Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How vulnerable are familiars?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Caliban" data-source="post: 359403" data-attributes="member: 284"><p>There is a rule that says your equipment is undamaged unless you roll a 1 on your saving throw. </p><p></p><p>Are you suggesting that there is a rule that says a fireball will burn whatever is inside your equipment without touching the container itself? </p><p></p><p>Due to the rule about equipment remaining undamaged, you have to choose between fireballs that phase through your equipment to damage things inside them, or having familiars being protected by a thin layer of clothe just because it is on your body. </p><p></p><p>I favor having familiars being somewhat protected. It doesn't slow down the game, and familiars are vulnerable enough as it is. (In my opinion.)</p><p></p><p>Either ruling is illogical, you just have to pick which flavor of illogic you find more acceptable. I have offered my opinion, you have chosen to ridicule that and force your opinion on me. </p><p></p><p>No thanks KD. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>*shrug* And you are being smug, condescending, and superior. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Total cover doesn't give an AC bonus or a Reflex bonus.</p><p></p><p>The rules state that if you have Total cover you cannot be targeted, and cannot be damaged unless that cover is breached. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>*shrug* I disagree. You can be smug about it you want, but that is basically what it comes down to. </p><p></p><p>I've laid out the logic for my position, and you have done nothing to actually refute it. You have just made personal attacks. If that's how you want to handle it, that's your choice. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In your opinion. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If that's what I said, you would be correct. Now please stop putting words in my mouth. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The rules don't really cover different effects from bludgeoning or piercing damage, except in regard to certain creatures. By the rules, you would have to damage the sack and create a small hole before I would take any damage. Obviously that is not the way it works in real life, in all instances. </p><p></p><p>Certain types of materials are resistant to certain types of damage, and flexible materials will transmit most blunt damage through them, while remaining relatively unharmed. </p><p></p><p>The rules don't cover this, but then there are many grey areas the rules don't fully cover, or choose to abstract to the point where they don't really match the real world anymore. This is one of them.</p><p></p><p>However, the rules do state that your equipment is not damaged by area effects or magical effects unless you roll a 1 on your save. It's not a logical rule, it's a game play rule. But that is how things work in the D&D universe. Logically, I believe that would have the natural consequence of sparing anything inside your equipement from being damaged as well.</p><p></p><p>You do not. You think that is silly, and that people who believe that should be ridiculed and laughed at (as evidenced by your previous post). </p><p></p><p>However, your position is equally silly and illogical. </p><p></p><p>Using your interpretation, Acid and Fire damage would pass through clothing and equipment, and burn anything inside, yet leaving your clothing and equipment unharmed. </p><p></p><p>And a silly extreme example for your interpretation: </p><p></p><p>If things contained in your equipment are completely vulnerable to magical attacks that you suffer, then you should be able to delouse yourself and all your equipment with a single Flaming Sphere. </p><p></p><p>All the little mites, ticks, lice, and even smaller creatures that live on your body would be decimated by even 1st level burning hands spell. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I try respect your opinion, even when I disagree with it. I'm willing to shrug my shoulders and accept that we handle some things differently. You play your way and I play mine. </p><p></p><p>I do not laugh at you when I disagree with your opinion. It is sad that you do not choose to return that courtesy. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is unfortunate that you cannot accept a differing point of view, and instead choose to act in this fashion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Caliban, post: 359403, member: 284"] There is a rule that says your equipment is undamaged unless you roll a 1 on your saving throw. Are you suggesting that there is a rule that says a fireball will burn whatever is inside your equipment without touching the container itself? Due to the rule about equipment remaining undamaged, you have to choose between fireballs that phase through your equipment to damage things inside them, or having familiars being protected by a thin layer of clothe just because it is on your body. I favor having familiars being somewhat protected. It doesn't slow down the game, and familiars are vulnerable enough as it is. (In my opinion.) Either ruling is illogical, you just have to pick which flavor of illogic you find more acceptable. I have offered my opinion, you have chosen to ridicule that and force your opinion on me. No thanks KD. [b][/b] *shrug* And you are being smug, condescending, and superior. [b][/b] Total cover doesn't give an AC bonus or a Reflex bonus. The rules state that if you have Total cover you cannot be targeted, and cannot be damaged unless that cover is breached. [b][/b] *shrug* I disagree. You can be smug about it you want, but that is basically what it comes down to. I've laid out the logic for my position, and you have done nothing to actually refute it. You have just made personal attacks. If that's how you want to handle it, that's your choice. [b][/b] In your opinion. [b][/b] If that's what I said, you would be correct. Now please stop putting words in my mouth. [b][/b] The rules don't really cover different effects from bludgeoning or piercing damage, except in regard to certain creatures. By the rules, you would have to damage the sack and create a small hole before I would take any damage. Obviously that is not the way it works in real life, in all instances. Certain types of materials are resistant to certain types of damage, and flexible materials will transmit most blunt damage through them, while remaining relatively unharmed. The rules don't cover this, but then there are many grey areas the rules don't fully cover, or choose to abstract to the point where they don't really match the real world anymore. This is one of them. However, the rules do state that your equipment is not damaged by area effects or magical effects unless you roll a 1 on your save. It's not a logical rule, it's a game play rule. But that is how things work in the D&D universe. Logically, I believe that would have the natural consequence of sparing anything inside your equipement from being damaged as well. You do not. You think that is silly, and that people who believe that should be ridiculed and laughed at (as evidenced by your previous post). However, your position is equally silly and illogical. Using your interpretation, Acid and Fire damage would pass through clothing and equipment, and burn anything inside, yet leaving your clothing and equipment unharmed. And a silly extreme example for your interpretation: If things contained in your equipment are completely vulnerable to magical attacks that you suffer, then you should be able to delouse yourself and all your equipment with a single Flaming Sphere. All the little mites, ticks, lice, and even smaller creatures that live on your body would be decimated by even 1st level burning hands spell. [b][/b] I try respect your opinion, even when I disagree with it. I'm willing to shrug my shoulders and accept that we handle some things differently. You play your way and I play mine. I do not laugh at you when I disagree with your opinion. It is sad that you do not choose to return that courtesy. [b][/B] It is unfortunate that you cannot accept a differing point of view, and instead choose to act in this fashion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How vulnerable are familiars?
Top