Spell Resistance is in a weird spot where it's annoying enough for me to deal with in combat that I don't wanna hit it with yon +5 Club of Rule Zeroing and frustratingly stupid enough when it comes to buffs that I can't really ignore it.
I usually just encourage my players to shy away from Spell Resistance altogether, explaining the downsides and then let them choose whether they want the hassle or not. If they don't and it's a Class Feature (like the Monk's Diamond Soul) I'll let 'em swap it with something else.
That's how I read it as well.
I don't encourage players to ever get spell resistance for this very reason.
Those that do have it, such as drow players, I suggest simply keep it lowered by default.
Yeah as it is SR is something really not meant for PC's it seems.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
SR works fine if you are the caster (the caster ignores his own SR). Otherwise, it sucks to be the recipient of buff spells that allow SR.
- Gauss
Spell resistance is remarkably hard to get past as well, kinda like Hardness in that regard.
I also noticed that casting defensively is ALMOST as hard as getting past SR, but not quite. Used to be that doing so was easy, since you had an entire skill dedicated to it.
This is why I encourage Wizard players to take Spell Penetration (both) and Combat Casting, plus taking an Elf as your race. SR is damned difficult to get past dependably.
|
Is there some particular reason being slightly/somewhat/mostly/hugely immune to magic shouldn't apply evenly to all types of magic that allow for spell resistance?
I'm sorry but I'm not exactly following the train of logic where it should somehow be even better then it already is for things that have it. A good amount of effort was made in the creation of Pathfinder to make things like SR and Concentration actually count for something compared to how it was towards the end of 3.5 D&D.
SR is amazingly powerful. You are blocking the enemy's magic without having to do anything. Just stand there and let the fireball roar around you with no effect.
It makes perfect sense that you should also have a hard time accepting the good magic. That's the price for being nearly immune to hostile magic.
If there isn't a hefty drawback, then everyone would take it.
3.5's Drow of the Underdark had a feat called Reactive Resistance, which allowed the user to drop their spell resistance as an immediate action and then return to normal at the start of your turn. That way you could let healing spells and such like to affect you.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've played and DMed this rule as written and I believe it is fair, as written (please pardon while I duck the rotten tomatoes being thrown at me).
My reasons:
1. Not all healing requires a spell being cast at the recipient by someone else. This causes certain other options to look a little better than the usual boring Cure Light Wounds.
2. Spell resistance will often prevent the damage you would have taken anyway.
3. It's been around a long time (meaning, I bet Gygax or whomever invented it did so just to make monsters tougher with no thought that any PC would ever get to use it).
4. You CAN lower it, which makes for interesting strategic choices during combat, thus adding to the fun.
5. Not all spells allow SR to be used against them in the first place.
6. In places where it is applicable it's REALLY good.
7. I don't have the books in front of me, but frankly I'm not sure that a caster is considered immune to his own SR. If he is, that is probably logical, but still really good too.
In my opinion as a DM, playing it any other way is like having your cake and eating it to. Anything that powerful should come at a price. I mean, if your DM allowed you to just say "Ok, I walk into the dungeon and kill the dragon. What's for lunch?" then the game would suck. The fact that you CAN'T have everything the way you'd ideally want it makes the game more fun, not less fun. It may be frustrating at times, but an "easy win" with no real work involved is a hollow waste of time, whereas a "challenging puzzle" gives a sense of accomplishment after negotiating it. SR with no drawbacks would be too easy.
I like it as is, its a good ability that can be excellent, fighting an evil spellcaster keep it up, fighting a giant keep it down. It certainly does not suck, its just not ludicrously overpowered.
The problem with Spell Resistance is that it exists in the first place. The idea is that it's like AC for spells. Energy resistance is a similar concept, being to energy damage like DR is to physical damage. The difference is that it's exceptionally difficult to bypass SR, and you can only ever cast one spell per round unless you are very high level and have a lot of feats to work with. A fighter throwing a bunch of attacks has a good chance of at least a few of them getting through in a round, but a sorcerer against an equal challenge rating creature with SR has a 50% chance of losing his entire action unless he has a very specific set of feats (Spell Pen, Greater Spell Pen, Spell Perfection), and only with specific spells. Considering Pathfinder has made it exceptionally easy for physical damage dealers to deal as much damage as casters, or more with the right builds, it seems odd that they would leave a mechanic like SR which basically halves a casters effectiveness against equal level targets, never mind that most encounters tend to be higher CR than the party.
Spell Resistance would need a pretty severe overhaul in order to be balanced correctly for the game, and as such I generally rule against players taking it in any way. I also try to avoid using monsters with unreasonably high SR, or adjust it accordingly if I have to.
Spell Resistance would need a pretty severe overhaul in order to be balanced correctly for the game, and as such I generally rule against players taking it in any way. I also try to avoid using monsters with unreasonably high SR, or adjust it accordingly if I have to.
I'm curious then... what do you houserule for classes for whom this is a class ability, automatically granted at level up *looks directly a monk*?
When you get higher level and can cast Holy Aura(best buff in the game) It only grants spell resistance to evil spells or spells cast by evil creatures! It also grants +4 deflection, protection from evil and any evil creature that hits you with a melee attack needs to make a fort save or go blind.
Otherwise spell resistance is a total trap in the earlier levels and I would not recommend it unless you are able to heal yourself.
Spell Resistance is an Option in the game. The PCs have to choose whether they use it or not. & In Combat healing is a bad idea.
A Standard Action for emergency Healing is pretty acceptable. And playing a Monk or Wielding a Holy Avenger is an Option.
If you really want to just add in a clause where it doesn't come into play when dealing with their party's spells or similar circumstances. Maybe make it to where they can lower it as a Free Action.
Honestly, I think Spell Resistance is ridiculously good. "Oh hey, this enemy is trying to instakill me/knock me out in one shot/effectively cripple me for the rest of the encounter/whatever else. Good thing it needs to get through my spell resistance first!"
Seriously, the ability to completely shrug off magic some % of the time is powerful (and Spell Resistance is generally pretty competitive. You can probably expect to dodge 25-50% or so of spells, depending on what you've got Spell resistance from and the enemies you face).
You can still spend a standard action to let yourself be buffed or healed. So you can be running around, buffed like crazy, while still getting to shrug off tons of spells that might be cast on you. Can it be impractical in combat, costing you an action if you want to let someone affect you with a spell? Yeah. But is it totally worth it? I personally think so.
I admit, maybe it'd be nice if it was easier to handle. I'd consider a move action to be somewhat more appropriate, and once it's down, I don't think it should really need more actions to keep it down... but I still feel that's a small price to pay for the benefit.
Just my opinion, I suppose, but I think it's pretty good as it is.
BTW that Wizard was fighting
Assuming PC WBL Gear:
Venda CR19
Mayless CR19
Selan CR19
Lufia CR19
Sir Alkin CR21
Total CR: 24
Summons don't add to challenge rating, but I wouldn't call "True Name" that.
I mean, if was not some stupid low-level dire bear or anything, was it? Probably would have ruled it CR22 VS CR 24..
And hey, wizards are auwie vs melee dudes, especially with greater invisibility and some good bodyguard :)
|
|
Yeah it sounds like your party should have died there, especially considering that calling a creature is radically different from summoning one. So that was two roughly CR 20 things in the room not only 1. Quite a lot for your already resource drained APL 19 party to take on certainly. I’m not exactly sure how SR is to blame for any of that, especially when the main cause of the Party’s SR it is a sword that could have been put away affecting people who could have moved another 5 or so feet in one direction to not be adjacent.
I personally don’t believe that spell resistance needs any particularly sweeping changes. It operates properly for what it does not as some kind of AC for spells but as an in between for the total spell immunity versus not at all spell immune. If nothing else this certainly isn’t a good example of it needing it.
|
I have a handful of problems with SR, personally:
- 1) It affects AoE spells in ways that don't make sense to me.
- 2) As a PC, if you fight a caster it is often one with higher CL than your level, which means that even with good SR you are almost always still taking the spell > 40% of the time (and that assumes the foe does NOT have/use tools to help overcome SR). On a bad day your SR might be effective as little as 10% of the time (0% if they have the SR-penetrating metamagic, but that's only fair).
- 3) Because your healer/buffer ally is the same level as you, they (barring SR-bypassing techniques) have a success chance of 10-20%% below that of your foe, often putting their success rate below 50/50. Since the buffer/healer type generally doesn't worry about SR (they aren't attacking foes, after all) they almost certainly won't have the SR-penetrating feats/abilities.
- 4) Lowering SR essentially takes your turn despite being a trade-off even without the action.
Personally, I'm considering house-ruling SR at my table:
- 1) SR does not affect spells that do not directly target you. A targeted effect is affected, but not AoE effects like fireball or lightning bolt. Touch attacks are generally affected, but simple energy-damage ones are not (disintegrate is affected, but scorching ray is not).
- 2) SR does not affect spells with the (harmless) descriptor.
@ Quintessentially Me - I have never had a player choose Monk as a class, nor have I ever played a Monk so it has never come up for us. For races that can get SR (Tiefling variant abilities and such) I usually remove it from the table of options along with raw stat boosts. There are very few ways for PC's to get SR, most of them being spells, and in most cases there are far better options for buffs in spell slots than ones that give SR. Ward Shield is probably the only exception and in most cases it's a healer that gets it, meaning they don't have to check against their own SR to heal.
@ DreamGoddessLindsey - There WAS a lot of stuff in that fight that did not conform to the rules. Two rings that add a pair of Metamagic feats for free to every spell of a certain elemental type is ABSURDLY powerful, for PC's OR enemies. An Empowered Intensified Meteor Swarm is a 12th level spell and you can't even do that with Spell Perfection! It's basically two, unlimited use metamagic rods in a single item. Those kinds of items should NEVER be in a position to fall into the hands of PC's and there are far better ways to improve the power of a BBEG than by giving him made up magic items. Generally just adding a custom template gives you the power to give him abilities you want him to have without giving him items that should cost as much as a level 20 character's entire budget.
Don't even get me started on custom spells.
I will say that if a single 20th level caster can take on a party of five nearly equal level enemies (absurd magic items aside) you must have given him some crazy stats. Let me ask a few questions:
1-What stat generation system did you use for PC's?
2-What stat generation system did you use for the BBEG?
3-What other gear/special rules did you give the BBEG?
4-What preparatory spells did the BBEG cast on himself?
5-What preparatory spells did the PC's cast on themselves?
6-How much information did the party have on the BBEG before confronting him?
7-How many other fights had they faced immediately before facing him? (IE how many resources did they have?)
8-How much time did they have to prepare to fight him?
9-What did the terrain look like?
A single caster character summoning a single powerful Demon should not be a challenge for a party of five even moderately powerful characters unless he has some pretty big DM homebrew boosts, especially not when the PCs have custom magic items and custom spells at their disposal. Also, a 19th level character only fails to bypass SR 26 on a 7 and only if he doesn't have any form of Caster Level increase or Spell Penetration. Most healing should easily have gotten through the SR, and if they expect SR26 to protect against a kitted out 20th level spellcaster, they are fooling themselves.
There are very easy ways to incapacitate single, heavy damage dealing spellcasters. Debilitating Portent forces a will save every time he deals damage, and if he fails he only does half. Blindness/Deafness is a fortitude save or he can't see to pick targets. Waves of Exhaustion grants no save and gives him some nasty stat penalties and action limitations. Stinking Cloud, among other spells, can Nauseate him and potentially keep him from taking anything but a move action. Greater Dispel Magic gets rid of any buffs he has, or potentially suppresses the ring, and Mage's Disjunction could render some of his gear useless. These are just a few of the many hundreds of ways the party could have dealt with him, and while not all of them are guaranteed to work, it never hurts to try.
Basically my point is that they likely had some forewarning of who and what this BBEG was, or they did not do their research. If they knew anything about him, they could easily have prepared to fight a strong spellcaster. The Spell Resistance was not the problem in this case. That said, I do agree that Spell Resistance is a bad mechanic, but not necessarily for the reasons you are stating. Most Spell Resistance is 11 + Challenge Rating, and any creature of equal Challenge Rating to the party should expect to get steamrolled fairly quickly. So a single creature 1-3 CR's above the party that has SR will generally mean Spellcasters have a less than 50% chance for anything to land unless they have Spell Penetration. That is innately poor design, but it would take an overhaul of how spells work in order to fix.
CR of the enemy force is not meant to be compared to a party's CR, it is meant to be compared to a party's APL (average party level), after adjusting for larger- or smaller-than-normal party. In this case, with 4 PCs of level 19 and 1 PC of level 21, your party had an effective APL of 19.4.
Bargle and Azazel are each CR 20 opponents alone. The fact that Bargle had to use a standard action to get Azazel there doesn't justify ignoring Azazel's contribution as a "summoned" creature -- and I don't care if the RAW say that's what you should do. Bargle might as well have spent a standard action to activate an alarm of some sort calling in Azazel from the next room; the effective challenge to the party would have been the same, except that Bargle is out a feat this way. That missing feat doesn't even begin to balance out Azazel's contribution.
Plus, by my reading of the Advanced and Giant templates, each of them bumps the HD of the creature by +2, so Azazel was a 22HD creature -- beyond the 18HD limit of True Name. That should seal the deal. Azazel counts as an additional CR 20 opponent, giving the overall encounter a CR of 22.
So, you've got your 19.4 APL party facing a 22 CR encounter. That puts it between the "hard" and "epic" difficulties for the party, according to http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gamemastering.html And you're doing this when, in your words, they've already expended "most of the PCs resources".
Yeah, it should have been tough. It should have been borderline "epic" even if they'd had most or all of their resources to bring to bear. The fact that they lived only through luck of the dice doesn't in any way indicate that SR isn't good enough with rules as written -- it just shows that they were in over their heads by taking it on after a "grueling stage".
With all that said, I wouldn't personally be against house ruling something for SR. But I agree with Morgen, this is not at all a good example to show the need for it.
If it's intended and ruled as written, that would make every class with Spell Resistance unplayable once they have it on top of making the Holy Avenger one of the worst items to have. Having to use a standard action to let a spell through is so mind-numbingly stupid that I can't help but think that it wasn't intended to be this way. At most it should be a free action, or preferably it shouldn't be an action at all and should be droppable at any time the same way you can choose to fail a saving throw.
Yes, SR works vs beneficial spells.
I'm surprised there hasn't been a spell version that gave hostile SR.Paladins can cure themselves with their own spells/own scrolls/own wands/Lay on hands.
Haven't you always wondered why Drow have SR? Because they don't trust each other.
Cleric Drow are better than non-cleric because they can bypass on SR to heal. And who trusts there allies enough to waste a stamdard to drop SR.
Personally, it would better to get a +2 saves than SR (like Dwarves get).
I'm running a kingmaker game currently where we tossed spell resistance out completely. Not only do I thoroughly enjoy it as a GM, but more importantly, my players *love* it. I would totally recommend everyone try it out sometime.
Please tell me there is errata for this or a misreading. If it's intended this way, all Spell Resistance is either so low it's irrelevant or so high it's getting you killed.
Correct. That's how it works. This is another reason monk players feel hard-done by.
@ DreamGoddessLindsey: I read your example the first time, and there was no need to bring it up again. I don't think it does anything to suggest that Spell Resistance was problematic in that scenario. But, let's take a look at it.
First off, I want to give one important distinction. Your SR in this example is from a Holy Avenger. At level 19-20. That thing gives SR 26, and your BBEG had spell penetration feats while your party casters didn't. That is obviously going to favor the enemy caster (and was everyone crowded around the Paladin or something to make use of it or something?). As you pointed out originally, the enemy needed a 2 or higher to get through the SR (26-20-4 = 2). How about we check with actual level appropriate SR though?
Cleric casts Spell Resistance, granting 12+CL. That's SR 31 (19 being the CL, I think?). Your BBEG now needs to roll a 7 or higher to penetrate SR. That's a 30% miss chance on all of his spells and that's with two feats spent to improve his odds. Without those feats, he's failing on half of all of his spells to affect characters with SR.
So, with that out of the way, let's move on to your example.
Advanced Vavakia "Azazel": Breath Weapon knocks off 25-33% of party's HP and debuffs.
...
Bargle: Quickened damage spell and maximized damage spell, totally almost 75% of what HP was left.
...
Lufia: Also readies spell counter, essential to stop Power Word spells and Avada Kedavra.
So, the entire party was hanging out directly next to each other, and took three AoEs. Not the brightest way to start a fight, but that's incidental I guess. Anyway, the party lost 75% of their current HP to two spells. Kinda seems like if they had, say, a 30-50% miss chance on both of those, they'd have been in better condition afterwards. And Power Word spells? Subject to spell resistance, despite their No Save status.
...
Bargle: Another damage spell, rolls low enough for Venda to resist and take no damage, then Quickened Greater Invisibility and uses teleport device that still functions regardless of Dimensional Lock.
Mayless: Heals self and attacks Azazel.
Selan: Uses Mass Heal, which very well might not have gotten through the SR on three people thanks to the Holy Avenger of Sir Alkin.
...
So, again, a damaging spell.
Then we get to these Heals. First off, with actual level appropriate SR, the party likely would have not been in bad condition in the first place. Despite this though, there's 2 people still clustered around your Paladin, getting the benefits of an SR that is pretty much paltry compared to your BBEG, but hampering the rest of the party. Seriously, why?
Let me go off on a tangent here. The Paladin can get SR for himself and adjacent allies. If you need the Cleric to heal you in battle, then yes, SR is probably not the best way to go and especially not an SR that hinders your allies and does nothing for you. But Paladins can heal themselves actually. As a swift action. Round after round, besides having pretty high HP in the first place, and amazing saves. So really, the Paladin gets a lot of benefit when soaking up enemy spells, and they can still keep themselves healthy. Why everybody else that would rely on Heals from the Cleric to stay alive was clustered around the Paladin, I just can't entirely comprehend. But okay. I guess let's move on.
...
Bargle: Another major damage spell to lower HP, then Avada Kedavra;
This is another 1 or 2 spells subject to SR (assuming Avada Kedavra would be?), before the battle ends.
So, let's recap. There were 4 spells thrown at the party that did major damage and might have been negated with level appropriate SR (and spread out amongst some AoEs makes for several possibilities to miss it for each).
Contrast, there were two Heal Spells, one of them being Mass, and quite possibly neither of them being necessary if some of those damaging spells ran up against SR.
So... yeah. I really don't see how your example makes it seem like SR is bad. Sounds like, if it was being used successfully, it would have helped a lot actually.
Edit: But that's just how I see it, I suppose.
SR is amazingly powerful. You are blocking the enemy's magic without having to do anything. Just stand there and let the fireball roar around you with no effect.
It makes perfect sense that you should also have a hard time accepting the good magic. That's the price for being nearly immune to hostile magic.
If there isn't a hefty drawback, then everyone would take it.
i question your definition of 'nearly immune to hostile magic' since every enemy caster you will go against will be high enough to get through a player's SR with a 7+
Ok if the creature is through True Name it counts for CR. So you take the Wizard's CR20 + Whatever-the-Frak-he-had-bonded's CR and see what the thing is. Can someone get me what the CR of the Demon is?
@ Azaelas: According to d20pfsrd, Vavakias are CR 18. Advanced and Giant templates are +1 each, so CR 20, I guess? (Finicky creature templates notwithstanding. I'm not entirely positive if they always make sense.)
Ok CR18 means that it would be CR20 so that means it is a total CR22 encounter for the PCs. From what I have seen the encounter was weighted in favor of the Wizard/Demon combo do to Player's making bad choices.
I still don't see how a single caster and an advanced Demon were able to be such a pain unless the party was inept. I understand that if they had previously used a number of resources this encounter might be quite a bit harder, but they HAD to know it was coming. It doesn't seem like the kind of encounter one just stumbles upon in a dungeon. This kind of thing gets noticed, and likely they were there to deal with it specifically.
Sir Alkin (Human Warrior of the Holy Light 21) (Not even sure how you do that....) should have been able to solo either one. With proper stat distribution, reasonable gear for level, feat selection and the right weapon, fighting a big snarly Demon is what Paladins are all about. Of course Warrior of the Holy Light removes their Spellcasting so it's up to the other one to use Litany of Righteousness, but seriously, a Paladin of this caliber should not have such serious difficulty, and can heal the party in a pinch (and notably does not suffer from Spell Resistance)
Venda (Human Two-Weapon Warrior 19) - Two-Weapon Warriors are legit with the right build. Moving and making full attacks, especially with haste and one or two buffs. The damage they deal is not negligible in the least.
Mayless (Human Paladin 19) - This guy isn't even bound by the silly 20th level restrictions of Smite Evil like Sir Alkin. His smite will do actual damage to Azazel and he is just as effective against an evil spellcaster.
Selan (Human Cleric 19) - Healbot? I can understand the Cleric having SOME difficulty from the SR the Holy Avenger provides if not designed to deal with SR. But still, a large amount of healing should get through.
Lufia (Human Witch 19) - Witches can either be REALLY good or REALLY bad. Assuming a decent ACF, good feat and hex selection, and a decent set of spells, this character should have been able to counter some of what the BBEG did, and possibly even incapacitate him.
The two Paladins is what makes me wonder how this went so bad. Paladins, when built at all intelligently, are one of the most powerful classes in the game. I'm playing one currently in an ongoing campaign and the damage it deals is disgusting. The party should have spread out, then focus fired on one target or the other (Probably the boss, because the Demon is easily killed after the spellcaster goes away). Seems like they mismanaged their resources, then stumbled unprepared into a fight against someone that they did not know how to counter and huddled together allowing him to deal damage to everyone at once.
Only those covered under the Spell and the spell monster abilities don't count.
Leadership's Cohort & True Name's Bonded Outsider both count for CR.
The thing is if they were benefiting from the Holy Avengers SR they were huddled together. That was their mistake.
As the poster above me said, putting your SR against a high level caster with Spell Penetration when your healer/buffer doesn't have said feats is suicide.
Right, but the fact that they can't get through SR that the opponent can isn't the fault of the SR system (though it's admittedly skewed slightly in enemy favor). And as I said, if it was level appropriate, it would have actually given the enemy wizard pause and blocked several of his spells. Instead, it was pretty much an autosuccess to him, while your spellcasters were worse off. Having to roll 5 higher is a lot, but that's because they didn't have the Spell Pen feats that the wizard did. If they had, it would have been a difference of 1 and nearly as simple for them to bypass.
I guess my point here is, it just happened to be at the exact point that it was nothing to the enemy, but a slight hindrance to the party. Again, not from the SR mechanics, but because of feat choices and the level of SR being used.
Different point: The party was going into his inner sanctum, knowing that they were going to be battling him. No one thought maybe it would be worth buffing before combat, where needing to lower SR wouldn't matter? (I mean, since you didn't run it as SR is meant to be, obviously they wouldn't bother, but prebuffing for a big fight makes a huge difference anyway. Being prebuffed and having spell resistance that actually causes problems for your enemy is that much better).
Given all the moving parts and other complications that the game has at level ~20, I don't think the SR rules as written were to blame for any one encounter at that level not going like some might have thought it should. That's just my opinion. It's also my opinion that the game is so inherently overpowered by about level 15+ and things just go haywire somehow, eventually. Encounters at high levels are difficult to balance and often very one-sided, making them harder to construct in the first place, and the party makeup has a lot to do with that too. Also, if the party members know how spell resistance works (which they should by level 18) then any trouble it caused in that particular fight should have been nothing new to the PCs. I mean, was this the first encounter where they had SR to deal with? If it wasn't, then they ought to understand how it works by now and be able to adjust accordingly. Even if they did know how it works, and had a plan, and executed the plan, it is my opinion that they still could have gotten party wiped or won easily based solely on the dice rolling.
Also, I want to point out that I play clerics a lot, and one pet peeve of mine is that (and I think this goes way back to the Gygaxian era as well) the cleric seems to get a lot of stuff that doesn't work as-advertized, after you read the fine print. Look at spells like Smite Evil (or Holy Smite, or whatever it's called). It's an AoE damage spell that does d6/lvl damage against evil outsiders. In other words, it's a spell you're supposed to use against demons, right? So you prepare it, you go into a fight against a demon and what happens? Your DM explains to you that you're not likely to encounter a large group of demons all in a big mob (so the AoE nature of it is less appealing because you're usually just fighting one big bad evil demon) and that virtually ALL evil outsiders have something called "Spell Resistance" which makes your anti-demon SPELL a lot less powerful (because it allows SR). It's like they handed you a gun called the "gun for use against bullet proof enemies" and when you pull the trigger you find out it doesn't actually pierce the bulletproof armor and any special way. The cleric spell list is rife with examples of this sort of stuff. In a game where people take turns moving, Magic Circle against Evil is permanently disabled for a PC the FIRST time they move out of the 10ft circle. This means the entire party has to huddle together and inchworm its way around the place one 5ft step at a time. The list goes on. The point I'm making is, there's LOT of stuff in there that doesn't work the way one might want it to, and that's intentional on the part of the original writers. I'm personally convinced some spells are just in there so that badguys can use them against the party (why else would Hold Person be level 2-3 while Hold Monster is higher level?). I think others are just plain bad and not worth using at all. I don't always agree with all of it, I strongly dislike some of it, I even houserule some of the stuff I dislike when I DM. That's ok, it's your game as DM, you can do that. I'm not telling you not to. I'm just saying that in my opinion, though the SR rules might seem "bad", I think they actually add to the challenge and fun as they are and would make the game less fun if houseruled otherwise. If you disagree and want to change it, go right ahead. I've houseruled stuff, and I considered the question of houseruling SR, but I decided I liked it better the way it is, in this case. Your mileage may vary.
As far as SR being awful because of a standard action to lower it:
Out of combat buffs and healing, makes no difference. You generally only get about one in-combat buff max and you shouldn't be doing healing in combat unless its Channel or Paladin's LOH for himself which aren't affected by SR. I don't see how making every spell caster you go up against roll to see if their spells work on you is bad at all. Seems like a pretty awesome ability to me.
As a player If you don't like the ability as RAW then don't use it. As a GM you can run your game however is most fun to you, so feel free to house rule whatever you like.
Does SR even work on Potions and Items that mimic Spells? IIRC it doesn't.
So SR messes with Boots of Speed?