PDA

View Full Version : Disease Question



AustontheGreat1
2010-04-13, 09:27 PM
Does immunity to disease mean that you can't be a carrier for diseases? As in can a creature immune to disease still spread a disease?

Ernir
2010-04-13, 09:46 PM
Erm, what gaming system is this? In real life, it's possible to carry a sickness without suffering the symptoms.

In D&D 3.5, I don't think mundane diseases are even infectious by RAW...

Douglas
2010-04-13, 10:00 PM
Cancer Mage goes out of its way to state that its immunity does not prevent being a disease carrier, so I think it's a pretty safe bet that normal disease immunity is intended to prevent spreading the disease to others as well.

Shhalahr Windrider
2010-04-13, 10:02 PM
Depends on the disease and how it’s spread, really. I think most carriers of Filth Fever (D&D 3.5) are technically immune to it, though not other diseases.


In D&D 3.5, I don't think mundane diseases are even infectious by RAW...
They’re certainly infectious if the listed vector occurs. Contact with a victim of slimy doom after its taken damage, for example, would be plenty enough to catch the disease.

And I don’t see how the “Inhaled” vector comes about if the infected individual isn’t coughing the germs up.

AustontheGreat1
2010-04-13, 11:11 PM
This is DnD 3.5 and thanks everyone my question has been answered

waterpenguin43
2010-04-13, 11:35 PM
If it's magical and related to the GOOD alignment, it doesn't carry it.

If it isn't, it still carries it. For example: Somebody gets a disease that harms them due to getting it in their blood. They are cut with a knife and their blood gets on said knife. The knife is, obviously, immune; But whoever it cuts next might still be infected.

Shhalahr Windrider
2010-04-13, 11:43 PM
If it isn't, it still carries it. For example: Somebody gets a disease that harms them due to getting it in their blood. They are cut with a knife and their blood gets on said knife. The knife is, obviously, immune; But whoever it cuts next might still be infected.
Depends how long the infectious agent can survive outside its host.

I suppose that does introduce another scenario. If disease immunity is meant to be a hyper-immune system, then wouldn’t the infectious agent be destroyed? So then an immune creature cannot carry.

Of course, this would vary from creature to creature. And it would be adding to RAW unless the creature description explicitly stated this is how the immunity worked. In most cases, it would actually be as above. The creature hosts the agent but is simply not affected by it.

Still, interesting thought.

Ashiel
2010-04-14, 06:18 PM
I once had an order of Paladins who were dedicated to a goddess of fertility, lust, and peace. They were very fey-like in their mannerisms. They were also very...well, to be frank they were completely unreserved with their affections for people. The fact that they were completely immune to disease and couldn't harbor it as a result (at least that was the idea), lead to them laying on hands without much regard for annoying things like STDs.

Mind you, this wasn't a BoEF styled game, and such things were merely implied or took place off-screen. They definitely weren't your run of the mill Paladins. Most of them were entirely capable of fighting, but would much rather negotiate or show evil doers that there were much more interesting things to do besides doing evil.

They actually garnished a lot of respect from the group; who saw them as really open minded, forgiving, and generally awesome Paladins; rather than the uptight judgmental paladin stereotypes.

Shhalahr Windrider
2010-04-14, 08:21 PM
Hah! Now those are Paladins! :biggrin:

AustontheGreat1
2010-04-16, 03:42 PM
as an additional question. Lets say I'm a Cancer Mage and am currently harboring more disease than Pamela Anderson; If I spit in someones mouth, do they have to make 20 or so fort saves the following morning? Because that seems really powerful to me. Whats the Limiting factor on all this?

Actually, Better Question: Wheres the best place to look if I want to learn how diseases in DnD work?

Shhalahr Windrider
2010-04-16, 05:10 PM
as an additional question. Lets say I'm a Cancer Mage and am currently harboring more disease than Pamela Anderson; If I spit in someones mouth, do they have to make 20 or so fort saves the following morning? Because that seems really powerful to me. Whats the Limiting factor on all this?
Well, the primary in-character limiting factor is the fact that not all diseases will be transferred through spit. Just spitting on someone would at best infect the subject with Contact diseases. The DM will also be within his or her rights to rule that certain Contact diseases also require more material than a small bit of spit to be infectious.

Out of character, another limit is the fact that there aren’t even 20 diseases listed in the DMG. Unless your DM has been working overtime introducing new diseases, you just don’t you’ll have your work cut out for you in contracting them. As near as I can tell, the ability to maintain oneself as a carrier for every disease encountered is supposed to be balanced primarily by this fact. Unfortunately, Book of Vile Darkness also added seventeen new diseases to play, thereby undermining any potential balance factor. I would advise a DM to make a more practical limit.


Actually, Better Question: Wheres the best place to look if I want to learn how diseases in DnD work?
I am not aware of any official source that really expands upon what is listed in the DMG for diseases. The most I’ve seen is the addition of new diseases that mostly follow the rules therein. If you want to expand on the role of disease in your campaign, I’d recommend looking for homebrew and third-party solutions.