question about spell immunity

[Li Shenron]

What I can try to say, is in regard of the question "is a spell of the same name but a different level the same spell?".
To me, if we rule that isn't the same spell, a 2nd level heightened charme is on pair with the spell in another list, another spell.
Thus, strictly by the wording of spell immunity, a DM can rule the protection is bypassed as well.

Seems you are complicating things more than needed A spell with the same name but a different level is the same spell but at a different level. My opinion is that if the level is more than 4, then Spell Immunity will be bypassed.

 

[Shariell]

Yeah, I think this too.
My speculation was only about the reason above the mechanics of the spell funcion.
Let's call it an "academic curiosity" oh how about we ruling this, nothing more

For gaming pourpose, the only way I think this spell work are the straight name of the spell (ala thanee) or yours

 

[isoChron]

Sorry, I'm easily confused.
I just didn't get it the way you meant it.

 

[moritheil]

Interesting. The difference, for me, is that the cleric's version is a fifth-level spell. It gets that +1 DC that Heighten Spell grants. It's not merely a 4th-level spell that costs a 5th-level slot. Flavor-wise I can accept your interpretation, but mechanically it doesn't work for me, because the cleric's version is actually more powerful than the druid version.I agree and don't think there's really any question about this. Just preparing a Magic Missile or Flame Strike in a 9th-level slot doesn't mean it bypasses the Lesser Globe of Invulnerability or anything else. You gain nothing for prepping a lower-level spell in a higher-level spot (sans-metamagic), save having that spell available if you need that one spell and only that spell, for some reason.Actually, I'd never use Spell Immunity to protect against damage dealing spells. It is useless in that situation, as you point out. Instead my clerics use it to protect against spells that provide unique and detrimental effects. vs. a druid, Poison, vs. a sorc/wizard possibly Ray of Enfeeblement, Hold Person, Dimensional Anchor, Enervation, Touch of Idiocy, etc. vs....well, you get the idea. Or if you don't know the caster you're facing, whichever of these that is most damaging to the particular cleric in question.Interesting. I'd never considered this strategy. Make your allies immune to fireball and then just start blasting away... *scribbles in notebook*

Thank you.

While I'm on the soapbox, let me comment on something else. There is a dangerous tendency to think that just because the mechanics of two different things are similar, they are closely related, and vice versa. The descriptive text is often ignored by this approach. While I don't say that we should look at the descriptive text above all else, neither should we look solely at the mechanics - which are just the nitty-gritty means of trying to make the world replicate the concept the author had.

Obviously, by stating that the cleric's version is more powerful, you mean to imply "and I think it SHOULD be more powerful because he's casting it as a 5th level spell." I don't, and that's where we differ. I can't argue with you that the cleric's flame strike doesn't differ by +1 DC, because under the rules it does. Rather, my point is that the very fact that it has a +1 DC is an unfortunate consequence of the rules being formulated as they are, just as a troll barbarian having a greater bonus to Concentration checks than an elven mage is an unfortunate consequence of the rules being formulated as they are. (I would likewise suggest that a druid casting a healing spell is essentially forced to cast it with his higher level slot because he's not as good at healing as a cleric - please don't think that I'm biased one way or the other.)

 

[Merlion]

I dont think its terribly diffacult. Spell Immunity makes you immune to a certain spell, or spells. It has a limit to how high level of a spell you can choose, but a certain casting of a spell having its effective level altered wouldnt matter. Spell Immunity makes you immune to that spell, modified or not.

So if you choose Flame Strike (which exists as a 4th level spell in the book and so can be chosen) your immune to Flame Strike. Period. Druids, Clerics, Heighted, Empowered, whatever.

As Thanee said in the begining, Spell Immunity is a defense that protects against a certain spell or spells, not against a certain level of spells...it just has a maximum limit as to what level the spell you choose to be protected from can be.

Even if you heighten a spell, its still the same spell, and thats what the actual protection from Spell Immunity is based on...the spell itself, not its level.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Even if you heighten a spell, its still the same spell, and thats what the actual protection from Spell Immunity is based on...the spell itself, not its level.

Of course it's based on the level. The description is totally unambiguous in that regard: "The spells must be of 4th level or lower." If the spell is not 4th level or lower, you are not immune to it. Simple, really.

 

[green slime]

Of course, you could argue that, for the purposes of Spell Immunity, Druidic Flame Strike is not equal to Clerical Flame Strike, for the simple fact that the Clerical version is fifth level.

And with regards to the whole debate: isn't it kind of an example of old men sitting around examining their navels? Most spells are "Heightened" to increase the save DC.... Spell Immunity is usually used against spells without saves. How many times in your games did you see a magic missile heightened to 5th level?? In how many years of gaming? Maybe against Globes of Invulnerability, but otherwise? Who is going to memorise it? I guess it is just one of those things that shore up a sorcerer against the wizard....

 

[Merlion]

Of course it's based on the level. The description is totally unambiguous in that regard: "The spells must be of 4th level or lower." If the spell is not 4th level or lower, you are not immune to it. Simple, really.

No, if the spell doesnt exist at 4th level or lower, you cant choose it when casting Spell Immunity. You cant choose Cone of Cold, or Chain Lightning, period.

But you can choose Flame Strike. And then you are immune to the spell Flame Strike. Any Flame Strike spell. Likewise you can choose Charm Person, and you are then immune to any and all Charm Person spells, regardless of what else may have been done to them.


What spell you can choose is based on level...the protection itself is not.

 

[moritheil]

What spell you can choose is based on level...the protection itself is not.

Precisely what I have been saying, only more succinct. Thank you.

 

[Shariell]

I've contacted the wizard of the coast Customer support, and the reply I recieved state that spell immunity FAILS to protect against spell of level higher than 4th, no matter if it's a heightened spell or if it's in a different level in another spell list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response (Zephreum H.) 08/07/2005 12:20 PM
Thank you for contacting us.

It is based on the Spell level not the name. So the same spell cast from a class that has it at a higher level, say...5th, will not be subject to the immunity.

Since spell-like abilities don't have a level placed onto them, they will be subject to the immunity.

Yes a 5th level version of Enervation will bypass the immunity as it is above 4th level.
Actually since the spell is now a higher level than 4 you will not be immune to it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope this can help to clarify
Shariell