Pathfinder 1E Barbarian Rage Power 'Superstition' vs Domain Power

[SmuggleNutz]

This came up in a recent session:

The player of a Barbarian with the Rage Power "Superstition" tried to claim that the Barbarian should get a saving throw against another character doing a beneficial Domain Power on him (Touch of Good from the Good Domain). The argument was that the Barbarian, under Rage, was an "unwilling" target and since the Domain power was a Spell-like Ability that Superstition kicked in and the Barbarian should get a save. The other school of thought held that the Domain Power description did not include a provision for a Save, and so the most that should happen is the Cleric should have to roll and attack to see if they hit. If they did, the power worked normally.

(The final ruling was that only an attack roll was required, but that the Barbarian could (Player's choice) turn on the allied Cleric and attack him instead of an enemy as a result.)

What does the community think?

 

[Cadence]

I'm guessing this is just a rehash of how you came to your solution...

The book goes out of the way to mention that spell resistance, dispel magic, and anti-magic work on all spell-like abilities. It presumably can't say that about saves though, because some spells (and thus there corresponding spell-like abilities) don't give them.

A lot of the other spell-like ability domain powers are ranged touch or melee touch and don't mention saves -- and I think they would have been explicit about those damage causing ones if they were meant to require saves. This is a touch one as well and so I don't see why it would gives a save either. The book also seems careful with other classes to say when a save is given (such as Bard's Frightening Tune or Deadly Performance, or for the Elemental Sorcerer's Elemental Blast which seems analogous to a domain power.).

Looking at the description of Superstition, it's a "morale bonus on saving throws" which means it applies on saves that they would be able to roll anyway. "Cannot be a willing target" says that they must try and save against things, even if they would aid them. I take this as a penalty, not an a benefit. It says they must try and save against Bull's Strength even if it would help them. It doesn't create an otherwise non-existent save against something like the Aid spell which doesn't usually give a saving throw even to the enemy.

I like your solution.

 

[SmuggleNutz]

Thank you. It just doesn't seem to be in the spirit of the ability for it to grant saves in all cases, even where one is not allowed.

Looking forward to any other feedback.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

As per RAW how I read Superstition, any and all spells or spell-like abilities need a saving throw (even helpful ones or domain abilities).

Read ToG again here, it is a spell-like ability and it within the RAW as per superstition as giving the barbarian a saving throw against it. Now with that being said I don't see any kind of way to save against this spell-like ability so having your Cleric roll a touch attack against the barbarians touch AC is the way I'd go with it too, but with one caveat. I'd add in his bonus for superstition while raging (+2) to his touch AC. If you hit, then you are able to give him the bonus. The barbarian would NOT attack the cleric in either case unless he was confused for some reason, he's raging not stupid.

The best way to do this is to just not rage until after buffs if possible then you don't have to worry about having them being shrugged off because of the power being activated.

 

[billd91]

I think the touch attack resolution is a fair one. The barbarian would have to try to save against anything that had a save, even if harmless. But that shouldn't give him a chance to save against something that has no saving throw.

Since the spell-like ability is administered by touch, having the barbarian actively try to avoid the cleric's touch rather than accept it is quite appropriate. As far as adding the +2 morale bonus, that seems reasonably appropriate too, but I'd be sure to add the -2 raging penalty as well.

If a character had a beneficial spell that 1) worked at range without requiring a ranged touch attack, and 2) didn't allow a save - then the barbarian's just going to have to accept that he can't resist that spell even if he doesn't want it.

 

[SmuggleNutz]

Hmmm.. What about the Cleric spell Prayer? It's a 40 ft burst with no save (does allow SR, though).

Another problem I think was that the player of the Barbarian seemed to think his character would not want anything to do with magic at all... ever. Kind of like the old AD&D Barbarians. The arcane caster in the party is already trying to be sneaky about casting spells. There is nothing in the description of Superstition to support this, but I guess if that's how the player wants to play it, then that's on them.

 

[Cadence]

Hmmm.. What about the Cleric spell Prayer? It's a 40 ft burst with no save (does allow SR, though).

I just can't believe its supposed to allow saves against the unsavable -- Magic missile? Power word kill? Wouldn't that be mathematically equivalent to "Grants spell resistance equal to your save bonus against things any spell or spell-like effect that doesn't usually grant a save"? And wouldn't they have to say what kind of save (Fort/Refl/Will) you get to make?

I was actually wondering about Prayer though. If he considers himself to not be an ally of someone casting this on him (or isn't even allowed to), shouldn't he be counted as a foe and take the -1 penalties?

Another problem I think was that the player of the Barbarian seemed to think his character would not want anything to do with magic at all... ever. Kind of like the old AD&D Barbarians.

I think that's fine... he just shouldn't be surprised if the party decides the PC is more trouble than he's worth at some point and either ditches him, or lets him die instead of violating his beliefs and using the appropriate spell to save him.

 

[SmuggleNutz]

I just can't believe its supposed to allow saves against the unsavable -- Magic missile? Power word kill? Wouldn't that be mathematically equivalent to "Grants spell resistance equal to your save bonus against things any spell or spell-like effect that doesn't usually grant a save"? And wouldn't they have to say what kind of save (Fort/Refl/Will) you get to make?

Exactly the argument that I made to get it brought back to reality, so to speak, and just require an attack roll if the Barbarian is being targeted. Then a Save if one is allowed.

I was actually wondering about Prayer though. If he considers himself to not be an ally of someone casting this on him (or isn't even allowed to), shouldn't he be counted as a foe and take the -1 penalties?

This actually came up in the same session as part of the overall discussion. The description of Superstition says the Barbarian "cannot be the willing target of any spell." Not exactly an ally, but not exactly an enemy either. It seems as though Superstition is meant to benefit the character, at a price, but not so costly that the character is unplayable. Or dies, as described in the following...

I think that's fine... he just shouldn't be surprised if the party decides the PC is more trouble than he's worth at some point and either ditches him, or lets him die instead of violating his beliefs and using the appropriate spell to save him.

The DM was allowing the Barbarian a save every time our clerics Channeled positive energy for healing. (I think the player wanted to save every time a spellcaster looked at him funny... almost like he wanted an unplayable character).

It seems to boil down to two things: Targeting and Saving. Is the Barbarian the target? And is a save allowed? Applying this test to the situation may be the simplest way to handle it.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

Hmmm.. What about the Cleric spell Prayer? It's a 40 ft burst with no save (does allow SR, though).

In regards to Prayer, since it has no saves whatsoever and affects allies and enemies, he gets it w/o a save of any kind or spell resistance since Superstition doesn't give SR, just saves to spells that have them.

Another problem I think was that the player of the Barbarian seemed to think his character would not want anything to do with magic at all... ever. Kind of like the old AD&D Barbarians. The arcane caster in the party is already trying to be sneaky about casting spells. There is nothing in the description of Superstition to support this, but I guess if that's how the player wants to play it, then that's on them.

Well that's a personal preference and part of his back-story, I wouldn't fault him for that. Probably why he took Superstition to begin with as his character distrusts ALL magic. This is just flavor and great role playing to me. Unless your party does something to harm him with magic, he shouldn't attack anyone in the group. I can see him getting mad and not understanding what magic is being cast upon him and therefore he keeps a wary eye on the magic users, sleeps further away from them, and won't actively engage them in friendly conversation.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

The DM was allowing the Barbarian a save every time our clerics Channeled positive energy for healing. (I think the player wanted to save every time a spellcaster looked at him funny... almost like he wanted an unplayable character).

It seems to boil down to two things: Targeting and Saving. Is the Barbarian the target? And is a save allowed? Applying this test to the situation may be the simplest way to handle it.

I think this is all part of the PC's back-story, it sounds like sometime in his past he was affected adversely by magic and therefore all magic is BAD to him. This would make a good campaign of intra-party role playing I think. The casters trying to show the barbarian that not all magic is bad or to be mistrusted, that it can help and heal him and that it can make the battle swing in favor of his side.

I also agree that targeting and saving are two different things and if the barbarian is playing it so that he hates all magic and wants to save against the funny cross-eyed look the mage gives him, that is up to your group and your DM to house-rule on and come up with something that is palatable to everyone so that you all have fun and so that everyone can survive harder fights.