I was reading 1st level spells in the PFSRD and I came across one called burning disarm.
That's one spell that except for under very specific circumstances I would want to fail my Ref save so can I forgo my save or do I have to take it like how with SR even if it's a friendly spell it's active and you have to have your SR punched.
I think it's ok. I mean, I'm not sure as of RAW, but I think you're alloed to "take 1" on any roll you make.
I was reading 1st level spells in the PFSRD and I came across one called burning disarm.
That's one spell that except for under very specific circumstances I would want to fail my Ref save so can I forgo my save or do I have to take it like how with SR even if it's a friendly spell it's active and you have to have your SR punched.
Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw: A creature can
voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a
spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to
magic can suppress this quality.
CRB, page 217 I believe.
Yes, you can voluntarily fail any save unless you have a specific rule that overrides the general rule.
Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw: A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result.
- Gauss
Edit: Ninja'd by Rynjin! :)
That's the page. I wonder, though, does it apply to all saves, or just saves against spells?
Also, what if the spellcaster has gotten the target to agree not to resist his spell, and then switches the spell on him? For instance, the party wizard intimidates someone into agreeing not to resist detect thoughts, but then the wizard casts a charm or dominate spell without the target's knowledge of the switch. Are the target's defenses still automatically down?
Implicitly: all saves. Explicitly: no such rule.
The section on spells is often extrapolated to reference to non-spell effects if there is no rules covering it.
Example: spell stacking rules are the main source for any ruling about whether effects (spell or not) stack.
Regarding switching spells. There is a debate on whether or not you can 'bait and switch'.
Some argue that you can only intentionally fail a save against a specific spell/effect.
Others state that if you do not know the effect you cannot decide to later on make the save after first deciding to fail the save.
Still others (myself included) state that it is spell/effect dependent. For example: if you are suppressing a Will save but are hit with a Fortitude save I would probably let you have the Fort save.
- Gauss
Remember that voluntarily forgoing a save isn't the same as choosing to get a natural one, just so it's said.
What's the difference? Failing is failing.
On a natural 1 from any damage spell causes the spell to ALSO target a piece of your gear. Depending on the spell, it could end up breaking it. Most DMs overlook this rule along with Fireball melting all your gold.
On a natural 1 from any damage spell causes the spell to ALSO target a piece of your gear. Depending on the spell, it could end up breaking it. Most DMs overlook this rule along with Fireball melting all your gold.
Ah, right. Yes, that's a rule I don't believe I have ever seen enforced.
Well it does need to come up for like an AOE Damage spell on a failed reflex save of a 1. So once in a blue moon kind of rule.
I know, but I've never actually seen anybody USE that rule.
Right because it would downright make your players ragequit. As would fireball melting all your gold, flammable gear(includes backpack, most ammunition, etc).
Most of the chart is your gear slots however and most necklaces, helms, and many other slots can't stand much fire anyways. Also remember Ioun stones are subject to area damage too.