
Khelvan |
Hello its possible that it was asked, but i didnt found something.
I need to know how the following would be handled correct.
BBEG casts scorching ray at target and hits 3 times.
Target has resist fire 30 / SR 24 and a Spellturning spell with
7 Spell levels left.
What applies first?
Does the BBEG needs to beat the SR First or would the Spell be turned first?
Since its a 2 Level spell it would cost 2 Levels from the Spellturning for all rays or 2 per ray?
Best regards
Khel

DM_Blake |

I'm not so sure Spell Turning does not apply. It cannot be used against spells with a range of "Touch" but Scorching Ray has a range of "Close". That's different.
I would apply Spell Turning first. There is no point in resisting some damage if the spell never hits you, so Spell Turning must be the first layer of defense.
Next is Spell Resistance. There is no point resisting it AFTER the damage is reduced by Energy Resistance; this should be "ALL or nothing", not "partial or nothing".
Both of those apply to the entire spell - if either one works, it affects all three rays. It's not possible to turn one back and have the other two hit you, nor is it possible to resist one and get hit by the other two.
Lastly, if the spell is not bounced back and is not resisted entirely, then apply the Energy Resistance fully to each ray, one at a time - which should eliminate all the damage because the Scorching Ray hits separately 3 times for a maximum damage of 24 each for each ray, not enough to beat the 30 resistance.

Byakko |
It's always a bit ambiguous when multiple effects are supposed to trigger simultaneously. However, if we read the trigger conditions:
Spell Turning: "Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster."
Spell Resistance: "To affect a creature that has spell resistance, a spellcaster must make a caster level check..."
Now, I would say a spell must target a creature before it can affect the creature, thus Spell Turning would happen slightly before Spell Resistance.
Therefore, I agree with DM_Blake, although for reasons different than his.