Fire elementals 100 or 200% Fire resistance

Omegaxicor

First Post
This is for 3.5 but it applies to any D&D, is Fire Immunity a 100% resistance or a 200% resistance ability because it seems that fire should heal creatures of fire...

Things like Dragons who exist in molten lava would only be immune but Living Elemental Fire, is that not like positive and negative energies in that living creatures have 200% immunity to positive but 0% resistance to negative (without outside factors such as a class that grants resistance/immunity) but undead have a 200% resistance to Negative energy and a 0% resistance to positive.

Am I misreading the rules, are they just missing this feature or am I wrong in my understanding?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Nope, there's no such thing as 200% resistance in D&D. Taking your fire elemental example, if fire healed them, there would be text similar to the text in undead statblocks that reverses the effects of positive/negative energy. So they're just immune to fire damage.
 

yea, I thought that...

I have always played as though they were healed by it until a player pointed out that they aren't (at least in any of the books he could see)

thanks
 


I think you've invented your own interesting house rule. It's rather imbalancing though, because the ability to heal from continious damage would render a fire elemental almost unkillable by players of the same CR.

I generally replace all immunity with numerical resistance, because its actually possible for a pyromancer in my game to burn a fire elemental. There is no such thing in my game as 100% immunity. Fire elementals have 'Immunity (Fire)', replaced with 'Resistance to Fire 100'.

While there is nothing in my game actually healed by fire, there are many fire creatures that gain fast healing when in a fire. I suspect this would be a better implementation of your house rule. Give a medium sized fire elemental something like 'Fast Healing: 4' when in contact with a fire of at least large size.
 

I prefer if a fire mage can actually be MORE effective against a fire elemental. "Oh, you're MADE of fire? That stuff I manipulate all the time to cast my spells? Well hey, let me rip you in half and recharge some of my spell slots."

So sure, hitting a fire elemental with a torch is ineffective, and a wizard who just happens to know fireball won't find it that useful, but there should be options for the dedicated fire mage.
 

I prefer if a fire mage can actually be MORE effective against a fire elemental. "Oh, you're MADE of fire? That stuff I manipulate all the time to cast my spells? Well hey, let me rip you in half and recharge some of my spell slots."

So sure, hitting a fire elemental with a torch is ineffective, and a wizard who just happens to know fireball won't find it that useful, but there should be options for the dedicated fire mage.

I have options of this sort, but if you have any suggestions or would be willing to reveal how you do it in your own campaign, I'd appreciate it.
 


So sure, hitting a fire elemental with a torch is ineffective, and a wizard who just happens to know fireball won't find it that useful, but there should be options for the dedicated fire mage.

Respectfully, I disagree.

A. There is no reason I can think of to make 3.5 wizards MORE powerful.
B. Being a respected scientist may give you access to a 'lightning machine' does not give you the ability control actual lightning. They aren't the same thing, though they may be similar.

Either way, about OP, cool houserule. One I might consider using myself.
 

I wouldn't just add such a power to a 3.5 wizard. I personally kinda hate Vancian magic. But if I were making a custom magic-user class (which I've done various ways over the years), yes, elemental mages would be able to influence elemental critters.
 

Remove ads

Top