Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
question about spell immunity
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="moritheil" data-source="post: 2463586" data-attributes="member: 30610"><p>If it's not fourth level or lower, you can't choose it at all. If you can choose it, it's not higher than fourth level. I cannot cast SI and say "wish." That fails right off.</p><p></p><p>(As a logically equivalent alternative, you could say that in the example Cleric Flamestrike and Druid Flamestrike are identical, and that NEITHER of them is blocked by SI, rather than both. But if they truly are the same spell they must exhibit the same effect. SI has historically never checked for a level after the actual specification of the spell.)</p><p></p><p>And if, as you say, SI blocks druid flamestrike but not cleric flamestrike, because they happen to reside in different spell slots, then that is logically equivalent to saying the two are DIFFERENT SPELLS, merely because of the different spell slots.</p><p></p><p>This opens a world of chaos, because I can then say a silent magic missile is a DIFFERENT SPELL because it takes up a different spell slot, and thus not subject to your spell immunity. In a normal battle situation, enemy mages will have a couple of silenced or stilled spells along with their normal ones (well, only if your DM is not moronic, but I'll assume he or she is not.) In addition, they will have their normal array of spells, which probably does not consist of just one spell. Thus your already-slim chances of being immune to the spell that you get targeted with get even slimmer.</p><p></p><p>Now, to be fair, I went and looked, and certain web versions of the SRD have:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>However, I am working from a version that has:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Do you see where this results in my assertion?</p><p></p><p>I will agree that the d20srd.org text is in favor of your approach, because it lacks the emphasis "specified." This conflicts with the version I was familiar with.</p><p></p><p>Nevertheless, I do not see it as consistent to approach SI as a spell that continually has to be checking for level. That approach completely lacks thematic integrity, which is that your immunity is absolute as long as it concerns one particular specified spell.</p><p></p><p>Ask yourself: does it even make sense to say that it is the exact same spell and yet somehow you are suddenly not immune to it just because a cleric casts it rather than a druid? Metaphors of "punching through resistance" and the like are entirely out of order: this is "immunity," or "unbeatable spell resistance." Power is not even a consideration except in the setup phase where you ask what spells can be picked.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, you may be aware that a spellcaster can prepare a 4th level spell in a 5th level slot if he lacks the ability to prepare 5th level spells. So what happens when a druid casts a flamestrike prepared in a 5th level slot? Do you mean to tell me that it somehow is able to pierce through SI just because the druid prepared it in a slot one level higher?</p><p></p><p>And if you do, then how can you not see how horribly useless this makes SI? The only time SI would be useful, then, would be when you had an exact knowledge of the casting habits of your enemy. How common is that?</p><p></p><p>I don't have a problem with you playing it how you like - it's your campaign. But to say that Cleric Flamestrike breaks SI, Druid Flamestrike does not, and to <em>still assert</em> they are the exact same spell just strikes me as untenable. It's not even remotely reasonable in terms of thematic coherency.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="moritheil, post: 2463586, member: 30610"] If it's not fourth level or lower, you can't choose it at all. If you can choose it, it's not higher than fourth level. I cannot cast SI and say "wish." That fails right off. (As a logically equivalent alternative, you could say that in the example Cleric Flamestrike and Druid Flamestrike are identical, and that NEITHER of them is blocked by SI, rather than both. But if they truly are the same spell they must exhibit the same effect. SI has historically never checked for a level after the actual specification of the spell.) And if, as you say, SI blocks druid flamestrike but not cleric flamestrike, because they happen to reside in different spell slots, then that is logically equivalent to saying the two are DIFFERENT SPELLS, merely because of the different spell slots. This opens a world of chaos, because I can then say a silent magic missile is a DIFFERENT SPELL because it takes up a different spell slot, and thus not subject to your spell immunity. In a normal battle situation, enemy mages will have a couple of silenced or stilled spells along with their normal ones (well, only if your DM is not moronic, but I'll assume he or she is not.) In addition, they will have their normal array of spells, which probably does not consist of just one spell. Thus your already-slim chances of being immune to the spell that you get targeted with get even slimmer. Now, to be fair, I went and looked, and certain web versions of the SRD have: However, I am working from a version that has: Do you see where this results in my assertion? I will agree that the d20srd.org text is in favor of your approach, because it lacks the emphasis "specified." This conflicts with the version I was familiar with. Nevertheless, I do not see it as consistent to approach SI as a spell that continually has to be checking for level. That approach completely lacks thematic integrity, which is that your immunity is absolute as long as it concerns one particular specified spell. Ask yourself: does it even make sense to say that it is the exact same spell and yet somehow you are suddenly not immune to it just because a cleric casts it rather than a druid? Metaphors of "punching through resistance" and the like are entirely out of order: this is "immunity," or "unbeatable spell resistance." Power is not even a consideration except in the setup phase where you ask what spells can be picked. Furthermore, you may be aware that a spellcaster can prepare a 4th level spell in a 5th level slot if he lacks the ability to prepare 5th level spells. So what happens when a druid casts a flamestrike prepared in a 5th level slot? Do you mean to tell me that it somehow is able to pierce through SI just because the druid prepared it in a slot one level higher? And if you do, then how can you not see how horribly useless this makes SI? The only time SI would be useful, then, would be when you had an exact knowledge of the casting habits of your enemy. How common is that? I don't have a problem with you playing it how you like - it's your campaign. But to say that Cleric Flamestrike breaks SI, Druid Flamestrike does not, and to [i]still assert[/i] they are the exact same spell just strikes me as untenable. It's not even remotely reasonable in terms of thematic coherency. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
question about spell immunity
Top