Due to the plot and story line my players were given the choice to become Drow Nobles or remain their current state with no penalties in regards to which they chose, plot goes on. If they chose the transformation they added the traits of the Drow Noble. They all took the package and we have played one full session with their new abilities. After having issues with finding appropriate adversaries whose special abilities were not affected by Spell Resistance so I could make some (not all) encounters a challenge, I reviewed the rules for Spell resistance found on pg. 564-565 and 216-217. Now my players are upset because it appears that the Spell Resistance also applies to their Cleric's spells (except the channel energy)causing him to have to roll a Spell Resistance check to heal or buff them with a spell, unless they "waste" a standard action to voluntarily lower their resistance. Now what do I do?
Now what do I do?
It's the nature of the beast. SR comes with a price.
You can houserule it that SR only kicks in for hostile spells.
Still, i usually go with the SR only kicks on hostile spells, (works both ways, for PCs and monsters alike) and only when you register the source as a non-hostile one. AKA. You lower your SR for my spells as usual, well too bad, im betraying you today...
|
My favorite houserule is making it a swift action to lower, standard to raise. So you can drop your guard to accept friendly spells, but you will be out of luck if the enemy goes before you can take the time to restore it.
In game however, I just treat it as an active firewall, so it can tell the difference between friend and foe.
Still, i usually go with the SR only kicks on hostile spells, (works both ways, for PCs and monsters alike) and only when you register the source as a non-hostile one. AKA. You lower your SR for my spells as usual, well too bad, im betraying you today...
Do you also make people automatically fail their saving throws in this instance? Because harmless magic only grants a save if you actively defend against it, while harmful magic always grants a save.
So to me, harmless magic seems something you recognise instinctively, and if you rule SR to only repel hostile spells, it seems lowering the SR is reactionary rather than deliberate.
Give them a choice to either take back the transformation or learn to live with the downsides as well as the up. It's not a "waste" of an action it's learnin to live with what you got when you decide to play a monster race. BTW, the caster can opt to affect herself with her own spells without having to drop her resistance.I agree with all this. If you want it to be difficult for magic to affect you, then it will be difficult for magic to affect you.
If you wanted to be immune to necromancy spells to avoid the ones that can hurt you, you will also be immune to the ones that can help you. Now, I don't think it is possible to be immune to a school of magic, but I'm just trying to give another example that helps SR make sense.
Also, I had my own question... the spell planar binding says, "(spell resistance does not keep it from being called). The creature can escape from the trap by successfully pitting its spell resistance against your caster level check," So, the SR doesn't keep it from being called, but once it is called, does the SR kick in right away to break out of the magic circle? That would make sense based on the nature of SR always being active as the default. The wording "pitting it against your..." just sort of makes it sound like some use of SR that requires an additional action, but I'm pretty sure that is NOT the case. Right?
Directly in the spell description it does state three different methods the creature can take to escape, one being spell resistance, and it can only use each method once per day. Unless the creature takes a standard action to lower its SR I would think at least the first SR check happen as soon as the creature enters the circle since it doesn't know what is going on and therefore it cannot not know whether to lower it's SR or not. At least that is how I understand it. So I agree with you that the SR check in this case does not require an additional action on the part of the creature.
Still, i usually go with the SR only kicks on hostile spells, (works both ways, for PCs and monsters alike) and only when you register the source as a non-hostile one. AKA. You lower your SR for my spells as usual, well too bad, im betraying you today...Do you also make people automatically fail their saving throws in this instance? Because harmless magic only grants a save if you actively defend against it, while harmful magic always grants a save.
So to me, harmless magic seems something you recognise instinctively, and if you rule SR to only repel hostile spells, it seems lowering the SR is reactionary rather than deliberate.
Is Reactionary, yes, when I said "hostile spells", It´s more like spell sources... (Sorry, english is not my Main lang.).
I see it as another defense of the body,but one that you have control over. The analogy with a firewall is pretty accurate with my view. Yet, once you define that X has access to you (i.e I lower my SR to allow the clr CLW spell, once or twice, and you state that you will do it all the time,so the rule is set), SR no longer applies unless you call it for, and even so, it requieres a swift action to readjust the rules.
And regarding your question, if part of the deceit, i will not deny the Save but you´ll get a penalty.-
Personally I tend to play it as TriOmegaZero does, as an active firewall that knows what to let affect you, but ultimately you just need to decide whether you’d prefer to houserule it or play it as is. Once you decide I’d give the player’s one last opportunity to undo the change to nobility if they don’t like your decision for whatever reason and go on from there.
My favorite houserule is making it a swift action to lower, standard to raise. So you can drop your guard to accept friendly spells, but you will be out of luck if the enemy goes before you can take the time to restore it.
I like that idea.
Another possibility would be to say that Drow SR doesn't work against Drow magic.
I agree with all this. If you want it to be difficult for magic to affect you, then it will be difficult for magic to affect you.
Well, as I said: There is precedence for selective resistance: Harmless spells automatically affect you unless you actively resist (i.e. you can make a saving throw, but you don't have to, and it doesn't cost you an action to "lower your saves")
If you wanted to be immune to necromancy spells to avoid the ones that can hurt you, you will also be immune to the ones that can help you. Now, I don't think it is possible to be immune to a school of magic, but I'm just trying to give another example that helps SR make sense.
Well, a lot of critters have selective immunity to certain types of spells (necromancy's actually something that you can have immunity to - constructs have it). Undead, for example, are immune to everything that requires a fort save, unless it's a harmless effect (and also stuff that affects objects, but that's not really relevant here)
And regarding your question, if part of the deceit, i will not deny the Save but you´ll get a penalty.-
You know what that means: You have a fighter with good fort save but weak will save. Enemy charms him, tells him he wants to buff him, casts death magic (which often requires fort save). Fighter is then killed by an effect he should have had a strong defence against, but that was denied to him because of his weakness.
|
Now what do I do?
I take the philosophy that players shouldn't get the shaft for ignorance. It comes off as DM "Gotcha!"
The players may have been ignorant about the effects, but the characters would have known what they were getting into (at least those who should know about SR issues and drow noble abilities).
If you're looking for suggestions, the houserule suggestions work. If you want to keep the SR rules, an ingame solution could be a confirmation step.
"Ok, after a few days, Josphepa notices that various members of the party are having a shimmery appearance, sometimes resembling their old selves. A quick meeting with House Mistress She-who-shall-not-be-named-other-than-with-a-very-long-name-with-lots-of-sy llables confirms that an additional step is needed to make the transformation permanent...."
I take the philosophy that players shouldn't get the shaft for ignorance. It comes off as DM "Gotcha!"
But it's so realistic, so life-like. Life so loves to shaft you for your ignorance.
At least in RPGs, you get to play another character to learn from your mistakes.
Due to the plot and story line my players were given the choice to become Drow Nobles or remain their current state with no penalties in regards to which they chose, plot goes on. If they chose the transformation they added the traits of the Drow Noble. They all took the package and we have played one full session with their new abilities. After having issues with finding appropriate adversaries whose special abilities were not affected by Spell Resistance so I could make some (not all) encounters a challenge, I reviewed the rules for Spell resistance found on pg. 564-565 and 216-217. Now my players are upset because it appears that the Spell Resistance also applies to their Cleric's spells (except the channel energy)causing him to have to roll a Spell Resistance check to heal or buff them with a spell, unless they "waste" a standard action to voluntarily lower their resistance. Now what do I do?
I would allow them a chance to roll it back since they did not know. SR is the one reason I have never played a drow. You could also allow them to remove the SR, but also remove another benefit of the class.
My favorite houserule is making it a swift action to lower, standard to raise. So you can drop your guard to accept friendly spells, but you will be out of luck if the enemy goes before you can take the time to restore it.I like that idea.
Another possibility would be to say that Drow SR doesn't work against Drow magic.
..but that is who they fight the most.
If I were to change the rule for my own game I would do this:
A character can benefit from any allied spell that they are aware of. This means they must succeed in all the normal conditions of spell awareness, which means a Spellcraft roll.
If they can't tell the allied heal spells from the allied Bane spells, they won't know when they are being targeted/affected. So basically, the only condition is awareness, no action required. I suspect you could end up with a PC who just doesn't have enough spellcraft to reliably toggle when it is optimal.
I'm not sure what the PF version says, but in 3.0 & 3.5 you could always voluntarily lower your spell resistance for a round, just like you can voluntarily fail a saving throw. This did mean that if someone was unconsious due to hit point loss, the cleric still had to make an SR roll to heal them. So I'm not sure what RAW says, but RAI is pretty clear. There are spells being cast on drow by other drow all the time, and there must be a method for that to be achieved. Voluntarily lowering SR is the only one that makes sense.
It was a standard action in 3.5 also. I remember that because one of the Drow books had a feat lowered the time to drop it.
Edit:The book is Drow of the Underdark, page 52. Reactive Resistance
I am in the "SR is mixed blessing and you have to live with it" camp. Want to be affected by beneficial spell? You have to concentrate upon lowering your innate (or acquired) resistance. I would thought if maybe, but only maybe, allow characters to maintain lowered SR as a move or maybe swift action in following rounds.
Same issue with level 13 monks with Diamond Soul. . .
A creature with spell resistance must voluntarily lower the resistance (a standard action) in order to be affected by such spells without forcing the caster to make a caster level check.
Note if you cast a spell on yourself, spell resistance doesn't apply. . .
If the target of a spell is yourself (the Target line of the spell description includes “You”), you do not receive a saving throw, and spell resistance does not apply. The saving throw and spell resistance lines are omitted from such spells.
But here's the kicker:
A creature can voluntarily lower its spell resistance. Doing so is a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Once a creature lowers its resistance, it remains down until the creature's next turn. At the beginning of the creature's next turn, the creature's spell resistance automatically returns unless the creature intentionally keeps it down (also a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity).
So dealing with lowering SR is actually pretty clear in the books. . .
Now what do I do?
Have the cleric do less healing and more damage? (:
Thank you everyone for your wonderful answers and amusing banter. I have spoken with a couple of my players and I think we have agreed to house rule it for the current campaign. However, for the future, the rule will stand as is.
Kind of reminds me of the time in 3.5 where no one knew a wizard casting a ranged touch attack in melee incurred the same -4 penalty as a ranged weapon firing into melee with out point blank and precise shot. The player of the wizard who had several ranged touch attacks had a conniption fit! Even funnier, he was the one who found the rule while looking for something else! Sometimes ignorance is bliss ;)