I searched for an answer on these forums and haven't find one. Does a superstitous barbarian (that is, a barbarian with the superstition rage power)--that successfully saves vs a cure spell during a rage (i.e. the spell is not successful)--still get healed for 1/2 of the spell's effect?
Saving Throw Will half (harmless)
--and--
An undead creature can apply spell resistance, and can attempt a Will save to take half damage.
.
Basically, I can see that being interpreted three possible ways, with varying degrees of adherence/favor to intent, the spell's statblock, or the spell's descriptive text.
Which of these is correct:
1) The statblock that says "Saving Throw Will half (harmless)" applies to all targets
2) The descriptive text means that only undead need to save against the spell in any situation
3) The descriptive text means that only undead get the half "damage"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You probably weren't able to find an answer here, because this is the Pathfinder Society Forum, for discussing topics such as Chronicles, Scenarios, Setting, etc.
I'll go ahead and flag your post for the 1E Rules Questions Forum, where you're more likely to get an accurate answer, from people who know the rules more intricately (many people here haven't touched 1E in years).
Yeah, I searched there too. I've found that forum to have little value for PFS, as you get all sorts of opinions and house rules and "how I would run it," when I want an official RAW interpretation for PFS.
I wish we had a specific PFS Rules subforum for that reason.
|
|
This question doesn't seem like that much of a build breaker, though, right?
I would just ask your GM before game how they would handle it, until you get an answer in the Rules Forum.
That's actually the "official" way to handle rules ambiguities in PFS1, and it's why there's no "PFS Rules" subforum.
1) The statblock that says "Saving Throw Will half (harmless)" applies to all targets
Option one is the correct one. There are other spells that have Will Negates (harmless) (such as invisibility) which completely negates the effect of the spell. The 'harmless' tag is merely there to denote that the spell is generally beneficial but that saving throws can be made if the recipient wishes to.
1) The statblock that says "Saving Throw Will half (harmless)" applies to all targetsOption one is the correct one. There are other spells that have Will Negates (harmless) (such as invisibility) which completely negates the effect of the spell. The 'harmless' tag is merely there to denote that the spell is generally beneficial but that saving throws can be made if the recipient wishes to.
However, in this case, the descriptive text says specifically that an undead creature "can" save vs the effect; if all targets "can" save vs the effect, that text is meaningless. Isn't that then a further clarification that basically says the Saving Throw line in the statblock is limited to undead only?
... Since undead are powered by negative energy, this spell deals damage to them instead of curing their wounds. An undead creature can apply spell resistance, and can attempt a Will save to take half damage.
There is no conflict here. The default status of this spell is to 'heal' the recipient and allows for them to make a saving throw (if they want to, since the spell is beneficial) to halve the effect. Since undead take damage from the spell, the 'harmless' tag is going to be rendered irrelevant and must save to take half damage from a 'harmful' spell.
The text is not meaningless. It is just not being interpreted correctly. 'Harmless' simply means that the spell is usually beneficial.
I'm not sold yet.
For what it's worth, I completely understand the harmless tag; that was never in question. It was only included in my quotation from the spell for completeness, not because I was confused about how to interpret it. The way that your answers seem to focus on it so heavily seems to distract from the meat of my interpretation. I see that tag as not in question at all, and not relevant to the question at hand. (Obviously, any cure spell is harmless to the barbarian in question, and whether that barbarian gets--or is forced--to save does not depend on whether the spell is categorized as harmless or not. If a spell allows a save, a superstitious barbarian must save whether its harmless or not.)
I don't believe that the line about negative energy vis a vis undead is relevant to the question at hand either. To me it hinges on the fact that if all targets "can" save vs this spell, the text about undead being allowed a save is meaningless and doesn't need to be there. Pointing out that it's positive energy and thus harms undead is meaningful, but the part about saves isn't if everyone is allowed a save. My current leaning is that including that line ipso facto means that targets that aren't undead don't have that option.
Remember, my question is about PFS, and PFS is the most rigid interpretation of the rules. What the text says is to be interpreted precisely.
Still open for new arguments that might change my mind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know what to tell you at this point. You state you 'completely understand' the 'harmless' tag and yet, it seems that you do not. I do not want to seem condescending. This issue is not overly complex. Bear with me while I break this down, as it might help.
For any (other) spell, 'Saving Throw: Will half' means that the target can make saving throw to reduce the effect by half. What the spell does isn't important at this moment.
Adding 'harmless' to the spell "Saving Throw: Will half (harmless)' means: The recipient may make a saving throw (if it wishes) to reduce the effect by half, though the spell is generally beneficial. This is similar to 'voluntarily failing a saving throw' (which the superstition barbarian cannot do in a rage).
Because of the nature of this spell (and that it is almost literally word for word from 3.5e D&D), special mention must be made of its interaction with the Undead. It is merely clarifying that undead can make a will saving throw for half damage, but make special note that the (harmless) tag is no longer present in the additional text within the special description when it comes to the undead. It is only present when the spell is used to target non-undead.
Wrapping this back around to the barbarian in question. They MUST make a saving throw to resist the effects of the spell. They cannot voluntarily fail the save. That means, as with every other spell that allows for a saving throw for half effect, they only receive half the effect if they make the save. There is no special language in the superstition rage power that specifies that the barbarian can ignore the 'half' effect of the spell in question.
To summarize: Everyone gets to make a saving throw for Cure Light Wounds, if they want to do so or must do so, that is what (harmless) means as a tag.
(harmless) - The spell is usually beneficial, not harmful, but a targeted creature can attempt a saving throw if it desires.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember, my question is about PFS, and PFS is the most rigid interpretation of the rules. What the text says is to be interpreted precisely.
GMs in Society must run the rules as they interpret them to be intended, that's it. There is nothing that says 'RAW' or any similar term in the Guide, simply that GMs should run as they understand the intent of the rules.
In my experience in Society you will find that most GMs understand the spell to allow a saving throw, for anyone who should desire, for half effect (in this case the barbarian would be required to try to save). I would personally have that as my base assumption if you are a player of a superstitious barbarian. If you're the GM then whichever way you believe is the intended reading is how you should run it at your tables, lacking any official clarification (which you won't get from the designers on the forums).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember, my question is about PFS, and PFS is the most rigid interpretation of the rules. What the text says is to be interpreted precisely.
This is actually incorrect, and has never been true.
Such guidance has never been included in any of the 11 Seasons' Guides, and has never been reiterated by any member of Leadership.
The actual way to handle ambiguous rules, in PFS1, I linked earlier up thread. And that was posted 8 years ago.
|
|
Whenever I played PFS back in the day, all the local gms made the barbarian make the will save.
it was a rather large sample size (i was a regular at 5 different stores with a multi table pfs presence, and several other smaller stores)
i also ran healers with other healing methods to circumvent the issue (channel energy, life link, etc.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Superstition (Ex): The barbarian gains a +2 morale bonus on saving throws made to resist spells, supernatural abilities, and spell-like abilities. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. While raging, the barbarian cannot be a willing target of any spell and must make saving throws to resist all spells, even those cast by allies.
The rage power specifies you must make saving throws to resist all spells. Cure spells have a saving throw so you must make it. There are other things besides undead that take damage from positive energy, they also get a saving throw vs. cure spells even though they are not undead.
However, in this case, the descriptive text says specifically that an undead creature "can" save vs the effect; if all targets "can" save vs the effect, that text is meaningless. Isn't that then a further clarification that basically says the Saving Throw line in the statblock is limited to undead only?
No, it's not. I get where you're coming from, but that's simply not how Pathfidner is written. You're right that the text in the description is redundant, however, Pathfinder is chock full of unnecessary text.
Vital Strike says "When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus", the second part of it is already stated by the rules on the attack action. Weapon Training says you add the bonus to CMB of maneuvers made with those weapon, even though that is already covered in the maneuver rules. Mobility and Haste say you lose the dodge bonus when denied the dex bonus, even though the combat rules already says that. The Monk's Unarmed Strike class feature says "This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full.", even though everyone can do that. Almost every natural weapon granting option repeats part of the natural attack rules (e.g. that it becomes a secondary attack when combined with manufactured weapon attacks).
All of these are what you might describe as "reminder text", i.e. text whose sole purpose is to remind the players of existing rules. CLW is just like that - 99% when you use a cure spell, the target does not roll a saving throw because "A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result." CRB pg. 217, and thus it would be easy to forget that cure spells have that "Will half" line.
Indeed, PF's writing norms for spells that only some creatures save agains dictate a "see text" added to the saving throw line, compare e.g.Chaos Hammer.
All in all, the line "An undead creature [...] can attempt a Will save to take half damage." does not in any way indicate that other creatures can't make a save. And without that assumption, it becomes clear that "Will half" applies to all targets.
Also, there is nothing stopping someone from choosing to automatically fail the save (as if it were harmless) even if it isn't harmless. Harmless is essentially a redundant but useful word they added to indicate "hey in case you don't want to read upwards of 3-5 paragraphs of text to be certain this spell won't deceptively screw you, there's no harmful gimmicks hidden in a cure spell or invisibility spell unless you're otherwise exceptional such as being an undead."
If for some weird and specific reason you wanted to intentionally fail a save vs a fireball, say because you heal based on fire damage, you can just choose to take a nat 1. There's even the Sadomasochism spell where it's even more obvious why you (as someone targeted by the spell) would choose to fail the save.