Does immunity to transmutation make you unable to use a belt of strength?

[randian]

It has a faint aura of transmutation, and is based on a transmutation spell, though it is not explicitly labeled a transmutation effect. So far as I know the spell or effect on which an item is based doesn't necessarily mean that the item is in fact applying that spell to the user unless it explicitly says so. Boots of speed are also "faint transmutation" items.

[PrismCat21]

How are they immune to transmutation?
Are they immune only to transmutation spells? All Transmutation effects? Effects that only transform them into other creatures?

Need a bit more info.

[randian]

How are they immune to transmutation?
Are they immune only to transmutation spells? All Transmutation effects? Effects that only transform them into other creatures?

Assume it's an extraordinary ability like "immune to paralysis" or "immune to polymorph" (itself a subset of Transmutation), so presumably it would include all Transmutation effects, including supernatural and extraordinary ones, not just spells.

[PrismCat21]

If they're immune to all transmutation effects, then I would say transmutation effects from magic items would not affect them, period.

Short and simple.

[randian]

If they're immune to all transmutation effects, then I would say transmutation effects from magic items would not affect them, period.

Sure, but is a belt of giant strength a Transmutation effect? Looking like one doesn’t make it one.

[Hellpyre]

Sure, but is a belt of giant strength a Transmutation effect? Looking like one doesn’t make it one.

RAW is very slightly unclear, but per SRD:


When detect magic identifies a magic item’s school of magic, this information refers to the school of the spell placed within the potion, scroll, or wand, or the prerequisite given for the item. The description of each item provides its aura strength and the school it belongs to.

The item appears to belong to the school, and total immunity should probably also cover item effects.

[Mordaedil]

You can lower immunity to allow something you're normally immune to as a free action and raise it back up as a standard action, so you can lower your immunity to allow the belt to affect you and then raise your immunity back up after.

[KillingAScarab]

Yes, generally, if you are immune to a school or subschool of magic, that includes the beneficial effects. This means that bardic music (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/bard.htm#bardicMusic) cannot buff allies who have protection from enchantment or mind-affecting effects.

If that isn't satisfactory, you could try to throw some Wolfgang Baur at it. Say the belt of giant strength was made by a shadowsworn (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?279059-The-worst-Open-Game-Content-base-core-classes), who cast all their spells using the non-existent shadow school regardless of the normal school, because the author had a dubious grasp on the magic system. This is, of course, a dubious step to take.


You can lower immunity to allow something you're normally immune to as a free action and raise it back up as a standard action, so you can lower your immunity to allow the belt to affect you and then raise your immunity back up after.I believe you are thinking of spell resistance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#spellResistance). Emphasis is mine

The terms "object" and "harmless" mean the same thing for spell resistance as they do for saving throws. A creature with spell resistance must voluntarily lower the resistance (a standard action) in order to be affected by a spell noted as harmless. In such a case, you do not need to make the caster level check described above.
An elf cannot allow itself to be affected by a sleep spell. They are immune because they do not sleep.

[Vaern]

It depends on how your immunity functions.
If it's like spell immunity, which says that you're treated as having unbeatable spell resistance, then presumably a magic item that you are wearing will not be subject to such a spell resistance barrier.
If it's written like a racial immunity, like an elf's sleep immunity, it may be willingly lowered to accept an effect as previously stated.
Where are you getting immunity to transmutation from? I know of some things that have immunity to polymorph and shape-changing effects, which a strength bonus would not be subject to, but I can't think of anything that has immunity to the whole school.


I believe you are thinking of spell resistance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#spellResistance). Emphasis is mine

An elf cannot allow itself to be affected by a sleep spell. They are immune because they do not sleep.
It's actually in the section regarding saving throws, not spell resistance.

Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw: A creature can volun-tarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic (for example, an elf’s resistance to sleep effects) can suppress this quality.
The SRD entries that I checked all excluded the specific example of the elf's sleep immunity, so I checked the book to pull out the original quote.

[randian]

Where are you getting immunity to transmutation from? I know of some things that have immunity to polymorph and shape-changing effects, which a strength bonus would not be subject to, but I can't think of anything that has immunity to the whole school.
Custom intelligent monster. You can’t turn it into a newt but it can’t Haste itself either.

[KillingAScarab]

It's actually in the section regarding saving throws, not spell resistance.

The SRD entries that I checked all excluded the specific example of the elf's sleep immunity, so I checked the book to pull out the original quote.I, too, own a first printing PHB for 3.5. I'm surprised to find this wasn't covered in errata (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata). However, Rules Compendium page 112 (or pages 130 and 131) made no mention of this.

It seems like a bad example, one which possibly arose because in an earlier draft elves may have only had a bonus to saving throws against sleep spells. That would go some way toward explaining why that appears in a section about saving throws. But, I can't corroborate that. With my understanding of an elf's trance, I feel that an elf being able to allow a sleep spell to affect it would be comparable to a grimlock (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/grimlock.htm) allowing a gaze attack to affect it.

[Crake]

I, too, own a first printing PHB for 3.5. I'm surprised to find this wasn't covered in errata (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/errata). However, Rules Compendium page 112 (or pages 130 and 131) made no mention of this.

It seems like a bad example, one which possibly arose because in an earlier draft elves may have only had a bonus to saving throws against sleep spells. That would go some way toward explaining why that appears in a section about saving throws. But, I can't corroborate that. With my understanding of an elf's trance, I feel that an elf being able to allow a sleep spell to affect it would be comparable to a grimlock (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/grimlock.htm) allowing a gaze attack to affect it.

What what I understand, elves most certainly can sleep, just like outsiders can sleep, if they choose to do so, but trancing is by far more efficient, so few, if any, ever actually do sleep voluntarily. Basically "Does not" and "Cannot" are not equivilencies.

The question of where you draw the line becomes iffy though. Obviously a mindless undead cannot lower it's immunity to mind affecting, in part because it lacks the mind to do so, but also because it lacks a mind to affect, much like trying to sneak attack an elemental. I tend to draw the line where it becomes physiologically impossible to be affected by something. For example, undead and poisons/stunning/crits. Their bodies lack the ability to be affected by those things, so no matter how much they try to lower their immunity, they cannot. On the other hand however, a lich most certainly CAN be affected by polymorph spells, so he most certainly can lower his immunity.

[Vaern]

The question of where you draw the line becomes iffy though. Obviously a mindless undead cannot lower it's immunity to mind affecting, in part because it lacks the mind to do so, but also because it lacks a mind to affect, much like trying to sneak attack an elemental. I tend to draw the line where it becomes physiologically impossible to be affected by something.
Technically, a mindless undead could lower its immunity to mind-affecting spells, but it is the nature of mind-affecting spells that they can not affect a creature with less than 1 intelligence even if they happen to not explicitly have immunity.
Similarly, a grimlock could willingly lower his immunity to gaze attacks, but it is the nature of gaze attacks that they can not affect a creature that can not see.

An elemental, on the other hand, is described as being not subject to critical hits. It has no immunity to lower - critical hits simply do not affect it, whether it is willing or not. There is a difference to being "immune" to something and being "not subject" to something, which is is important to note as sneak attack explicitly says that it doesn't work on creatures that are immune to critical hits. In addition, the sneak attack description specifies that undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack, making no mention of elementals. Thus, one might argue that sneak attacks can, in fact, affect elementals.

[Falontani]

How does all this function with excluded schools of magic for specialist wizards? Can a wizard with transmutation (a rather poor choice it seems) as a prohibited school not benefit from an intelligence item with Fox's Cunning as a prerequisite?

[tyckspoon]

How does all this function with excluded schools of magic for specialist wizards? Can a wizard with transmutation (a rather poor choice it seems) as a prohibited school not benefit from an intelligence item with Fox's Cunning as a prerequisite?

Doesn't interact with specialization at all - specialization prevents a Wizard from casting spells of the prohibited schools. It does not prevent those spells from affecting the Wizard in any way; somebody or something else can cast a prohibited spell on the specialist Wizard, the Wizard just can't be the source of it.

[randian]

The item appears to belong to the school, and total immunity should probably also cover item effects.
Probably, though magic items have confounding rules. For example, while Magic Weapon is a Transmutation spell and the magical basis for magic weapons, actual magic weapons radiate Evocation not Transmutation.

[KillingAScarab]

Probably, though magic items have confounding rules. For example, while Magic Weapon is a Transmutation spell and the magical basis for magic weapons, actual magic weapons radiate Evocation not Transmutation.That is a guideline (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicItemBasics.htm#magicItemsandDetectMagic) provided when no spell was listed on what was required to create the item. A belt of giant stength (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#beltofGiantStrength) is listed as having moderate transmutation, and requires bull's strength (a transmutation spell) to make.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Radiating Transmutation magic does not make the strength bonus granted by a belt of giant strength a Transmutation effect. The belt will function just fine.