• COMING SOON! -- Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition! Level up your 5E game! The standalone advanced 5E tabletop RPG adds depth and diversity to the game you love!
log in or register to remove this ad

 

Book of Exalted Deeds - Ravages?

Dr. Confoundo

First Post
The monk in our party took the Vow of Poverty and some other Exalted feats, but the one we are really confused by is the Touch of Golden Ice. Three things in particular are troubling us. (I don't have the book in front of me, so forgive me if I get the details wrong.)

1) Nowhere in the section on Ravages does it list what kind of save you use to resist the effects of the Golden Ice. We are assuming that it is a Fortitude save, like poison, but it would have been nice for it to be noted down.

2) Does Ravage damage from multiple hits stack, or if you are affected once, do you take no more damage from additional attacks? What is the rule for regular poison, because none of us could find that answer either.

3) Our big problem is over who it affects. Normally, Undead are immune to poison, but there is a reference to Evil Undead taking extra damage from ravages. There's also a mention of it bypassing the traditional immunity of outsiders, but it doesn't flat out state either Way.

Any help?
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Dmitr

First Post
Well, they're exactly like poisons, except not poisons, trust on this, no really, we mean it, they're not poisons...


1) fort, yes

2) Poisons and ravages typically inflict ability damage, which is like normal damage in that you can keep taking it from the same or different sources (just like you can take damage from the same sword many times). Incidentally, drain can stack the same way, but is worse. There are a few poisons (and possible ravages, I don't recall off hand) that inflict drain, but not many.

3) They affect all evil creatures, even those immune to poisons.
 

Derulbaskul

Explorer
Dr C,

You are about to enter that place known to DMs as the Place of Sincere Regret.

I would refer you to page 35 of Exalted Deeds. The ability damage done by ravages affects undead and evil elementals unlike normal poisons. A Fortitude save is implied but, to the best of my knowledge, not explicitly stated.

As ability damage, multiple attacks do indeed stack just as any other form of damage stacks whether from repeated blows (hit point damage) or additional doses of poison (ability damage) etc...; it is not a penalty.

In addition to the listed damage, page 35 states that the ravage does ADDITIONAL ability damage based on the Charisma bonus of the victim. Yes, the higher a creature's Charisma, the MORE ability damage it takes.

Personally, I would immediately discuss with the player that you will not be allowing the additional damage based on the victim's Charisma score as this is just a piece of Erroneous Design (BoED: Book of Erroneous Design). This is far too powerful for a feat particularly when it can be gained as bonus feat.

I would also insist on using the listed DC (14) and not the normal formula for poison of half the character's level or hit dice plus Con bonus. And then fudge every saving throw for any opponents that the character tries to infect with "holy urine".

The rest of the VoP works out OK in actual play but this feat is just bad, bad, bad design.
 

Dr. Confoundo

First Post
I'm not the DM in this particular game, but we were all trying to figure out how the darn thing works. He assumed that undead were immune, until I pointed out the 'undead take extra' clause. This is problematic for two reasons: Undead are supposed to be immune to poison, and they are also immune to things which need a Fort save. Has this been definitively okayed by the Sage anywhere?

As for the extra damage based on Charisma, is it the target's Charisma or the attacker's Charisma that gives the bonus? We were reading it as the attacker's, but we may be wrong, and I don't have the book in front of me.
 

Caliban

Rules Monkey
Dr. Confoundo said:
I'm not the DM in this particular game, but we were all trying to figure out how the darn thing works. He assumed that undead were immune, until I pointed out the 'undead take extra' clause. This is problematic for two reasons: Undead are supposed to be immune to poison, and they are also immune to things which need a Fort save. Has this been definitively okayed by the Sage anywhere?

As for the extra damage based on Charisma, is it the target's Charisma or the attacker's Charisma that gives the bonus? We were reading it as the attacker's, but we may be wrong, and I don't have the book in front of me.
Ravages are not poison, although they have nearly identical effects. Poison immunity does you no good against a Ravage.
 

Derulbaskul

Explorer
Dr. Confoundo said:
(snip) As for the extra damage based on Charisma, is it the target's Charisma or the attacker's Charisma that gives the bonus? We were reading it as the attacker's, but we may be wrong, and I don't have the book in front of me.

It's the target's Charisma bonus that "provokes" the extra damage. This is clearly stated on page 35.

As for the need for the Sage's ruling (um, are you sure his rulings really clarify things?), the book clearly states that undead are affected.
 

Scharlata

First Post
Dr. Confoundo said:
[...] trying to figure out how the darn thing works. [...]

Hi!

Even if this does not answer your question in the first place, this is the only entry on diseases (supernatural one like afflictions) in the latest Sage Advice.

Kind regards

Q: How are save DCs for disease attacks calculated?
Judging from the Monster Manual, disease DCs would seem
to be based on Constitution. But that can’t be correct, can
it? The higher the Constitution score the healthier the
monster, right?


A: When a monster has a disease special attack, the save DC
for that disease is 10 plus + 1/2 the creature’s Hit Dice plus the
creature’s Constitution modifier.
As a general rule, any special attack that comes from the
attacker’s body uses Constitution to determine the save DC. In
the case of a mundane disease that functions as a special attack,
healthier creatures carry a more virulent strain. For example,
Table 8–2 in the Dungeon Master’s Guide lists a DC of 12 for
filth fever. Nevertheless, it requires only a DC 11 Fortitude
save to avoid contracting filth fever from a dire rat’s bite, while
an otyugh’s bite causes the same disease on a failed DC 14
save.
Special attacks that involve supernatural diseases often use
Constitution to determine the save DC as well. In some cases
the creature or the disease might warrant using a different
ability score. A mummy’s mummy rot, for example, uses
Charisma instead of Constitution because undead creatures lack
Constitution scores.
When a character is exposed to a disease in some manner
other than a monster’s special attack, use the save DC listed on
Table 8–2. For example, if a character steps on a rusty nail and
is exposed to filth fever, the save DC is 12.
 

Li Shenron

Legend
Caliban said:
Ravages are not poison, although they have nearly identical effects. Poison immunity does you no good against a Ravage.

Exactly... otherwise they would be called poisons :p

OTOH the "Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects or is harmless)" could make some concern... I guess that ravages don't work on objects and definitely are not harmless. Maybe the BoED says anything about this fact?
 

Dr. Confoundo

First Post
Derulbaskul said:
As for the need for the Sage's ruling (um, are you sure his rulings really clarify things?), the book clearly states that undead are affected.

Unfortunately, it doesn't. It implies, in a roundabout way, and not definitively. If it was as clear cut as you make it out, we wouldn't be having this discussion. ;)
 

Sejs

First Post
Remove Touch of Golden Ice.


Seriously. VoP, fine. Other exalted feats, fine. Touch of Golden Ice on a VoP monk, not fine.


In my experience, that's the one feat that tends to be really Bad News Bears.



(...Walter Matthau)
 

krazykid

First Post
We are also have a monk with VoP & golden ice in the party.
What works for us is:

1) DC 14 for save that will not scale as levels increase
2) We do not allow the effect to stack

This makes the feat workable - at low levels it is powerful but acceptable and now the monk has hit 4th things are normalising. In a few levels it will be a distant memory in terms of effectiveness.
 

Desmien

First Post
Dr C,

You are about to enter that place known to DMs as the Place of Sincere Regret.

I would refer you to page 35 of Exalted Deeds. The ability damage done by ravages affects undead and evil elementals unlike normal poisons. A Fortitude save is implied but, to the best of my knowledge, not explicitly stated.

As ability damage, multiple attacks do indeed stack just as any other form of damage stacks whether from repeated blows (hit point damage) or additional doses of poison (ability damage) etc...; it is not a penalty.

In addition to the listed damage, page 35 states that the ravage does ADDITIONAL ability damage based on the Charisma bonus of the victim. Yes, the higher a creature's Charisma, the MORE ability damage it takes.

Personally, I would immediately discuss with the player that you will not be allowing the additional damage based on the victim's Charisma score as this is just a piece of Erroneous Design (BoED: Book of Erroneous Design). This is far too powerful for a feat particularly when it can be gained as bonus feat.

I would also insist on using the listed DC (14) and not the normal formula for poison of half the character's level or hit dice plus Con bonus. And then fudge every saving throw for any opponents that the character tries to infect with "holy urine".

The rest of the VoP works out OK in actual play but this feat is just bad, bad, bad design.
Honestly I think it would be situational. For instance if the target is a zombie or something that would have very low charisma. The additional damage would be minimal. Also in part the DM would make the charisma attribute of some enemy NPC and few would have a high charisma while being evil. Usually a bard or sorcerer since you're not going to be coming across many paladins who are susceptible to the affect
 

dave2008

Legend
Honestly I think it would be situational. For instance if the target is a zombie or something that would have very low charisma. The additional damage would be minimal. Also in part the DM would make the charisma attribute of some enemy NPC and few would have a high charisma while being evil. Usually a bard or sorcerer since you're not going to be coming across many paladins who are susceptible to the affect
Just so that you are aware - you responded to a post that was 17 years old.
 


Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top