Fire/Cold Subtype confusion - redesign indecision?

Quasqueton

First Post
This post, on its face, is a rules question. But its underlying confusion may be a worrisome insight into the thinking/procedure of the D&D3.5 redesigners.


Regarding the cold and fire "subtype modifiers". . .

Savage Species mentions (on page 143) "A creature may have . . . one elemental subtype, one energy subtype . . .". What is the difference?

The fire elemental is typed as: "Elemental (Fire)"

The fire giant is typed as: "Giant (Fire)"

The salamander is typed as: "Outsider (Fire)"

Is there supposed to be a difference between these subtypes?



Monster Manual says of the fire subtype: "A fire creature is immune to fire damage. It takes double damage from cold unless a saving throw for half damage is allowed, in which case it takes half damage on a successful and double damage on a failure."

The errata update of 3-18-03 makes no change to this.


Savage Species says of the fire subtype: "A [fire creature] is immune to fire damage and takes a -10 penalty on saves against cold attacks. If a cold attack does not allow a saving throw, the creature takes double damage instead."


Fiend Folio says of the fire subtype: "A creature with the fire subtype is immune to fire damage. It takes half again as much (+50%) damage as normal from cold, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed, or if the save is a success or failure."

Note that there is only two months between the printing of SS and FF. Both are claimed to be 3.5 compliant, yes?


You know, this kind of makes me mad and worried about 3.5. If the redesigners can't make up their mind, or are unsure about the rule, they shouldn't go changing it in official books. They should be letting the original rule stand until they are finished thinking on it and playtesting it. If something is not absolutely broken they shouldn't go tweaking it in each new publication. That just confuses the otherwise playable rule.

Quasqueton
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


Oh, but the above rules are "finished". Finished twice it seems. They are officially published in recent books.

But these finished rules are unexplained for my first question, and contradictory in my second.

I *am* asking a rules question(s) here; not just complaining.

Quasqueton
 


I'd go with the FF version because it's the most recent, but it's really just guesswork until 3.5 comes out. Technically, using anything besides the original rule until the release of 3.5 is just using supplementary information, and isn't considered "official" anyway.

If you want to use the official (3.0) rule, stick with the original.
If you want to use supplementary rules, pick the one that works best for your campaign.
If you want to use the official (3.5) rule, I'd guess that it'll be the version from FF, but like I said... it's just a guess.

Hope that helps.
 

Hope the stick with FF rule

Of the three versions of vulnerability to opposing element for the fire and cold subtypes, I prefer the Fiend Folio version, so I hope that's the one they'll make "official" with 3.5. It was confusing to see a different rule in FF than in Savage Species, but I was pleased to see the different rule, since Fiend Folio is more recent and it suggests to me they have abandoned the rule in Savage Species for these subtypes, which I didn't like since it meant elemental attacks with no save got no benefit against the opposing subtype.
 

Savage Species mentions (on page 143) "A creature may have . . . one elemental subtype, one energy subtype . . .". What is the difference?

Elementals, Mephits, Dragons etc have Elemental subtypes : Fire, Earth, Air, Water.

Some Giants have Energy subtypes : Fire, Cold. Certain creatures possibly should have Energy subtypes but don't - I would have expected an Arrowhawk, for example, to have an [Electricity] subtype.

Without flicking through a Monster Manual, I can't think of any creatures off-hand who have Electricity, Sonic, or Acid subtypes.

-Hyp.
 

Re: Hope the stick with FF rule

zoroaster100 said:
it suggests to me they have abandoned the rule in Savage Species for these subtypes, which I didn't like since it meant elemental attacks with no save got no benefit against the opposing subtype.
"If a cold attack does not allow a saving throw, the creature takes double damage instead." (for a fire creature)

I like the FF version simply because its the easiest to remember - +50% damage regardless of save.
 

Re: Re: Hope the stick with FF rule

Spatula said:
"If a cold attack does not allow a saving throw, the creature takes double damage instead." (for a fire creature)

I like the FF version simply because its the easiest to remember - +50% damage regardless of save.

Conversely, I like the SS version because its easier to adjudicate.
A cold creature has a -10 save versus Fireball and takes double fire damage versus a FlamingSword +1
 

I noticed this too... I think I like the SS version best, but I haven't used any of them in play yet, so my opinion is based on looking at it on paper.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top