Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hvg3akaek" data-source="post: 5218087" data-attributes="member: 71190">mneme: One thing I cannot grasp from your take on this rule is as follows:A "Fire and Cold" power, by your ruling, would be weaker than a "Fire" or a "Cold" power.A simple "Fire" or "Cold" power would be effective against anyone not immune to Fire or Cold, whereas one that does both damage types would now not be effetive against either group.But, as they are stated, multiple damage type powers are meant to me more potent than single damage type powers.Not only is there a <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/feat.aspx?id=1169" target="_blank">feat</a> that can add another type of damage to your powers, but tehy had to change how such items as a "flaming dagger" worked, to limit the potential abuse of said items.  And then there's the clerical power of <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/power.aspx?id=61" target="_blank">Astral Storm</a>, which, by your reasoning, has to be an incredibly sucky power... anyone immune to Cold, Fire, Lightning, or Thunder ignores it all?  Wow, what an underwhelming power...But - if the rules are meant to support the mechanics, if additional damage types is meant to make things more potent (as, with the resistance rules, they are), then it would mean that immunities had to be in the same boat.  Multiple damage-type powers have multiple damage types so they can get around those resistances and those immunities.  Sure, the fire elemental is immune to fire, but this is fire *and* lightning - it still damages him!Anything else, and the powers and feats seem most crazy!</blockquote>

Verification