As Written is ambiguous because it gives no insight into how to determine when spells deviate from the 'usual'.
And no, (lacking) an explicit exception in the spell can't be the determining factor, because the system already includes the principle of Specific Trumps General. An explicit exception in the spell would override even a general rule of 'The last spell in the series always trumps the others'. We don't have the latter. Why would we need the former?

I always assumed it would, but you're right that the combining effects rules do seem to prohibit it. Honestly, it doesn't seem to come up much in play, by the time you can spare the slots for multiple protections at the same time, you can pick up permanent items if you're that worried about energy damage, so its only come up a few times and we always just allowed it.

In this thread they worked through things pretty detailed regarding the Energy Immunity spell. Since that is more or less the same thing that is being asked here, perhaps it can shed some light on it?

Pathfinder

I don’t usually mess with necromancy but the thematics of something intrigued me. So assuming I can get a death clutch spell to work on an npc we've been dealing with for awhile I was tempted to then pull a Davy jones situation thus the meat of the issue.

Basically I want to animate the corpse as a powerful intelligent undead but I want to give it a critical weakness, ie make it so whomever possess the heart can control the undead and with one attack can end it as well.

Mechanically is there a legit way to pull this off with just spells (currently 8th level spell slots and lower cleric)?
Or is this a kind of thing where craft wonderous / lichdom research (heart = phylactery) would need to be used to turn the heart into a weak point?
Or is this kind of more rule of cool ask the gm how he wants to do it or if they'd allow it thing?

------------

Also, does the soul matter when creating intelligent undead? Ie - if someones already been brought back to life before you can animate them (clone etc) can you only make non intelligent undead with their remains?

------

When creating undead is there a way of preserving a creatures daily/at will spell like abilities or greater effects?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedronai View Post
That's not RAW. That is your interpretation of RAI. And that's fine, as is your reasoning of wanting to avoid precedent-setting. It's probably how I would rule it, too.
But the actual Rule As Written is ambiguous because it gives no insight into how to determine when spells deviate from the 'usual'.
The RAW is actually that they do work together, because "usually" only says that this is common, not when or where it happens - it implies that each spell will say so or be obvious (and actually, most spells are obvious - you can't be both a frog and a mouse, etc). Since there's nothing which stops the spells working together and this rule doesn't cover them, we can only conclude that they do, in fact, both function.

However, the actual rules as written are largely irrelevant to... well, basically everything. Therefore, rule as you will. The intention is certainly ambiguous.

Pathfinder

Can an alchemists vestigial arm discovery/ies (if multiple taken) or tentacle discoveries be the target limbs taken and replaced by the monsterous graft discovery?







 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2019-02-15 09:00:08am local time
Myth-Weavers Status