| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I was building/designing a cleric lich with the magic domain, which grants the spell antimagic field as a lvl 6 domain spell (wich is quite good in itself). I wondered what happened to the liches damage reduction in an antimagic field... it is DR/magic and bludgeoning... an antimagic field would supress magic weapons, so a warrior with a magic sword would have a hard time damaging the lich... unless the DR itself is supressed too. Is DR a magical/supernatural ability?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The pathfinder OGC states that DR is a supernatural ability, but it is difficult to tell whether the word 'supernatural' is being used as a keyword or just as descriptive text in this context. Certainly some kinds of DR (such as the Barbarian ability) are explicitly labeled as Ex not Su, and suppressing all kinds of DR in an antimagic field creates some silly situations.
Personally, I would recommend using the 3.5 ruling. The 3.5 SRD states that DR is either Su or Ex depending on the type of DR. Below I've cut out all of the types listed:
".... piercing, bludgeoning, or slashing damage (Ex).... alchemical silver (Su), adamantine (Ex), or cold-forged iron (Su).... magic weapons (Su).... chaotic-, evil-, good-, or lawful-aligned weapons (Su)........
When a damage reduction entry has a dash (–) after the slash, no weapon negates the damage reduction (Ex). "
Thus, in the antimagic field, your Lich would be considered to have DR 15/Bludgeoning.
This: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/special-abilities#TOC-Damage-Reductio n says:
Some magic creatures have the supernatural ability to instantly heal damage from weapons or ignore blows altogether as though they were invulnerable.
If the DR is supernatural, isn't it cancelled by the antimagic field? So in that case a lich within an antimagic field would loose all DR?
Spells normally ignore DR, so surrounding himself with an antimagic field might be a good defense if the DR stays up (of course, he can't cast spells anymore, so it's not perfect)
Undead don't wink out of existence or fall unconscious in an antimagic field, even though they are inherently magical. And the lich is still a sort of skeleton, which explains the DR/bludgeoning for me (but that might be flavor...), even within an antimagic field... it still has no flesh.
AMF is an emanation from the caster, even if DR was somehow disabled in the area of the effect, the caster isn't going to be under its effect.
In the example from the OP the Lich would keep its DR.
AMF is an emanation from the caster, even if DR was somehow disabled in the area of the effect, the caster isn't going to be under its effect.
In the example from the OP the Lich would keep its DR.
.... not sure where you got that from. The focal point of an emanation is still under its area of effect. JJ implies as such specifically for AMF in this thread: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kl37?Emanations-and-the-Big-Guys. More importantly, a lot of spells don't function as intended without this interpretation (circle of protection, circle of clarity, silence, zone of truth).
Stauffie: DR is not always supernatural. The bestiary entry has (Su or Ex), and some DR such as a barbarian's DR are explicitly labelled as Ex. Best to use the 3.5 FAQ in this case as I wrote above, but as always it is 'DM's call'.
I'd say the DR 15 / bludgeoning and magic becomes DR 15 / bludgeoning, if that seems too much at least the same DR as a skeleton DR 5 / bludgeoning.
|
Blakmane's interpretation looks good to me.
The universal monster rules list DR as Ex or Su, but don't divvy up which is which. We can fall back on 3.5 or use common sense; the results are similar.
Bludgeoning/Slashing/Piecering DR is due to physical properties of the monster, such as a lich being mostly bone and therefore having DR/Bludgeonin. Ex.
Silver and Cold Iron are due to magical properties of the critter. Likewise for DR/Magic. Su.
Alignment DR is probably also a magical property; Su.
Adamantine DR is usually (golems) due to the critter being insanely tough; physical property; Ex.
Epic... I dunno about that one. I'm inclined towards Su, because the natural weapons of critters with DR/Epic also count as Epic weapons for DR purposes.
On another note: DR is explained as being either invulnerability or instantaneous healing. I'd say that instantaneous healing is nearly always Su, and invulnerability will tend towards Ex. But this is not a hard rule.
AMF is an emanation from the caster, even if DR was somehow disabled in the area of the effect, the caster isn't going to be under its effect.
In the example from the OP the Lich would keep its DR.
.... not sure where you got that from. The focal point of an emanation is still under its area of effect. JJ implies as such specifically for AMF in this thread: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kl37?Emanations-and-the-Big-Guys. More importantly, a lot of spells don't function as intended without this interpretation (circle of protection, circle of clarity, silence, zone of truth).
Stauffie: DR is not always supernatural. The bestiary entry has (Su or Ex), and some DR such as a barbarian's DR are explicitly labelled as Ex. Best to use the 3.5 FAQ in this case as I wrote above, but as always it is 'DM's call'.
Not quite sure how that post says the creature is being affected by the effects of the spell/ability. His post quite literally states the spell doesn't extend out from the edges of the grid space of the creature so it doesn't cover a larger area for creatures who take up multiple grid squares. That is all he says.
There are numerous headaches that occur if the defensive ability AMF provides strips you of all magical effects, the least of which is DR. As an emanation AMF blocks LoE which is generally required for just about every other magical effect you would cast on someone else (or them to cast on you). If it stops all effects you currently have on going you end up losing spells (that great +6 stat item stops working and takes 24 hours to get back), having a lower AC (bracers of armor - gone, ring of protection - gone, amulet of natural armor - gone), your contigency spell won't work and so on and so on.
What part of any of that makes AMF a good idea? How is that even a 'good' defensive ability?
You are enlightened.
Anti magic field are often used offensively stand by some other caster with an anti magic field and have your friendly marshal beat the crap out of them.
AMF isn't a great idea for players alot of the time. But its a good idea occasionally when you are confronting a superior foe who is mostly magical. Casting that on yourself and moving in range of hte bad guy can let the Barbarian charge/pounce it to bits regarldess of its magical protections.
AMF isn't an I-Win button though. It has positives and negatives. Cast it at your own risk.
PRD: (i.e. Paizo, not that 3pp site)
An emanation spell functions like a burst spell, except that the effect continues to radiate from the point of origin for the duration of the spell. Most emanations are cones or spheres.
A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. A burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.
The spell is an Emanation with the caster as the center point. You are always effected because you are within the 10 foot sphere created by the spell.
It doesn't say you aren't effected, so you are. Use it wisely.-S
AMF is an emanation from the caster, even if DR was somehow disabled in the area of the effect, the caster isn't going to be under its effect.
In the example from the OP the Lich would keep its DR.
.... not sure where you got that from. The focal point of an emanation is still under its area of effect. JJ implies as such specifically for AMF in this thread: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kl37?Emanations-and-the-Big-Guys. More importantly, a lot of spells don't function as intended without this interpretation (circle of protection, circle of clarity, silence, zone of truth).
Stauffie: DR is not always supernatural. The bestiary entry has (Su or Ex), and some DR such as a barbarian's DR are explicitly labelled as Ex. Best to use the 3.5 FAQ in this case as I wrote above, but as always it is 'DM's call'.
Not quite sure how that post says the creature is being affected by the effects of the spell/ability. His post quite literally states the spell doesn't extend out from the edges of the grid space of the creature so it doesn't cover a larger area for creatures who take up multiple grid squares. That is all he says.
There are numerous headaches that occur if the defensive ability AMF provides strips you of all magical effects, the least of which is DR. As an emanation AMF blocks LoE which is generally required for just about every other magical effect you would cast on someone else (or them to cast on you). If it stops all effects you currently have on going you end up losing spells (that great +6 stat item stops working and takes 24 hours to get back), having a lower AC (bracers of armor - gone, ring of protection - gone, amulet of natural armor - gone), your contigency spell won't work and so on and so on.
What part of any of that makes AMF a good idea? How is that even a 'good' defensive ability?
Arg, I had not even thought of that... the lich I had in mind is a slighlty altered version of http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/unique-monsters/cr-12/phaegia-human-lich-c leric-of-orcus-11
not of orcus but Urgathoa, with the magic domain instead of evil domain. But casting AMF would probably also lower his AC due to magic breastplate, and mess with his spell storing +1 mace... Well, i guess AMF has it's downsides, but these minor things are not that bad, still might be worth taking it.As for DR... i think it would be weird if DR/bludgeoning and magic became just DR/bludgeoning... is he suddenly less vulnerable to magic? If a powerfull artifact or god (those are not affected by AMF's mortal magic) attack the lich... an artifact super magical sword of a god would still damage it, i guess... so I think I am just going to keep the DR as it is. The lich won't completely lose it, because he's still a skeleton.
And apart from damage reduction, I also forgot about the liches natural armor bonus... is that a supernatural/magical thing? what about the elemental immunities? (not that it will come up, nonmagical elemental damage is easily avoidable... but i guess that since he's still a skeleton cold and electricity still don't matter)
Anyway, the idea that sparked the post was that DR on this baddie is nice in theory, but in practise useless because the players will have magical weapons... cast AMF, and suddely the barbarian with the magical axe and the paladin with the magical sword have a very hard time damaging him... and the wizards and clerics spells don't work either... of course the lich will have a hard time too... his paralysing touch doesn't work anymore (would people allready paralysed suddenly wake up again? Yes they would... strange), etcetc... but he can pummel them with his mace, they do not have (much) DR.
I think undead minions (a vampire for example) that the lich controls via his channeling/undead master feat break free as well, since they are considered to be under effect of the spell control undead... hmmm, headaches.
Anyway, the idea that sparked the post was that DR on this baddie is nice in theory, but in practise useless because the players will have magical weapons... cast AMF, and suddely the barbarian with the magical axe and the paladin with the magical sword have a very hard time damaging him... and the wizards and clerics spells don't work either... of course the lich will have a hard time too... his paralysing touch doesn't work anymore (would people allready paralysed suddenly wake up again? Yes they would... strange), etcetc... but he can pummel them with his mace, they do not have (much) DR.
I think undead minions (a vampire for example) that the lich controls via his channeling/undead master feat break free as well, since they are considered to be under effect of the spell control undead... hmmm, headaches.
I don't think it would break the control unless the minion entered the circle. Because the minion is the target of the spell.
I don't think it would break the control unless the minion entered the circle. Because the minion is the target of the spell.Anyway, the idea that sparked the post was that DR on this baddie is nice in theory, but in practise useless because the players will have magical weapons... cast AMF, and suddely the barbarian with the magical axe and the paladin with the magical sword have a very hard time damaging him... and the wizards and clerics spells don't work either... of course the lich will have a hard time too... his paralysing touch doesn't work anymore (would people allready paralysed suddenly wake up again? Yes they would... strange), etcetc... but he can pummel them with his mace, they do not have (much) DR.
I think undead minions (a vampire for example) that the lich controls via his channeling/undead master feat break free as well, since they are considered to be under effect of the spell control undead... hmmm, headaches.
The minion would be no longer in LoE of the spell which means commands could no longer be issued. And while spell states they don't attack, if intelligent, they would quite easily be able to enter the AMF which would break the spell while they were in the area.
As for DR... i think it would be weird if DR/bludgeoning and magic became just DR/bludgeoning... is he suddenly less vulnerable to magic? If a powerfull artifact or god (those are not affected by AMF's mortal magic) attack the lich... an artifact super magical sword of a god would still damage it, i guess... so I think I am just going to keep the DR as it is. The lich won't completely lose it, because he's still a skeleton.
I don't think you get it.. DR 15/bludgeoning and magic means that a weapon has to be bludgeoning AND magic to penetrate the DR. Otherwise this would read DR 15/bludgeoning OR magic, an artifact super magical sword would still have to deal with the lich's DR because it is not bludgeoning.
In short the lich is not more or less vulnerable to magic, it just isn't a requirement to penetrate his DR, removing the 'magic' part of the DR makes it slightly worse in that any mundane bludgeoning device can now hurt him.
I don't think you get it.. DR 15/bludgeoning and magic means that a weapon has to be bludgeoning AND magic to penetrate the DR. Otherwise this would read DR 15/bludgeoning OR magic, an artifact super magical sword would still have to deal with the lich's DR because it is not bludgeoning.In short the lich is not more or less vulnerable to magic, it just isn't a requirement to penetrate his DR, removing the 'magic' part of the DR makes it slightly worse in that any mundane bludgeoning device can now hurt him.
I did not know that! Is that really true? Wow, that makes liches hard to kill indeed.
So, his DR is even better than thought.That kind of lowers the use of the AMF, and I might want to make sure the players actually have some magic bludgeoning weapons.
Last question, what about the liches natural armor bonus? It might be in some sourcebook, but i can't find wether it's supernatural or extraordinary.
There are numerous headaches that occur if the defensive ability AMF provides strips you of all magical effects, the least of which is DR.
True, but that alone doesn't rule out the possibility of functioning that way.
For example, take spell resistance: On the cover it sounds like a great defensive ability for PCs.
But then you find out that it applies to every spell cast by anyone other than you. That means your cleric's Cure Light Wounds gets bounced by your SR - unless you consciously take an action to drop it.
I'd almost see AMF being treated the same way. It doesn't state that it ignores your allies' magic weapons and effects while they're in it either. I would almost argue that the only magical affects that would function within that sphere would be the ones that the AMF-caster cast herself; putting up AMF would likely suppress buffs provided by the caster's party members.
Now, that would probably leave intact its DR and any of its own buffs. This is all assuming that the spell works in as restrictive a manner as it is worded.