Hi folks, I searched the forums for this and... I don't think it's been discussed before, but I just noticed something about the spell Stormbolts that I'm surprised has never come up.
CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF (a copper rod)
EFFECT
Range 30 ft.
Area a 30-ft.-radius spread, centered on you
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Fortitude partial; Spell Resistance yes
DESCRIPTION
When you cast this spell, lightning spills forth from your body in all directions. The bolts do not harm natural vegetation or creatures in the area you wish to exclude from damage. Any other creatures within the area take 1d8 points of electricity damage per caster level (maximum 20d8) and are stunned for 1 round. A successful Saving Throw halves the damage and negates the stun effect.
It requires a fortitude save for half damage and to negate its stun effect. This is cool, because it is a blasting spell that doesn't rely on reflex.
However, read as written, doesn't that mean that undead are immune to it? Or at least that they necessarily take half damage from it, since they are immune to effects that require fortitude saves?
No Constitution score. Undead use their Charisma score in place of their Constitution score when calculating hit points, Fortitude saves, and any special ability that relies on Constitution(such as when calculating a breath weapon’s DC).
Darkvision 60 feet.
Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms).
Immunity to bleed, death effects, disease, paralysis, poison, sleep effects, and stunning.
Not subject to nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Constitution, Dexterity, and Strength), as well as to exhaustion and fatigue effects.
Cannot heal damage on its own if it has no Intelligence score, although it can be healed. Negative energy (such as an inflict spell) can heal undead creatures. The fast healing special quality works regardless of the creature’s Intelligence score.
Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects or is harmless).
Aggressive Thundercloud has two saves: one for the stun effect (fort) and one for the damage (ref), but since Stormbolts relies both on fort... That's got me scratching my head, because it makes no sense in regards to what kind of spell it is (an evocation blasting spell) that its damage would be ineffective against undead.
Thoughts? Has this ever come up to anyone's knowledge? How do you think it was intended? How have you played it?
Thanks!
Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects or is harmless).
The damage from stormbolts would affect objects. So I think you're OK to blast undead with stormbolts.
The damage from stormbolts would affect objects. So I think you're OK to blast undead with stormbolts.
Actually, no.
The bolts do not harm natural vegetation or creatures in the area you wish to exclude from damage. Any other creatures within the area take 1d8 points of electricity damage per caster level (maximum 20d8) and are stunned for 1 round.
Stormbolts only affects creatures, it does not interact with objects at all.
Fortitude Saves: Spells with Fortitude saves usually physically transform the target, apply an effect you’d normally resist with a Fortitude save (such as disease or poison), or are a form of attack that sheer physical toughness is enough to resist. In general, making a successful Fortitude save means the effect hits, but the target toughs it out, like a bear shrugging off the stinky musk sprayed by a skunk. Note that if your spell only affects creatures—not objects—then nonliving creatures such as constructs and undead are immune to the spell. For example, this makes them immune to creature-oriented polymorphing spells, but not spells such as disintegrate, which can attack objects.
So, as written, Undead are completely immune to Stormbolts. That is probably an oversight (I'd assume they didn't let it auto-target objects so that people don't have to roll fortitude for every object they wear, without considering the consequences for constructs and undead), and I don't see anything wrong with allowing it to damage (but not stun) undead and constructs, but it's not RAW.
So, if a GM subscribes to the "probably an oversight" idea regarding damage, would the undead roll fortitude saves for half (which is a weird thing for undead to do) or just automatically take half damage?
It's unusual, but not unheard.
They have to roll fortitude to reduce the damage of Disintegrate, too, for example. So yeah, I'd have them roll for half.
It explicitly calls out damage to creatures, and only to creatures.
If it dealt damage to every object in range, that would affect every wielded object on every humanoid in range, effectively being a mass sunder, and you'd have to roll a separate save for every object in the radius, so that's obviously not meant. If it only applied to unattended objects - which is more reasonable - it would still need to be called out as such. But no, it just doesn't mention objects, so there's no interaction.
Also, then it would have to have "Fortitude partial (object)", and it lacks the (object) tag on the saving throw.
In any case, I think "No harm to natural vegetation" is there to remove any ambiguity regarding trees (and, possibly, protect plant creatures).
A living tree is likely a creature too, because (fun fact) Disintegrate only deals damage to creatures or disintegrates nonliving matter, which would mean that an object made out of living matter (as a tree would be) is either immune to Disintegrate, or also considered a creature.
A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 40d6). Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust. A disintegrated creature's equipment is unaffected.When used against an object, the ray simply disintegrates as much as a 10-foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell disintegrates only part of any very large object or structure targeted. The ray affects even objects constructed entirely of force, such as forceful hand or a wall of force, but not magical effects such as a globe of invulnerability or an antimagic field.
A creature or object that makes a successful Fortitude save is partially affected, taking only 5d6 points of damage. If this damage reduces the creature or object to 0 or fewer hit points, it is entirely disintegrated.
Only the first creature or object struck can be affected; that is, the ray affects only one target per casting.
...It explicitly calls out damage to creatures, and only to creatures.
If it dealt damage to every object in range, that would affect every wielded object on every humanoid in range, effectively being a mass sunder, and you'd have to roll a separate save for every object in the radius, so that's obviously not meant. If it only applied to unattended objects - which is more reasonable - it would still need to be called out as such. But no, it just doesn't mention objects, so there's no interaction.
Also, then it would have to have "Fortitude partial (object)", and it lacks the (object) tag on the saving throw.In any case, I think "No harm to natural vegetation" is there to remove any ambiguity regarding trees (and, possibly, protect plant creatures).
A living tree is likely a creature too, because (fun fact) Disintegrate only deals damage to creatures or disintegrates nonliving matter, which would mean that an object made out of living matter (as a tree would be) is either immune to Disintegrate, or also considered a creature.** spoiler omitted **
Yeah, I am gonna agree with Pan. It saying that it does not harm natural vegetation has no logical implication that it would harm anything else. If anything, I think the inclusion that it doesn't harm natural vegetation is meant to clarify that it only harms its target creatures, not anything else, like a lightning bolt spell or a fireball would have the potential to.
But it also seems like its being written to have no interaction with objects at all, whether intentional or collateral, is a bit odd. Like, contrary to Pan's guess in their first post, and unless I am very mistaken, there wouldn't ever be a case where a spell like this auto-targets all attended objects in its range and makes the DM have to roll a ton of saves for every object someone is wearing, so I don't see how removing all interactions with objects was done to simplify an otherwise cumbersome mechanic. But being how fine the specificity of its targeting capacity is, it seems odd to me that I couldn't, if I wanted to, have one of my stormbolts hit an unattended object intentionally if that's what I wanted to do with it, ya know what I mean? So I wonder if there is some other intention behind the design of this spell that explains why it can't damage objects explicitly and why undead are also immune to it RAW. It's just odd. I still don't feel confidently that I what its RAI is. Like, was it intended to be drawn towards living creatures as lightning rods, or something?
Thing is, you don't get to aim Stormbolts. You exclude a set of targets, and everything else is automatic.
The basic premises of Stormbolts and Scorching Ray are so different that you can't really use one to argue what the other does.
Stormbolts auto-attacks against every creature in range, including creatures that you aren't even aware of, and always hits, but creatures can reduce damage with a Fort Save.
Meanwhile, Scorching Ray just gives you a few attacks that you can freely aim at any target, object or not.
Since you can't target anything with Stormbolts (they do that on their own, your only imput is excluding your allies), you can't send them against anything specific - you couldn't even target a sheet of paper.
So yes, the thing about natural vegetation only applies to natural vegetation. Since Stormbolts also only targets Creatures, it only applies to Creatures that are natural vegetation. Rare (unless you count trees), but they exist.
By RAW, no. It again only damages creatures.
Also, have a look at Shatter.
It's the same level as Sound Burst, and explicitly calls out that (and how) it damages objects.
And while we're at it, Fireball explicitly says "Unattended objects also take this damage."