Some questions about friendly spells and SR

[Stalker0]

My character may soon recieve SR (he's a monk) and so I realize I'm not quite sure how it works for friendly spells like healing.

Now, I know you can lower your SR as a standard action, but of course that leaves you vulnerable. But I thought you could willingly recieve a friendly spell automatically. Am I off base, something I'm missing, etc.

 

[Vuron]

My character may soon recieve SR (he's a monk) and so I realize I'm not quite sure how it works for friendly spells like healing.

Now, I know you can lower your SR as a standard action, but of course that leaves you vulnerable. But I thought you could willingly recieve a friendly spell automatically. Am I off base, something I'm missing, etc.

Unfortunately no, while you can choice to lower your SR voluntary to recieve the benefits of a harmless spell it requires a standard action and your SR stays down until your next turn.

The result being that unless the character keeps spending standard actions to keep SR down in combat healing is somewhat problematic and opens the player up to hostile spells at least temporarily.

Personally I think the drop resistance action should be made a free or swift action as it's a bit to devastating to PCs with innate SR.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Agreed with Vuron, but note that it's a fairly common house rule (I think) to allow harmless spells to bypass SR. Personally, I think it would be okay to just remove SR and saves from all harmless spells (with special caveats for harmless spells that are not harmless to some creatures, like cure light wounds and undead). YMMV.

 

[Vuron]

Agreed with Vuron, but note that it's a fairly common house rule (I think) to allow harmless spells to bypass SR. Personally, I think it would be okay to just remove SR and saves from all harmless spells (with special caveats for harmless spells that are not harmless to some creatures, like cure light wounds and undead). YMMV.

I think that would definitely be a fair houserule for most campaigns. I was never really a fan of SR negatively impacting healing spells.

 

[DreamChaser]

I disagree on this actually.

SR can be one of two things at mid-to-high levels:

A minor factor that rarely comes into play (SR 5 to 15).

A significant protection (15+) that will save you from the spells and SLA of a vast number of mid-to-high level creatures. Thus, you will take less damage. Thus, you will need healing less.

The down side: you cannot have a cleric heal you easily in combat. Especially for a monk, this shouldn't be a problem: they have Wholeness of Body which can take care of emergencies.

Plus, I don't think a potion would apply to SR (though I could be wrong about this and a spell completion or spell trigger item of course would).

DC

 

[Pyrex]

Personally I think the drop resistance action should be made a free or swift action as it's a bit to devastating to PCs with innate SR.

This isn't devastating, it's balancing.

Significant SR scores are an amazingly powerful defense, this keeps it fair.

 

[Pyrex]

I
Plus, I don't think a potion would apply to SR (though I could be wrong about this and a spell completion or spell trigger item of course would).

That's correct. You never have to make an SR check for spells you cast. Potions consider the drinker to be the caster, ergo the potion doesn't have to defeat your SR.

 

[Vuron]

This isn't devastating, it's balancing.

Significant SR scores are an amazingly powerful defense, this keeps it fair.

SR is of significant power at higher levels but the neccesity of using standard actions to lower SR to recieve beneficial spells like buffs and healing in combat is perhaps a bit much of a cost.

At 13th level (which is where the monk gets SR as an innate ability) this means that during the round in which the monk wants to recieve healing (without having a caster check) he is effectively doing nothing other than a move equivalent action.

Considering the number of characters which are likely to have SR providing magic items or spells on them at these levels this largely removes the luxury of in combat healing (except from healers to themselves). This is a) a significant paradigm shift and b) a significant book-keeping challenge for DMs. This is a good fix if SR is significantly overpowered but based on the ability to counteract SR through caster level boosts (spell penetration greater spell penetration etc) or to cast powerful spells that don't offer SR (forcecage etc) I'm not sure this is a good balance.

Of course based on your campaign YMMV but I venture to say that at least in a good number of games the houserules suggested would probably work pretty well.

 

[Bad Paper]

I love the "must spend standard action to lower SR" rule; it keeps drow in line. And my players need that right now, so I'm here for them.

...and it also keeps the party cleric from giving spell resistance to those who need it most.

 

[Infiniti2000]

For those who already think clerics are high-powered, using the RAW just gives clerics that much more benefit. After all, we're mainly talking about healing spells here, so the cleric is the one LEAST to worry about the negative effects of SR.

By not adopting that house rule, IMO, you are basically only 'hurting' non-clerics (or I suppose non-self-healers).

A milder house rule would be just that SR doesn't apply on harmless cure/heal spells (or on inflict spells for undead). In the long run this will benefit the PCs more than the bad guys.