Magic Immunity again (yes i know)

[Max Caysey]

Hey...

I know that it has been asked before, and I have read some posts on the subject, but still I'm unsure of how to handle it, when it comes to some creatures.

Should all forms of "magic immunity" and the one epic golems or demi liches have, be updated to the 3.5 version = unlimited spell resistance or would you guys keep them as written, if they have not been updated in any official publication?

Im asking because I think the answer could go either way... but one of the answers is illogical at the same time. Therefore I would like to hear your thoughts on this and what you do at your table. Thanks!

[sleepyphoenixx]

If i ever dm an epic campaign with those enemies i'd probably leave it as it is. Infinite SR isn't much of a hindrance to spellcasters long before that level, given the amount of SR:no spells that has been added over the years in the various supplements.

I'd change it in a core-only game though, if i ever felt like playing one that is.

[sideswipe]

If i ever dm an epic campaign with those enemies i'd probably leave it as it is. Infinite SR isn't much of a hindrance to spellcasters long before that level, given the amount of SR:no spells that has been added over the years in the various supplements.

I'd change it in a core-only game though, if i ever felt like playing one that is.

possibly if you want to tone it down have it as infinite spell resistance AND auto save spells.
some magic will still work, or at least partially work. its very strong but still gives casters hope :)

[Kraken]

Just be aware that immunity to SU effects can have some strange ramifications and also cause arguments at the table unless you lay out what it means more explicitly than the rules do. For instance, I've seen people argue demiliches can't be fooled by a shadowdancer's hide in plain sight because their version of HIPS is SU. Ultimately the DM ruled that because HIPS doesn't directly affect the demilich it wasn't immune. Get stuff like this out of the way ahead of time and you'll be fine leaving it as is, I agree infinite SR isn't all that great, though it's still a good perk.

[Max Caysey]

Just be aware that immunity to SU effects can have some strange ramifications and also cause arguments at the table unless you lay out what it means more explicitly than the rules do. For instance, I've seen people argue demiliches can't be fooled by a shadowdancer's hide in plain sight because their version of HIPS is SU. Ultimately the DM ruled that because HIPS doesn't directly affect the demilich it wasn't immune. Get stuff like this out of the way ahead of time and you'll be fine leaving it as is, I agree infinite SR isn't all that great, though it's still a good perk.

Indeed... It a good point. The one big problem I saw, was the falling wall of iron. Yes its a spell but its not magical when it hits. Neither is Orb of X, so what to do... It be logic, in my mind that it was only spells that had Spell Resistance Yes.

[Honjuden]

I would update it to match the ability given to golems in 3.5.

[ericgrau]

Almost all the SR no spells don't affect the target directly or create something non-magical so magic immunity shouldn't apply. You are opening a big can of long arguments so I think it would be best to update them to 3.5 magic immunity.

Or else house-rule something clearly defined. For example call it an AMF that extends 1 inch from the immune creature's body so that spells can't originate and form there but any effects that don't touch the immune guy right away still apply. And that doesn't affect the immune guy nor his gear or spells either. Most of the time this won't be much better than infinite SR though.

[Calimehter]

To come at it from another point of view . . . you could rule that spells cannot create non-magical effects at all, meaning that there were no such thing as no-SR spells anymore.

I remember seeing this as part of a "magic fix" thread somewhere, and I was always intrigued by it. It has some big ramifications above and beyond just solving your SR question - you functionally blur the border between Conjuration and Evocation, make it hard to use magic to build things since it would be dispellabe, and so on - so might be more than you want. It *does* address your question tho so I wanted to throw it out there for your consideration. :)

[sideswipe]

To come at it from another point of view . . . you could rule that spells cannot create non-magical effects at all, meaning that there were no such thing as no-SR spells anymore.

I remember seeing this as part of a "magic fix" thread somewhere, and I was always intrigued by it. It has some big ramifications above and beyond just solving your SR question - you functionally blur the border between Conjuration and Evocation, make it hard to use magic to build things since it would be dispellabe, and so on - so might be more than you want. It *does* address your question tho so I wanted to throw it out there for your consideration. :)

i just had the image of someone dispel magic-ing their soup because its too salty :smallwink:

[Max Caysey]

Thanks for your replies...