Holy Liberator Immunity question

[Cyraneth]

Including bless and aid? How ridiculous.

Perhaps the intention is that the paladin is immune to such effects but can switch it off _as if_ it were SR. Not that there would be any reason to do so in the paladin's case, but for the HL it's useful.

Well, I'd rule (or at least, house rule) that immunity only blocks detrimental effects. Whatever is considered "detrimental" would be up to the character/creature with the immunity at any given time.

- Cyraneth

 

[hong]

And what about a minotaur's immunity to maze effects? That is most certainly a "magic immunity" or would be "suitable" as a magic immunity, but the maze spell isn't subject to spell resistance... So, unbeatable spell resistance wouldn't really be any help to a minotaur, huh?

There are many bits in 3E where the text from previous editions has been copied and pasted in, and unexpected interactions with the new rules have resulted. See prot. evil, for example.

 

[Stalker0]

Cyraneth, could you please provide me with one bit of information. Are there any charms or compulsion effects that you know of that aren't spells?

the bards' suggestion is spell-like, so it doens't count. Because if there aren't any, then this whole argument is moot.

 

[Cyraneth]

Cyraneth, could you please provide me with one bit of information. Are there any charms or compulsion effects that you know of that aren't spells?

the bards' suggestion is spell-like, so it doens't count. Because if there aren't any, then this whole argument is moot.

Well, there are plenty. The harpy's captivating song ability is a supernatural charm ability, and the vampire's domination is a supernatural compulsion effect... If you gave me some more time, I might be able to dig up some more...

- Cyraneth

 

[Stalker0]

Hmm, well in the light of the examples Cyraneth gave, I'll have to side with him on this one.

The immunity has to be more then just unbeatable spell resistance if its going to counter effects that aren't spell-like or spells. I'd say its a strict immunity.

In that context, then ANY compulsion or charm effect he is immune to...even the good ones. A fire elemental can't say, oh wait, I'm not immune to fire right now.

While spell resistance is a special case that can be lowered if desired, this immunity is a seperate issue from that and unless there's a book rule that I don't know about, then it can't be waved away.

 

[hong]

Hmm, well in the light of the examples Cyraneth gave, I'll have to side with him on this one.

The immunity has to be more then just unbeatable spell resistance if its going to counter effects that aren't spell-like or spells. I'd say its a strict immunity.

In that context, then ANY compulsion or charm effect he is immune to...even the good ones. A fire elemental can't say, oh wait, I'm not immune to fire right now.

While spell resistance is a special case that can be lowered if desired, this immunity is a seperate issue from that and unless there's a book rule that I don't know about, then it can't be waved away.

The thing is that 3E is generally good at catching these "obvious" loopholes, where what would normally be a bad option could be useful. Eg you don't _have_ to take every attack in a full attack action; you have the option of automatically failing a save (and similarly you can lower your SR); you can fill higher-level spell slots with lower-level ones; etc. Thus I find it hard to believe that a character shouldn't be able to lower their immunity in a situation where it's beneficial.

 

[Krafen]

Isn't that basically what I said?

I was just clarifying that you cannot lower your SR to receive a beneficial spell and then raise it again in the same round to protect yourself from hostile spells.

 

[Cyraneth]

I was just clarifying that you cannot lower your SR to receive a beneficial spell and then raise it again in the same round to protect yourself from hostile spells.

And that is why we are discussing whether immunity is spell resistance or not...

- Cyraneth

 

[Kai Lord]

Sure, but the Holy Liberator's description (p. 57-60 in DotF) states that the immunity protects against all effects, not just spells. - Being immune to charm and compulsion spells is something else entirely, agreed.

Correct. The text is quite clear in that it is not limited to magical effects. It states the HL is immune to charm and compulsion effects, and that his mind is his own. Period. It doesn't matter if the effect is Extraodinary or not. I'd say that the "his mind is his own" bit indicates that if he so chose, he could allow someone to bless him.

 

[Stalker0]

I think the rule lawyer approach has got to be, is there any mention of being able to lower immunites in any of the books?

We know about spell resistance, but I think most people are convinced this immunity isn't simply a form of spell resistance, its something else.

As far as I can tell, there is no such rule. And while I agree that for the most part, 3e rules usually allow loopholes to have your cake and eat it too in cases like this, but I can't see any for this one.