Energy Vulnerabilty Spell vs. Immunity

[TarionzCousin]

Does the spell "Energy Vulnerability" from the PHB2 (page 112) temporarily affect a creature immune to the type of energy specified by the spellcaster?

Example : Energy Vulnerability (fire) vs. a Red Dragon. Assume the dragon is affected--loses the SR roll and fails its save. Does the dragon now take +50% damage from fire?

Edit: added quote below.

The affected creatures gain vulnerability to that energy type (they take +50% damage from that energy even on a successful save).

 

[FEADIN]

I think it's written that this spell as no effect on a creature immune to the energy?
If not, the red dragon takes 50% more damage from an energy he is immute to....so he takes nothing.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I think it's written that this spell as no effect on a creature immune to the energy?
If not, the red dragon takes 50% more damage from an energy he is immute to....so he takes nothing.

No, nothing like that is written. As written, it appears to affect all creatures within a ten-foot burst that fail their save/SR.

 

[Vorput]

If not, the red dragon takes 50% more damage from an energy he is immute to....so he takes nothing.

Think Feadin is right- like trying to deal Str damage to a wraith.

 

[frankthedm]

Yep. 50% more than zero is still zero.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I'd read it as an immune creature taking 50% of the regular spell damage. Then again, my group allows the mass resist energy and energy immunity spells, so the evokers (me, to be precise ^_^) need all the help they can get!

 

[Rabelais]

There's probably a null error [Fire=false] joke in there somewhere too.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Yep. 50% more than zero is still zero.

So, if I interpret it this way, the target creature becomes both Immune and Vulnerable, correct? So the immunity trumps the vulnerability.

However, it's also easy to interpret it as "the immune creature becomes vulnerable," in which case it suffers the +50% damage penalty.

I added the relevant text from the PHB2 to my original post, fyi. Copied below:

The affected creatures gain vulnerability to that energy type (they take +50% damage from that energy even on a successful save).

 

[Rystil Arden]

It seems pretty obvious that Immunity + Vulnerability == 0 Damage. Consider the White Dragon who casts Energy Immunity: Fire. Immune, right?

Let's look at it mathematically. There's an order of operations here, but we'll assume the player gets to choose whichever one is better. Our choices are:

(Damage * 1.5) * 0

OR

(Damage * 0) * 1.5

Either way, 0 damage.

 

[frankthedm]

So, if I interpret it this way, the target creature becomes both Immune and Vulnerable, correct? So the immunity trumps the vulnerability.

However, it's also easy to interpret it as "the immune creature becomes vulnerable," in which case it suffers the +50% damage penalty.

I added the relevant text from the PHB2 to my original post, fyi. Copied below:

So? Are you trying to claim the spell gets around the immunity? The spell no more does that than it gets around any energy resistance the target has.