Elemental Blast (Sp): At 9th level, you can unleash a blast of elemental power once per day. This 20-foot-radius burst does 1d6 points of damage of your energy type per sorcerer level. Those caught in the area of your blast receive a Reflex save for half damage. Creatures that fail their saves gain vulnerability to your energy type until the end of your next turn. The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 your sorcerer level + your Charisma modifier. At 9th level, you can use this ability once per day. At 17th level, you can use this ability twice per day. At 20th level, you can use this ability three times per day. This power has a range of 60 feet.
Creatures that fail their reflex saves gain a vulnerability to your energy type, not those that are -damaged- by the ability. This means 2 things:
1) Elemental Blast applies the vulnerability first (done at the time of the save) followed by the damage, meaning it does more damage than previously believed.
2) More importantly, Elemental Blast could potentially hurt creatures with resistance or even immunity to cold damage. I'm not sure what the ruling is, but if someone who is immune is affected by an ability to become vulnerable, what does it mean? Are they still immune? Do they become vulnerable? Do the two cancel each other out and they simply take regular damage from that energy source?
It would make sense an ability that can only be used once a day (at first anyway) would have very powerful capabilities, a means for elemental sorcerers to provide a fighting chance against an enemy that normally could not be harmed by their bloodline.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a creature is Immune to something (damage), it is still Immune to that something (damage), even if that something (damage) is increased by 50%. It could definitely do more damage to something that is only resistant to the damage.
A creature with energy immunity never takes damage from that energy type. Vulnerability means the creature takes half again as much (+50%) damage as normal from that energy type, regardless of whether a saving throw is allowed or if the save is a success or failure.
It never actually says that a creature doesn't have to make saving throws. Energy immunity seems to only make you immune to the damage a spell does, not any other effects of the spell. That means something that fails the save would gain vulnerability.
1) Elemental Blast applies the vulnerability first (done at the time of the save) followed by the damage, meaning it does more damage than previously believed.
A good general rule is that you do everything in order written unless otherwise specified. It is not otherwise specified, so you would apply the damage first then apply the vulnerability.
2) More importantly, Elemental Blast could potentially hurt creatures with resistance or even immunity to cold damage. I'm not sure what the ruling is, but if someone who is immune is affected by an ability to become vulnerable, what does it mean? Are they still immune? Do they become vulnerable? Do the two cancel each other out and they simply take regular damage from that energy source?
Going back to the first quote, a creature that is immune to a damage type will never take damage of that type. 150% of something times 0 is still 0; this means even if you're vulnerable.
1) Elemental Blast applies the vulnerability first (done at the time of the save) followed by the damage, meaning it does more damage than previously believed.A good general rule is that you do everything in order written unless otherwise specified. It is not otherwise specified, so you would apply the damage first then apply the vulnerability.
I can see where that could make sense, but personally the order of operation should be
1)spell cast
2)save
3)failed save consequence
4)end result (damage, spell effect, etc.)
Guess this is something that would be left up to DM fiat, but it's just what makes the most sense. I do admit this is a pretty weird scenario. Usually a successful or failed save determines the final spell effect rather than a secondary effect that might alter the overall end result.
On the other hand, I solidly can't argue the logic regarding immunity and vulnerability unless a dev walks in and says that vulnerability overrides immunity.