PookaWitch's page

I'm hoping that I can get some input on a topic that is baffling both myself and my DM.

I'm playing a paladin of Shelyn who is helping to eradicate an evil temple. The problem we're facing is that there are evil works of art of evil deities. So far for the valuable unholy symbols she has been going by the part of the code that says you may destroy art if more art arises from it by having the symbols melted down to be used by an artist.

But they encountered a large statue to a very evil deity in an evil temple. We're both stumped on what she should do she's been praying for advice and we're hoping for some insight.

Can paladins of Sheylyn destroy evil art when it's not to be used for more art? There is another paladin in the group she's been talking this over with and the topic has come up that if they leave the statue it may be a source of more inspiration for other evil worshippers. It's too large to carry out all of the stone to use for other artists to make different statues. It also does have a large emerald she's thinking could be used, but that does nothing about the statue itself.

I babbled on, but we've hit a philosophical problem. Could I please get some input that may help?

I'm facing a rules problem/question with the Winter Witch prestige class.

The WW ability.
Unearthly Cold (Su): At 8th level, a winter witch’s spells,
spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities that deal cold
damage become horrendously cold. Half the cold damage
caused by these effects comes from an otherworldly
power and is not subject to being reduced by resistance or
immunity to cold-based attacks.

The monster having Cold Immunity

Immunity (Ex or Su)
A creature with immunities takes no damage from listed sources. Immunities can also apply to afflictions, conditions, spells (based on school, level, or save type), and other effects. A creature that is immune does not suffer from these effects, or any secondary effects that are triggered due to an immune effect.

Format: Immune acid, fire, paralysis; Location: Defensive Abilities.

or

Energy Immunity and Vulnerability
A creature with energy immunity never takes damage from that energy type. Vulnerability means the creature takes half again as much (+50%) damage as normal from that energy type, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed or if the save is a success or failure.

So the question we're debating here, is that I have a winter witch character with snowcasting from Frostburn. She tried to make a spell that does no damage, just effects (suffocation) on frost giants as a cold spell. The DM ruled that because immunity says that they are immune to all spells with the cold descriptor, they would be immune to any spell that she made 'cold', even if it did no damage. (snowcasting basically just gives any spell the cold descriptor, which gives her a CL bonus due to her prestige class) My side of the debate is that they are just immune to cold DAMAGE, not side effects from cold spells, and unearthly cold should probably get past that for effects anyhow. (ie. boreal wind is a stronger, cold gust of wind. Even without Unearthly Cold they would just be immune to the cold damage it caused, but not immune to the wind pushing effects.)

Also, technically, by that logic Unearthly Cold would be a total waste since any spell with the cold descriptor they would be totally immune to anyhow and it wouldn't even do damage in the first place, so half of the damage not being cold would be a moot point.

This isn't a heated, angry debate, just one where we're both confused and don't really know what the answer is. It happened a couple of days ago in our game and we need to figure this out before we start again. His ruling for that day was that he let me re-choose my action saying how the giants just would laugh off the mass suffocation spell since it now had a cold descriptor (so I chose to cast it normally instead).

Hi, I've been avidly reading and looking over these forums for many years now, but finally am posting a question that hopefully I can get some help with.

Basically, the bit of a back-story, is that my home campaign has been the same setting/worlds/cross-overs for over 20 years now. We love Pathfinder and have been translating older characters into it for years now.

It's mostly just my husband and myself, but we GM back and forth, so a house rule is that we both need to agree on any adjustments/changes. We have a base rule of 'Character First' meaning that character concept/history/fun should come before rules... so we're pretty easy going about what is played and how characters are created.

So I'm currently wanting to translate a character I've had for over a decade. Her class was the Green Ronin Witch, and compared to the PF witch it falls fairly short. Normally I would just directly translate her over, but the GR witch has spontaneous casting (with a familiar, bonus feats, etc... nearly like a wizard) but had spontaneous casting (with the list of spells known, like a sorcerer/oracle)... with a spell list that was pretty comparable to the PF witch spell list.

My husband said that I should just use the PF witch base abilities (hexes/familiar) but give her the spontaneous casting and spells known from the GR witch.
My first instinct is that I thought that may be too powerful, but I wasn't sure.

I've been digging around for hours now trying to find if anybody had figured out a decent translation for say, using a wizard base with sorcerer spontaneous casting for a guide for home-brewing this... but came up short while looking.

So I rambled on, but basically I'm looking to see if the GR witch spontaneous casting used with the PF witch base (same saves/BAB/HD/skills/etc) would be too powerful, or balance out around the same.

If not, what would be a good trade in? Taking out some of the hexes? Maybe using a preparing a small list of 'spells known' per day with spontaneous casting? (somewhat like the Shaman from the Minatures Handbook). I'm kinda stuck on how to proceed.