| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Alright, so I have a mini-rant about this little quirk I've just discovered.
So, Harmless spells do not automatically bypass SR. So why does every notiation of SR on harmless spells include that little (harmless) tag? Harmless has literally zero effect on whether or not spell resistence applies.
The rules are pretty clear on this, so why do we tag the SR section with (harmless)? And why are there entries like this in the rules:
An undead creature can apply Spell Resistance, and can attempt a Will save to take half damage.
Is this just lazy editing, or do the devs themselves not understand how Spell Resistance applies to harmless spells?
Also: gaining Spell Resistance means you can virtually never cast spells on yourself ever again, unless they are quickened, as you have to lower your own SR as a standard action, but then it is back at the start of your next turn! No self-buffing allowed!
Seriously, there are some major problems with the way SR applies to harmless spells.
Your spells automatically bypass your own spell resistance. No lowering is required.
Alright, fair enough (re-read the SR section, hah), but the rest of my rant still applies.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Your spells automatically bypass your own spell resistance. No lowering is required.Alright, fair enough (re-read the SR section, hah), but the rest of my rant still applies.
The rest is about Harmless right?
Core:
(harmless): The spell is usually beneficial, not harmful, but a targeted creature can attempt a saving throw if it desires.
I thought your spells bypassed your own SR regardless of whether or not they were harmless.
I still think the harmless tag either allows them to bypass any and all SR, or is useless.
The harmless tag is completely useless, and is the source of my rant. That stuff about not targetting yourself was sorta tacked on, and does not apply.
However, it seems that the devs are slightly confused about this as well, so I was wondering if in the next edition of the books (and in all future books), we could have the (harmless) tag on the SR part of spells just taken off. It serves no purpose. It confuses people, and I cannot think of a single reason why you would have to label spells harmless for the purposes of SR, since SR fully applies to harmless spells.
Just to be clear, here is the rules reference that backs this up:
The terms “object” and “harmless” mean the same thing for spell resistance as they do for saving throws. 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.
Bold emphasis is mine.
The "harmless" tag gives the GM room to invent stuff like a Permeable Resistance feat (prereq: spell resistance) that causes "harmless" spells to go through your SR automatically. You could invent the feat anyway, of course, but you'd end up arguing with your players on its every application.
I kinda think the devs must have had something of the sort in mind when they stuck the tag everywhere. I realize that begs the question of why no such feats/items/etc taking advantage of it exist. :-(
I'm going to have to look, but I thought the harmless tag was for saving throws, not SR.
|
Just to be clear, here is the rules reference that backs this up:
The terms “object” and “harmless” mean the same thing for spell resistance as they do for saving throws. 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.Bold emphasis is mine.
I went on this same rant just recently trying to get some insight. I also think it's stupid.
Okay, I just had never noticed it before under SR, that's all.
Note that I completely disagree with the rant about SR. Spell Resistance means you inherently resist spells. Wanting it any other way is wanting all of the benefits but none of the drawbacks.
On the other hand, I do agree that it makes the (harmless) tag on SR pretty damn pointless :)
|
|
Okay, I just had never noticed it before under SR, that's all.
Note that I completely disagree with the rant about SR. Spell Resistance means you inherently resist spells. Wanting it any other way is wanting all of the benefits but none of the drawbacks.
On the other hand, I do agree that it makes the (harmless) tag on SR pretty damn pointless :)
That's the biggest thing, is the Harmless tag does nothing, so why even have it?
That doesn't even touch on the bigger issue of Spell Resistance being a net loss for most characters despite the fact that the game treats it as a benefit.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
That doesn't even touch on the bigger issue of Spell Resistance being a net loss for most characters despite the fact that the game treats it as a benefit.
I still don't get how some feel it is a net loss. I'd much rather deal with downtime healing taking 1 round longer for me to turn off my SR in exchange for bad guy's spells bouncing off.
|
|
That doesn't even touch on the bigger issue of Spell Resistance being a net loss for most characters despite the fact that the game treats it as a benefit.I still don't get how some feel it is a net loss. I'd much rather deal with downtime healing taking 1 round longer for me to turn off my SR in exchange for bad guy's spells bouncing off.
Yeah, but the problem is in how likely those two things are. You are far more likely in most circumstances to resist your allies heals and buffs than you are to resist your enemies affects.
Who takes feats like Spell Penetration? Not healers and buffers, generally only damage dealers.
Does the party normally fight enemies whose caster level is the same as or lower than theirs? No, they typically fight creatures or enemies who are a level or two (or more) more advanced than them.
Which classes are most likely to be SAD with higher primary stats? Sorcerers and Wizards who are designed to kill or incapacitate things. Buffers and healers are generally wearing heavier armor or using larger weapons and are more likely to need to spread their stats out, thus lowering their ability to overcome SR compared to SAD offensive casters.
Martial characters are also generally the people who can least afford to spend rounds lowering their SR to receive buffs. A standard action out for a buff or heal is probably going to be matched by wasting that rounds move action, and then wasting another move action the next round to get into position, preventing a full attack and lowering their value to the party by the moment.
The entire system is geared to make SR a bigger hindrance than help. Just look at the monk. He's already got some of the highest saves and largest number of immunities out there, right next to the paladin. Spell Resistance actually severely hurts him, because the abilities that he could save against almost negligently before still won't hurt him, but now the party buffer(s) and healer(s) are having to roll against his SR to make him more effective.
Enemy spells will very rarely bounce off. BY comparison, allied spells almost always will.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would not be in favor of removing the harmless tag. Instead I would allow the harmless tag on Spell Resistance to act the same as on Saving Throws and have those spells automatically succeed against SR unless the target specifically tries to resist the spell.
Okay, I just had never noticed it before under SR, that's all.
Note that I completely disagree with the rant about SR. Spell Resistance means you inherently resist spells. Wanting it any other way is wanting all of the benefits but none of the drawbacks.
On the other hand, I do agree that it makes the (harmless) tag on SR pretty damn pointless :)
Ok, so Something that is supposed to be a good thing is actually more hindrance then benift. A monk getting sr gets nerfed (even more) when he hits that level. WTF.
It might be pointless but at least it doesn't negatively impact the game.
But I will cry for the poor soybean plants that died to create the ink used for those extraneous 'harmless' tags.
I almost want to say it's plausible they intended or believed they were using a mechanic whereby SR was automatically dropped for when you chose to forgo a Save for Harmess spells, even though that wasn't actually implemented. But if you played that way, then there's really very little reason to ever need to drop your SR as a Standard Action, as every spell you'd want to effect you would be Harmless... Invalidating another mechanic seems weirder than a bit of superfluous text here and there.
I would not be in favor of removing the harmless tag. Instead I would allow the harmless tag on Spell Resistance to act the same as on Saving Throws and have those spells automatically succeed against SR unless the target specifically tries to resist the spell.
Same here. That would be a fine errata.
Changing the Standard action to an Immediate action might balance things out. Either it applies only to that one spell (in which case you can receive only one buff per round) or it lasts a round (in which case you're vulnerable for a bit) or it lasts until you use another IA to raise it again. Take your pick.