Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jackinthegreen" data-source="post: 5741032" data-attributes="member: 6678119">On the extraneous bit, WotC does indeed add a lot of technically unnecessary information to its texts.&nbsp; It's known as &quot;fluff.&quot;&nbsp; The fluff of this argument seems to hinge partially on the fact that there was text written stating that a poison could be made specifically for oozes.&nbsp; Such text seems to be for the benefit of DMs as a reminder of &quot;hey, you can make your own rules.&quot;&nbsp; It is nothing more, and certainly not an example to set examples by.WotC is also not consistent throughout its content, even within the same book.&nbsp; Trying to make something consistent of it, while admirable, falls to house rules and is thus beyond the scope of discussing the meaning of what is actually published.&nbsp; I would not recommend applying the disease examples to poison because of this.The druid's venom immunity and an ooze's immunity to poison are technically different abilities with pretty much the same result.&nbsp; Since we're talking about the semantics of words, note how the ooze trait description simply says &quot;immunity to poison&quot; and then adds a caveat later while the druid's venom immunity says &quot;At 9th level, a druid gains immunity to all poisons&quot; and leaves it at that.&nbsp; To quote another class, the Contemplative: &quot;At 5th level, a contemplative becomes immune to poisons of all kinds.&quot;&nbsp; Both classes' abilities leave no room for interpretation.&nbsp; They say &quot;immunity to all poisons&quot; and &quot;immune to poisons of all kinds.&quot;&nbsp; Immunity to all poisons means immunity to all poisons, and unless there is a published poison specifically stating it circumvents these abilities, it is quite clear that a 9th level druid is flat-out immune to all poisons.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jackinthegreen, post: 5741032, member: 6678119"] On the extraneous bit, WotC does indeed add a lot of technically unnecessary information to its texts. It's known as "fluff." The fluff of this argument seems to hinge partially on the fact that there was text written stating that a poison could be made specifically for oozes. Such text seems to be for the benefit of DMs as a reminder of "hey, you can make your own rules." It is nothing more, and certainly not an example to set examples by. WotC is also not consistent throughout its content, even within the same book. Trying to make something consistent of it, while admirable, falls to house rules and is thus beyond the scope of discussing the meaning of what is actually published. I would not recommend applying the disease examples to poison because of this. The druid's venom immunity and an ooze's immunity to poison are technically different abilities with pretty much the same result. Since we're talking about the semantics of words, note how the ooze trait description simply says "immunity to poison" and then adds a caveat later while the druid's venom immunity says "At 9th level, a druid gains immunity to all poisons" and leaves it at that. To quote another class, the Contemplative: "At 5th level, a contemplative becomes immune to poisons of all kinds." Both classes' abilities leave no room for interpretation. They say "immunity to all poisons" and "immune to poisons of all kinds." Immunity to all poisons means immunity to all poisons, and unless there is a published poison specifically stating it circumvents these abilities, it is quite clear that a 9th level druid is flat-out immune to all poisons. [/QUOTE]

Verification