Evasion for Fortitude Saves?

[Cloudgatherer]

There are a few spells and effects that do pure damage and a fotitude save can be made for half. Anyone play with the idea of making an "evasion-like" ability for fortitude saves? Share your thoughts or opinions!

 

[Xarlen]

There are very few spells that do that. I don't think it'd be a worthwhile class ability.

 

[Thanee]

Defenders of the Faith - Templar PrC - Mettle

Bye
Thanee

 

[Crothian]

Defenders of the Faith - Templar PrC - Mettle

Bye
Thanee

Also note that that one ability applies also to will saves as well.

 

[kreynolds]

There are a few spells and effects that do pure damage and a fotitude save can be made for half. Anyone play with the idea of making an "evasion-like" ability for fortitude saves? Share your thoughts or opinions!

That's a tough question to answer. The nice thing about ray spells, such as Disintegrate, is that even on a successful save, the target still takes 6d6 points of damage and the damage isn't reduced.

The Templar's ability would allow them to suffer only half damage, but I don't particularly like the idea of combining that ability with evasion. The idea of evasion is that you can dodge/twist/duck/whatever, thus avoid the spell and possibly take very little damage, if any at all. However, rays don't work like that. When a ray hits, it hits. There really isn't any such thing as glancing blow from a ray, which is why they require Fortitude saves most of the time.

As a PrC ability, I guess it wouldn't be too bad. Perhaps something gained at epic level would be appropriate. It would definately be comparable to some of the material that's gonna be in there.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Evasion for Fortitude Saves?

That's a tough question to answer. The nice thing about ray spells, such as Disintegrate, is that even on a successful save, the target still takes 6d6 points of damage and the damage isn't reduced.

Nah. The nice thing about disintegrate is that if someone fails their save, THEY DIE. That's the point of using disintegrate. The damage taken on a successful save is just gravy.

The Templar's ability would allow them to suffer only half damage, but I don't particularly like the idea of combining that ability with evasion.

Not quite. Mettle means that if you make your save, the spell doesn't affect you at all. Compared to the benefit of not dying, this isn't really that major a bonus compared to normal.

I wouldn't have any problems with making Mettle a feat. There aren't that many spells with Fort/Will saves that have partial effects on a failed save. Mostly they either work or don't work.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Evasion for Fortitude Saves?

Nah. The nice thing about disintegrate is that if someone fails their save, THEY DIE.

Well...ok. That is a good point.

Not quite. Mettle means that if you make your save, the spell doesn't affect you at all.

Not quite, and incorrect in the case of disintegrate. It depends on the spell. Take a look...and note my empahsis in red...

Mettle (Su): A templar's special blessing allows her to shrug off magical effects that would otherwise harm her. If a templar makes a successful Will or Fortitude saving throw that would normally reduce the spell's effect, she suffers no effect from the spell at all. Only those spells with a Saving Throw entry of "Will partial," "Fortitude half," or similar entries can be negated through this ability.

So, Mettle wouldn't help a Templar at all against Disintegrate, as a successful save simply means you don't die, like you said. But disintegrate doesn't have either "Will partial" or "Fortitude half" as part of the spell. If you make your save against disintegrate, you simply take 6d6 points of damage, and there's no save or reducing that with Mettle or Evasion.

I wouldn't have any problems with making Mettle a feat. There aren't that many spells with Fort/Will saves that have partial effects on a failed save. Mostly they either work or don't work.

Unfortunately for me, I have an NPC spellcaster that is quite fond of direct damage ray spells, and many of those spells allow a Fort save for half damage, so a Templar would be a real challenge for him. Though this is my problem, and I wouldn't be against Mettle simply because of that.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Evasion for Fortitude Saves?

So, Mettle wouldn't help a Templar at all against Disintegrate, as a successful save simply means you don't die, like you said. But disintegrate doesn't have either "Will partial" or "Fortitude half" as part of the spell. If you make your save against disintegrate, you simply take 6d6 points of damage, and there's no save or reducing that with Mettle or Evasion.

Disintegrate has a save of "Fortitude partial". Mettle protects against spells that do "Will half", "Fortitude half" and _similar_ effects. If a spell does half damage on a successful save, that's a reduced effect as a result of the save. Disintegrate doesn't kill you on a successful save, it has a reduced effect as a result of the save. The intent is pretty clear, IMO.

Besides which, there just aren't that many spells that do precisely half damage on a successful Will/Fort save (inflict X wounds and horrid wilting being the ones that spring to mind), and Mettle wouldn't be worth it if it was limited this way.

 

[Cloudgatherer]

Well I was not aware of the Mettle ability. That sounds pretty similar to what I was thinking. I had imagined an ability that only dealt with damage dealing spells (as opposed to save or take damage spells). Perhaps that version is a little on the weak side, I liked the Mettle description.

Any thoughts on turning Mettle, all or partially, into a feat or feats? (As opposed to a class ability)

 

[Thanee]

Well, from a balance point of view, a Mettle feat would be ok, since Mettle is like 10 times weaker compared to Evasion. One of the few spells it is really useful against, would be Horrid Wilting.

Or make it a magic item like Ring of Evasion.

Bye
Thanee