PDA

View Full Version : [PF] Ice Tomb Hex vs. Undead.



Barstro
2014-04-04, 11:07 AM
The Witch Hex of Ice Tomb has an old description and an errata. IMO, the errata does not address the problem (caused mostly by fluff language).

Ice Tomb.
Effect: A storm of ice and freezing wind envelops the target, which takes 3d8 points of cold damage (Fortitude half). If the target fails its save, it is paralyzed and unconscious but does not need to eat or breathe while the ice lasts. The ice has 20 hit points; destroying the ice frees the creature, which is staggered for 1d4 rounds after being released. Whether or not the target’s saving throw is successful, it cannot be the target of this hex again for 1 day.
Errata/Clarification
What is the range of ice tomb hex? Can it affect objects? Does the target need to drink? Can it affect a cold-immune creature? If the target succeeds at its save, is it still imprisoned? How long does it last?

Like most major hexes, the range is 60 feet.

In the second printing of Ultimate Magic, the text says, "A storm of ice and freezing wind envelops the creature...," so it only affects creatures, not objects.

The target doesn't need to eat, breathe, or drink.

The general assumption for effects is if the creature negates the damage from the effect, the creature isn't subject to additional effects from that attack (such as DR negating the damage from a poisoned weapon, which means the creature isn't subject to the poison). Therefore, a cold-immune creature takes no damage from the hex and can't be imprisoned by it.

A target that succeeds at its save takes half damage and is not imprisoned.

Under temperate conditions, the ice lasts 1 minute per witch level. In tropical environments it might only last half as long. In cold environments where ice and snow persist without melting, it might last indefinitely.

Source(s) Ultimate Magic FAQ

My issue is as follows;
The ice only surrounds the creature; it does not infiltrate the creature. As such, it is an external force, much like a stone wall. I see no reason that an undead would be immune to all this hard ice suddenly appearing around it.

What I think should happen (and my logic) that I will present to my DM is as follows;
1) Undead are valid targets of Ice Tomb (They are "creatures")
2) Undead cannot be "paralyzed and unconscious". (immune to paralysis, immune to sleep)
3) Undead are trapped in the ice. (Fortitude save is only for HALF damage. The other part of the damage does not get a save. Since that part does not get a save, the "immune to any effect that requires a fortitude save (which should really be only for things effecting the body, not external to it) has no effect).
EDIT 3a) It might be fair to have a second save be reflex (some damage is cold, some damage is particles of ice flying around)
4) Because they are still conscious, the undead can break out after dealing 20 damage to the ice (possibly while considered "grappled").
5) If the undead do no break out, the ice melts (one minutes per level, depending on temperature)
6) Once free, undead are not staggered, etc.

I think this turns a very overpowered hex with a ridiculous 100% failure rate against a target witches already cannot harm into a slightly overpowered hex that still is marginally useful in a fight.

Any thoughts before I present this? I'm trying to keep my witch relevant without being overpowered.

Psyren
2014-04-04, 11:42 AM
By RAW undead are immune. Whether the save is Fort negates or Fort partial, it is still a fort save that does not affect objects.

I think you'll have better luck saying "I know the rules say X, but I think it would make more sense if you ruled it as Y" rather than "My reading of the rules is Y and nothing else."'

Finally, note that (non-gravewalker) Witches are intended to be weak against undead.

Barstro
2014-04-04, 12:32 PM
By RAW undead are immune. Whether the save is Fort negates or Fort partial, it is still a fort save that does not affect objects.

I think you'll have better luck saying "I know the rules say X, but I think it would make more sense if you ruled it as Y" rather than "My reading of the rules is Y and nothing else."'

Finally, note that (non-gravewalker) Witches are intended to be weak against undead.

I should have been more clear that I do understand what the rules say. It's just that the basis for the rules don't really apply when the force is external to the body. Granted, the part that makes it external to the body is the fluff part of the spell and not a true effect.

While I wish the rules made more sense, I'm not really asking that they be changed (by SKR, at least), more curious if my proposed houserule struck anyone as being an inherently bad idea.

Given that, as you say, witches are intentionally weak against undead, I'll spend some time thinking of other avenues.