3.5 Subtype Change

[abeltdaMike]

I noticed in the new Unapproachable East handbook by WoTC that the elemental subtypes have changed for 3.5. In the book the creatures with the cold subtype now read:

______ are immune to cold damage but are vulnerable to fire attacks. They take half as much damage (+50%) as normal from fire, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed, or if the save is a failure or a success.


Im guessing that this will be true for all subtypes. Instead of double damage if saving throw is failed.

I think nobody has spotted this and if somedid then ignore this post.

 

[Grazzt]

These are detailed the same way in the 3e Fiend Folio.

 

[Ravellion]

This makes a helluva lot more sense IMO. Good change!

 

[RingXero]

While this was known for 3er, as it was one of the first 'updates' announced, it is nice to get confirmation that the new book complies with the change, and not just Fiend Folio.


RX

 

[I'm A Banana]

One of the best changes, IMHO.

For FFd20, there's a host of 'levels' of subtype, so a fire creature could take twice as much damage from cold, +50% damage from cold, or even half damage from cold, and could be resistant to fire (half damage) or just absorb it (gaining healing from it).

This makes what I'm doing make more sense. And I'm all for that.

 

[coyote6]

Note that another 3.5-ish source (Savage Species, IIRC) had yet another implementation of vulnerabilities. The creature took a -10 to saves against the thing they were vulnerabe to, or double damage if the effect allowed no save.

Looks like maybe they changed from the -10 or x2 to the "+50%, regardless" relatively recently. I wonder why they changed. I also wonder if they specify how +50% works with "save for half" -- I'd guess that you'd treat a save as "x1/2" and follow the normal multiplication rules. Thus a creature vulnerable to fire would take 150% of rolled damage if it fails a save, and 100% damage if they make the save. But I bet a lot of people would do it 150%/75% if they don't specify . . . And that might be the intended result, anyways.

Also interesting is that the +50% version has no impact on the usefulness of Evasion to vulnerable creatures, while the -10 version would make Evasion a bit less useful.

Unless, of course, "no damage from save" is supposed to be figured as "x0", and then you follow the multiplication rule to get x1/2 damage. Oy.

Hey, WotC, get your Sage Advice ready.