Is it a good thing to have 6+level or 11+level SR as a PC, or does it mess you up more often than it saves your bacon?
I almost always look for an archetype/character option that gets rid of SR, just because I've yet to play an SR-heavy character that has been helped more than hurt by their Spell Resistance. Not being healed when you NEED it is kind of annoying.
I once played in a game where all the PCs had SR. We all lowered it at the beginning of the first game and never raised it. The thought of resisting a healing spell was scarier than the thought of getting hit with offensive magic.
Must've been a house rule, Gregory, because RAW you have to use your standard action every round to keep SR down. Which is why I'm always desperate to get rid of it.
Yes thats what I thought too. It sounds amazing at first, but I do believe the negatives far outweight the benefit.
We have an Oracle in the group, so my Sorcerer probably isn't going to be the only buffer at least.
A few types of Spell Resistance don't eat a standard action to accept helpful spells: for example, once you complete the Accursed story feat, you automatically accept harmless spells. Of course, you might need quite a while of adventuring before you get this benefit.
@Mister Fluffykins It was definitely a campaign full of house rules. Having SR was awful and I was the one who pointed it out.
@OP Avoid it if possible.
Well, your own spells always bypass it, so that's one redeeming quality.
With your sorceror, as long as you have a way to heal yourself, then you should be fine.
Or you could just use a potion/wand?
A creature's spell resistance never interferes with its own spells, items, or abilities.
Yes, high-level buffs would still be a pain to apply but most could be cast right before a fight, where lowering your resistance would be no issue. Healing in-combat could still be a pain but I think SR can be very useful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IT'S A TRAP!
Putting aside RAW for a minute, is there any real reason that SR hinders friendly spells? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You can voluntarily fail a save, what's wrong with letting you choose not to apply SR to a friendly spell?
Lantern archons have Aid as a SLA, but it would be completely impossible for them to use it on a trumpet archon, as they cannot make that SR check. Hound archons have to roll a 9 or better to use Aid on their fellow hound archons, and bralanis have to roll an 11 or better to use Cure Serious Wounds on their fellow bralanis. Why do they even have these abilities if they fail half the time?
As a house rule, I would just allow people to choose which spells are affected by SR. Or if that's too generous, allow them to lower it as an immediate action instead of a standard action, lasting until the start of their next turn.
I've played a sorcerer/dragon disciple (gold) through RotR. We're currently dealing with book 5, I believe. Non-optimized character, large group (8-10) and I've been happy to be able to cast the spell Spell Resistance as a bloodline spell: 12 + caster level SR as a fifth level spell.
This isn't the same as the always on SR, but for fights, functionally, it's worse, since you have to take a round to cast. Even so, I've been happy to have it as a standard buff up for big fights many times. If I could fit a way to make it permanent into my build, I would.
In my experience with my group, it's a good buff for a buffer. Probably not good for other roles due to the impact to buffs and heals.
Yeah, I feel there is a reason.
Spell resistance is a powerful ability, one that should come with some kind of catch.
Making every spell need the check is a balancing factor for everyone with spell resistance.
Why does the superstitious barbarian need to save against any spell that is cast on him?
Because it's a powerful ability, and has downsides.
|
Typically no it is not worth it.
On my Wizards in Home Games I always change the +5 armor and SR on my Robes of the Archmage because they are typically not worth it (I play with a ring of Invis and use Miss chance, False Life and DR as my Wizard defenses not AC.
Only one time did I Ever use spell resistance was on a cleric. Was facing an Evil Bastard with lots of SLA and it had an instant hate for anything With an Aura to a god of Good (Paladins and Clerics). I knew this from the wizard going into the fight. I casted Death Ward and SR. He saw me and my Aura....targeted me and Failed to do anything to me. The Fighter Chopped him down while he tried to kill me.
I consider it to be a trap option most of the time. I wouldn't take it for free.
Yeah, I feel there is a reason.
Spell resistance is a powerful ability, one that should come with some kind of catch.
Making every spell need the check is a balancing factor for everyone with spell resistance.Why does the superstitious barbarian need to save against any spell that is cast on him?
Because it's a powerful ability, and has downsides.
The difference is that the Superstitious Barbarian isn't wasting actions to get her buffs in order. She can delay (though if the buff caster is even slightly optimized this won't be necessary lol) her turn until after all the proper in-combat buffs are cast, and THEN begin raging. As a free action!
There's a reason everyone takes superstitious but nobody takes spell resistance.
|
Only time I've seen someone want to keep SR was when the main healer was a witch with healing hexes, Spell Penetration, and Greater Spell Penetration. Normally it would be annoying to spend two feats towards healing your friend, but that campaign was full of outsiders with medium-to-high SR, so it was needed anyway.
In campaigns where SR-laden foes are uncommon, having SR is a huge issue because you can't convince your casters to spend 2 feats just so that they have better chance to buff/heal you. In those cases you either have to be buffing yourself (e.g. you are the spellcaster) or just accept that you won't get all the spells and will be last priority for targeted buffs/heals.
Yeah, I feel there is a reason.
Spell resistance is a powerful ability, one that should come with some kind of catch.
Making every spell need the check is a balancing factor for everyone with spell resistance.Why does the superstitious barbarian need to save against any spell that is cast on him?
Because it's a powerful ability, and has downsides.
There are a lot of powerful class abilities that don't come with a catch.
Having spells, for example.
A class feature (like Diamond Soul for the Monk) should not be something that 99.99% of people will be desperate to get rid of because it ACTIVELY NERFS THEM.
Depends on the SR. If your able to lower it so you can accept harmless spells (or whatever spell you wish) get it. If you are unable to lower it...well...thats a balance issue you have to decide. If you have no clerics or mages in the party then keep it as pretty much any magic you come across would be malicious
I always kinda thought that healing in combat wasn't very good anyways, but that's just me. :P
|
|
I always kinda thought that healing in combat wasn't very good anyways, but that's just me. :P
Depends on what tools you have available to heal. Using cure serious wounds? Probably a waste of time. Using lay on hands on yourself as a swift action? Good use of time. Using Heal? Probably a good use of time, especially if the target both had conditions *and* lots of HP damage.
I always kinda thought that healing in combat wasn't very good anyways, but that's just me. :P
It can be a problem when you are downed and 2 hp away from death and the healer can't get through your SR to stabilize you. Later on it discorages Heal and status removal, which is a bit more of a problem.
The main sticking point though is buffs. Having to roll for SR to apply haste is a *****. If you aren't getting them then SR isn't a big deal.
What we really need is a feat that lets you lower as a Move or Swift action. Maybe a chain that eventually lets you lower as an Immediate.
Not fun for feat-starved builds, of course. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, I feel there is a reason.
Spell resistance is a powerful ability, one that should come with some kind of catch.
Making every spell need the check is a balancing factor for everyone with spell resistance.Why does the superstitious barbarian need to save against any spell that is cast on him?
Because it's a powerful ability, and has downsides.There are a lot of powerful class abilities that don't come with a catch.
Having spells, for example.
A class feature (like Diamond Soul for the Monk) should not be something that 99.99% of people will be desperate to get rid of because it ACTIVELY NERFS THEM.
Having spells usually does come with a catch in the form of lower HD, BAB and worse armor and weapon proficiency.
Would SR also apply to potions?
Say I'd tell my party "if I ever go unconscious, I got a potion of CMW in my left pocket, just pour it down my throat", would that work, or would the potion have to go through the SR too?
Yeah, I feel there is a reason.
Spell resistance is a powerful ability, one that should come with some kind of catch.
Making every spell need the check is a balancing factor for everyone with spell resistance.Why does the superstitious barbarian need to save against any spell that is cast on him?
Because it's a powerful ability, and has downsides.There are a lot of powerful class abilities that don't come with a catch.
Having spells, for example.
A class feature (like Diamond Soul for the Monk) should not be something that 99.99% of people will be desperate to get rid of because it ACTIVELY NERFS THEM.
Okay, maybe I shouldn't have used a class feature example; I used it because it fit the context of allies' spells not working.
Spell resistance is very powerful, when you need it.
As in, harmful spells are cast against you.
Effectively gives you two saves. The 11+level obviously being more effective at this
If all members of a particular race could save twice against every spell, wouldn't you want there to be a counterbalance?
All members of a LOT of particular races can "save twice" against any spell. They're called Outsiders.
It works VERY well for Outsiders, for two reasons:
1.) They provide their own buffs.
2.) Their caster level is higher than yours.
It's that second one that's really the rub. PC spell resistance is nearly WORTHLESS because it hinders your allies more than it does most NPCs, who are probably a higher level than you if they're meant to be threatening, which means they have a higher caster level, which means they bust SR easier.
Having spells usually does come with a catch in the form of lower HD, BAB and worse armor and weapon proficiency.Yeah, I feel there is a reason.
Spell resistance is a powerful ability, one that should come with some kind of catch.
Making every spell need the check is a balancing factor for everyone with spell resistance.Why does the superstitious barbarian need to save against any spell that is cast on him?
Because it's a powerful ability, and has downsides.There are a lot of powerful class abilities that don't come with a catch.
Having spells, for example.
A class feature (like Diamond Soul for the Monk) should not be something that 99.99% of people will be desperate to get rid of because it ACTIVELY NERFS THEM.
Which isn't a downside because they have SPELLS.
And hell, most spellcasters DON'T have a lower BaB, HD, and worse armor proficiencies than the majority of classes.
Clerics, Oracles, Druids, Shamans for the full caster team all hold their own in combat as well as the Monk, Rogue, Warpriest, Bard, etc. even before spells come into play.
WITH said spells they come out over the Fighter, Cavalier, and their ilk.
Lower BaB and HD than those guys isn't a drawback, since it's directly what provides them with the most powerful class feature bar none in the game.
HAVING Full BaB and HD is the drawback in this game, since it generally means no spells 4 u.
All members of a LOT of particular races can "save twice" against any spell. They're called Outsiders.
It works VERY well for Outsiders, for two reasons:
1.) They provide their own buffs.
2.) Their caster level is higher than yours.
So are bralanis never supposed to use Cure Serious on anyone besides themselves? Do hound archons only use Aid on themselves too?
They use it on people without SR, and themselves.
Quoth Mr Ed: "Nay"
Also, people usually cast aid before a fight. :P
|
Like many have said it depends somewhat on your role in the party and also on what your saves look like. SR on an Sorc/Wiz/Witch who only has a good will save and no wisdom to back it up can be quite useful. SR is mostly detrimental to monks in my opinion. Also useful in parties for the only spellcaster (yes they do exist) or that split up and solo adventure sometimes (maybe these exist?).
I think low SR (5+lvl type) is often at least neutral and sometimes a boon. There are plenty of high CR creatures that have fewer caster levels than hit die (dragons and monsters + class levels come to mind), and your party members can often pierce that pretty easy. Doesn't often work for the BBEG but can be useful against his minions.
