RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
As far as I know, the only rolls which automatically fail on a roll of 1 are attack rolls and saving throws. The question recently arose in my group whether rolling a 1 on a caster level check to overcome SR should also be considered an automatic failure, given the following text from p.217 of the Core Rulebook:
"The defender's spell resistance is like an Armor Class against magical attacks."
Implying that the caster level check is the magical equivalent of an attack roll. So the question is, is this simply an instructive simile or to be taken more literally?
Thoughts?
As far as I know, the only rolls which automatically fail on a roll of 1 are attack rolls and saving throws. The question recently arose in my group whether rolling a 1 on a caster level check to overcome SR should also be considered an automatic failure, given the following text from p.217 of the Core Rulebook:
"The defender's spell resistance is like an Armor Class against magical attacks."
Implying that the caster level check is the magical equivalent of an attack roll. So the question is, is this simply an instructive simile or to be taken more literally?
Thoughts?
That's probably reasonable to have a 1 auto fail on SR. Although if a 1 would have succeeded, the opponent with SR is highly outmatched, and will be dead soon anyway so it probably doesn't matter much.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
That's probably reasonable to have a 1 auto fail on SR. Although if a 1 would have succeeded, the opponent with SR is highly outmatched, and will be dead soon anyway so it probably doesn't matter much.
Keep in mind that the attacking spellcaster does not roll to penetrate SR at all unless the defender has at least one point of SR. Outmatched or no in whatever other sense, having at least SR 1 in that circumstance would give you a 5% chance of avoiding all spells affected by SR.
I'm leaning towards allowing it for that reason, as otherwise enemy spellcasting abilities scale to such a degree that PC SR would be next to worthless without it. But I always like hearing various opinions.
SR is compared to AC, but it isn't AC. As such, I don't believe there should be an autofail option. It's not going to change the power level of most encounters or PCs notable, so if you go that route, it shouldn't really make much difference. The possible exception will come at higher levels, when you can potentially face spellcasting foes all day, every day; at that point, whoever has to make the most rolls against SR is going to lose out on the occasional spell.
PCs getting gear with SR is definitely a poor option; if you want decent SR, go with the spell resistance spell; the holy aura series is passable, if only when dealing with mooks.
I'm more curious what your doing where a roll of a 1 isn't just a failure in the first place to raise a question like this?
That's where I was going with my response. Seems like a very limited case when a 1 would succeed. Eg. 11th level elven wiz with Spell Penetration, Greater Spell Penetration, and orange Ioun Stone (+7 vs SR total). He'd succeed on a 1 vs. 8th level demons and devils (SR 19).
Anything less tweaked (meaning higher level PCs) will really stomp the encounter.
This is probably more applicable for the baddies attacking the PCs. I guess a Pit Fiend might be annoyed by someone with SR 13 armor disregarding his spells 5% of the time if a 1 autofailed.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
This is probably more applicable for the baddies attacking the PCs.
That's actually exactly what I'm trying to figure out. The reality is that PCs don't get many, or very strong, methods of acquiring SR, with the exception of, say, Diamond Soul. So you end up with one of two situations happening:
1. The PCs are fighting lower-CR monsters whose caster levels are low enough that PC SR makes a difference, at which point it's likely the PCs are going to ignore or absorb most of the monsters' abilities anyway.
2. The PCs are fighting a BBEG with a caster level significantly higher than their SR, which makes the roll to pierce PC SR more of a formality than anything.
I can think of plenty of reasonable counterarguments--maybe SR isn't meant to be much of a big deal to PCs in the first place, and is more of a stat designed for monsters. Maybe one considers it a good thing that SR is only good against weaker foes to begin with. However, as it stands, SR for PCs seems as though it will rarely, if ever, be the sort of thing which would turn the tide of a closely-contested battle, especially as the bonuses start piling up. The rolls begin to feel like foregone conclusions, and foregone conclusions do not make for compelling drama.
I can think of plenty of reasonable counterarguments--maybe SR isn't meant to be much of a big deal to PCs in the first place, and is more of a stat designed for monsters.
Any fight with a BBEG where PC SR is significantly into play will create an equal problem for the party. SR goes both ways, and what makes you resistant to fireballs also makes you resistant to cures or buffs. There are plenty of threads on the board discussing this. In general, PCs don't have (or want) high SR, so it works out to be primarily an ability for opponents.