Poison Immunity

[mneme]

Right. The ironic thing is that near as I can tell, this means that if you have, say, a jagged weapon, if you use a non-damaging effect through it and critical, you'll get to drop the ongoing damage on the target you critical. Which is the only way in which critical effects that inflict ongoing are better than those that inflict damage, and in the context of attacks balanced by not being able to do damage...interesting.

 

[Solvarn]

I'm not sure how you come to this conclusion. Where does it state that you cannot be immune to effect?

There's currently a thread about immunity and if you somehow can insist that what you said is true after reading it: Damage of two types but immunity to one(*1). I will gladly listen to your explanations.


(*1): Even though the title does not imply it it's still about immunity and effects as well.

Yeah I posted in there a few times and I disagreed with a lot of what was said there.

My stance is that damaging effects have a keyword applied to them in the description or they are untyped.

"10 damage + 5 poison damage + ongoing 5 damage"

The 10 damage is untyped damage, the 5 poison damage is poison, and the ongoing 5 damage is untyped. Poison is kind of weird but I would think that a power with the poison keyword would specify the damage type of the ongoing damage if it were meant to be subject to immunity. If you are cut with a poison blade you may not take poison damage, but you will still bleed.

Kind of seems like a common sense issue to me, although people reading too much into the issue could look up the definition of effect in the compendium, (or where it's defined in the PHB III) and you will see an "effect" is technical what happens after the Effect: line in a power. Now, power descriptions themselves contradict this because some of them mention the word effects in the Hit: section.

/shrug

Like I said, if my PC's cut someone with a poison sword and the attack does ongoing damage untyped, the person is bleeding.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Yeah I posted in there a few times and I disagreed with a lot of what was said there.

My stance is that damaging effects have a keyword applied to them in the description or they are untyped.

"10 damage + 5 poison damage + ongoing 5 damage"

The 10 damage is untyped damage, the 5 poison damage is poison, and the ongoing 5 damage is untyped. Poison is kind of weird but I would think that a power with the poison keyword would specify the damage type of the ongoing damage if it were meant to be subject to immunity. If you are cut with a poison blade you may not take poison damage, but you will still bleed.

Kind of seems like a common sense issue to me, although people reading too much into the issue could look up the definition of effect in the compendium, (or where it's defined in the PHB III) and you will see an "effect" is technical what happens after the Effect: line in a power. Now, power descriptions themselves contradict this because some of them mention the word effects in the Hit: section.

/shrug

Like I said, if my PC's cut someone with a poison sword and the attack does ongoing damage untyped, the person is bleeding.

I don't get your problem, you agree on the results of the OP's examples. I agree as well. Poison Immunity works as you want it to work regarding theses examples. Yet, you argue that there is something wrong - that's at least what I guess you are saying.

 

[Solvarn]

I don't get your problem, you agree on the results of the OP's examples. I agree as well. Poison Immunity works as you want it to work regarding theses examples. Yet, you argue that there is something wrong - that's at least what I guess you are saying.

Oh I don't have a problem, but I guess looking back at my post it might seem like I do, sorry about that.

I just think that it's odd that immunity isn't more clearly clarified as it can have a significant effect on combat.

 

[DracoSuave]

Yeah I posted in there a few times and I disagreed with a lot of what was said there.

My stance is that damaging effects have a keyword applied to them in the description or they are untyped.

"10 damage + 5 poison damage + ongoing 5 damage"

The 10 damage is untyped damage, the 5 poison damage is poison, and the ongoing 5 damage is untyped.

This is correct.

If a poison power did that, it would be as you describe.

It would be:

A poison effect that deals 10 untyped damage, 5 poison damage, 5 untyped ongoing damage.

Poison immunity only affects the 5 poison damage, however, other game rules differ. A dwarf's save bonus vs poison applies to the untyped ongoing damage because while it lacks a damage type, the power that created it has the poison keyword and it is still a poison effect.

I just think that it's odd that immunity isn't more clearly clarified as it can have a significant effect on combat.

It's pretty damn explicit in how it works these days.

If it's immunity to a damage type, you take no damage of that type.
If it's immunity to a condition, you never suffer from that condition.
If it's immunity to fear, poison, charm, polymorph, sleep (I'm sure I'm missing one), you never suffer non-damaging effects from effects with that keyword.
If it's immunity to gaze, powers with that keyword do nothing to you.

That's pretty damn specific. Poison is both a damage type, and has a seperate case explicitly spelled out for it. So that's why immunity to poison gets to do more.

 

[Xeterog]

Bring this one back again...at least it isn't too old:

So, how does poison immunity of most undead not totally screw over PC's that concentrate on doing Poison damage?

Also, why is the 2nd part of the immunity rule " creature that is immune to charm, fear, illusion, poison, or sleep is not affected by the nondamaging effects of a power that has that keyword" not override the 1st part (exception based rules you know) so that poison immunity would only stop the non-damaging effects of a power that has the poison keyword?

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Bring this one back again...at least it isn't too old:

So, how does poison immunity of most undead not totally screw over PC's that concentrate on doing Poison damage?

How many players actually do specialize in dealing poison damage? But to answer your question:
a) Poisoner MC feat (D373)
b) MC Assassin and pick up Venom Hand Master (D379)

Also, why is the 2nd part of the immunity rule " creature that is immune to charm, fear, illusion, poison, or sleep is not affected by the nondamaging effects of a power that has that keyword" not override the 1st part (exception based rules you know) so that poison immunity would only stop the non-damaging effects of a power that has the poison keyword?

B/c it doesn't contradict the first part about damage. There is no specific vs general issue going on here.