How interesting is the Fire subtype?

[St Fan]

Sandstorm introduces the Blazing Berserker, who gets the fire subtype when raging, as well as the spell mantle of the fiery spirit, who can grant the fire subtype permanently.

My question is, ignoring the XP cost and component cost of the spell (a Dweomerkeeper can cast it for free anyway), how interesting exactly is this subtype?

Sure, you get immunity to fire, and it is (Ex) -- the spell is instantaneous, thus it can’t be dispelled nor it will shut down in an anti-magic field.

In exchange, however, you not only get vulnerability to cold, but also become susceptible to a number of powers and spell. Here’s a quick and non-exhaustive list:


You can get turned by a cleric with the Water domain, or rebuked by a cleric with the Fire domain.
You are affected, or further harmed, by the following spells:
antifire sphere
cold fire
hydrate
red tide
thalassemia
wall of water
waves of cold
You may gain immunity to some other effects, however, like the spell extract water elemental.


What are your thoughts on this? Are the pros of gaining the subtype overshadowed by the cons?

[Venger]

fire is the most common damage type, so getting immunity is pretty great. clerics are unlikely to give you much trouble. if you run into a monster who can exploit your vulnerability, you can correct for it with spells or polymorphing. go for it. get the cold subtype too for more immunity

[St Fan]

Although not stated by the rules, it's very unlikely a DM will allow having both the cold and fire subtype.

Notably there's a spell, mantle of the icy soul, which gives the cold subtype, but only temporarily. On a creature with the fire subtype, it just removes it instead for the duration of the spell.

Of course, that makes it a good complement for mantle of the fiery spirit. In the rare cases it could be too much of a liability, like exploring a paraelemental plane of ice, casting mantle of the icy soul will take care of it for a few hours.

[liquidformat]

In the case of Blazing Berserker it is often pared with Frozen Berserker in frost rager builds. However, like St Fan pointed out the big question is, is this theoretical optimization or would your run of the mill dm actually allow this?...

[Venger]

In the case of Blazing Berserker it is often pared with Frozen Berserker in frost rager builds. However, like St Fan pointed out the big question is, is this theoretical optimization or would your run of the mill dm actually allow this?...

there's no rule against it, and dealing some piddly energy damage isn't going to break anyone's game .

[liquidformat]

there's no rule against it, and dealing some piddly energy damage isn't going to break anyone's game .

I am a bit confused about your comment, Blazing Berserker gives you the fire subtype while raging, Frozen Berserker gives you the cold subtype while raging. So if you have both feats you should be immune to fire and cold, though whether those two feats actually work together is up to the dm since it isn't against RAW but might be RAI. I just brought up frost rager prc because that is when you most often see this feat combo on optimization boards...

[Conradine]

The good thing is that you choose when getting that subtipe and when not.

But I always asked myself if you can have both cold and fire subtipes.

[Ramza00]

It allows you to be constantly on fire and suffer no recuperations, until family members without the subtype want to hug you.

[Venger]

I am a bit confused about your comment, Blazing Berserker gives you the fire subtype while raging, Frozen Berserker gives you the cold subtype while raging. So if you have both feats you should be immune to fire and cold, though whether those two feats actually work together is up to the dm since it isn't against RAW but might be RAI. I just brought up frost rager prc because that is when you most often see this feat combo on optimization boards...
What exactly confuses you? Those two feats absolutely work together.


The good thing is that you choose when getting that subtipe and when not.

But I always asked myself if you can have both cold and fire subtipes.

Yes, you can have both subtypes at once.

[Particle_Man]

Since it is only on while raging, when fighting a white dragon (or whatever) just don’t rage.

[liquidformat]

Yes, you can have both subtypes at once.

I know of no source that says you can have both subtypes at the same time, only that the two feats don't say you can't take one if you have the other and don't comment on how they interact.

With an absence of explicit ruling it is then up to dm fiat, so a dm saying no they don't work together or cancel each other out is as correct as one who says you are immune to both fire and cold.

[Crake]

It's absolutely horrible, because you have now made yourself susceptible to unbreakable, non-mind affecting mind control in the form of a fire domain cleric (or anyone able to access domain powers at a decent level) rebuke fire creatures ability.

As a side note, mantle of the fiery spirit is a great way to then control someone.

[Venger]

It's absolutely horrible, because you have now made yourself susceptible to unbreakable, non-mind affecting mind control in the form of a fire domain cleric (or anyone able to access domain powers at a decent level) rebuke fire creatures ability.

As a side note, mantle of the fiery spirit is a great way to then control someone.

That's theoretically possible, but setting gentleman's agreement aside, how often do you encounter a cleric with an effective turning level of twice your level? And who also has the fire domain? Is that something that happens to you guys a lot?

[liquidformat]

It's absolutely horrible, because you have now made yourself susceptible to unbreakable, non-mind affecting mind control in the form of a fire domain cleric (or anyone able to access domain powers at a decent level) rebuke fire creatures ability.

As a side note, mantle of the fiery spirit is a great way to then control someone.

how would that interact with a character that only has that subtype while raging? Once the rage ends the cleric/rebuker looses control?

[Venger]

how would that interact with a character that only has that subtype while raging? Once the rage ends the cleric/rebuker looses control?

No. Like everything else in the game, it only checks if they're a legal target when the thing is applied. If you were rebuked while you had the fire type, you stay rebuked even after your rage is over.

[Mr Adventurer]

No. Like everything else in the game, it only checks if they're a legal target when the thing is applied. If you were rebuked while you had the fire type, you stay rebuked even after your rage is over.

Is this supported in the rules text? I know it is for spells, but I didn't think the turning rules were comprehensively written enough to cover this situation; it's not like being temporarily undead is a common effect.

[Venger]

Is this supported in the rules text? I know it is for spells, but I didn't think the turning rules were comprehensively written enough to cover this situation; it's not like being temporarily undead is a common effect.

Yeah. When you apply any sort of effect, spells included, you just check whether the target is legal when you apply it. You don't have to take into account all the things the target could be later, or nothing would ever work on anything.

It might not be common, but it's possible. If a cleric had a very high effective turning level, he could command a lich, who is able to use polymorph effects if he wants to. If the lich polymorphed into a different type, he wouldn't suddenly stop being commanded. It would persist because effects only care if you're a legal target when they are applied. It doesn't matter what you do later.

[Mr Adventurer]

Yeah. When you apply any sort of effect, spells included, you just check whether the target is legal when you apply it. You don't have to take into account all the things the target could be later, or nothing would ever work on anything.

It might not be common, but it's possible. If a cleric had a very high effective turning level, he could command a lich, who is able to use polymorph effects if he wants to. If the lich polymorphed into a different type, he wouldn't suddenly stop being commanded. It would persist because effects only care if you're a legal target when they are applied. It doesn't matter what you do later.

Yes, I understand what you're saying - but where are the rules to support it? I don't think I've seen them.

"Nothing would ever work on anything" definitely seems like an overstatement, FWIW

[St Fan]

Yes, I understand what you're saying - but where are the rules to support it? I don't think I've seen them.

"Nothing would ever work on anything" definitely seems like an overstatement, FWIW

There is a Sage Advice ruling on this, I believe; the question comes up from times to times.

It is an important rule, indeed. You can't break an effect already in place just by changing your creature type to one not concerned by it. As Venger said, whether a target is valid for a spell or effect is checked when cast, and not afterward.

This, quite naturally, can be abused. There are spells that can change your type, or even give you an alignment subtype (notably soul of anarchy and soul of order), and thus can be used to have permanent spells cast on you that demand a specific creature type or alignment (like axiomatic creature) that wouldn't work normally.

[tiercel]

That's theoretically possible, but setting gentleman's agreement aside, how often do you encounter a cleric with an effective turning level of twice your level? And who also has the fire domain? Is that something that happens to you guys a lot?

This was my first impression as well, although “merely” being rebuked (cowering for 10 rounds) is still plenty harsh (is there a way to break rebuke-based, not fear-based, cowering condition?) and is much easier to achieve.

That said, the other point of “how many clerics of the Fire domain do you encounter?” is more than fair to ask and probably speaks to how much your DM is Out To Get You as anything.

Alternate point to this thread: how much more is full fire immunity worth, than, say, fire resistance 30? —Since of course the latter you can get from a 2nd level spell at CL 11+ (and with decent duration).... and protection from energy is also available, of course.

[Hiro Quester]

While such abuse is theoretically possible, you have to consider whether your DM is the type to engage in such abuses. That's usually a munchkin player, in my experience. DM might be more reasonable.

The advantages are not to be underestimated, however. The party wizard can cast a fireball into melee to fry enemies without harming you.

Even better, get your party druid to cast fire seeds on some holly berries, and carry them into battle. When you are raging and surrounded by enemies your druid shouts the command word and you explode yourself in a massive fireball at them, while you are unharmed.

[AnimeTheCat]

That said, the other point of “how many clerics of the Fire domain do you encounter?” is more than fair to ask and probably speaks to how much your DM is Out To Get You as anything.

As a DM who has sent specific threats that target the weaknesses of the party, I can say for certain that this depends, 100%, on part action and setting influence.if the players seek out blessings from a fire deity or something, and then turn against said deity or face off against an opposing deity, heck yeah I'm going to use fire domain clerics! The party will know about it and they'll have another reason to kill the cleric first.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Yes, I understand what you're saying - but where are the rules to support it?

Not proof, but strong evidence from the incarnate construct line of spells. If they stopped working once the target was no longer valid, they would be absolutely nonfunctional, because they only target constructs and turn them into non-constructs. That suggests the implicit assumption is that they keep working even though the target is no longer valid.

[darkdragoon]

Neither the subtypes or the abilities seem to care about another one being present. YMMV on if such interactions were even considered.

[Elkad]

Fire plus Cold subtypes should equal half damage from both energy types, using additive bonuses. -100% fire damage and +50% fire damage.

[Venger]

Fire plus Cold subtypes should equal half damage from both energy types, using additive bonuses. -100% fire damage and +50% fire damage.

+50% of 0 is 0. You're immune to both types.

[St Fan]

You know, peering through the spells that have special effects on the fire subtype, I realize what constitute the subtype isn't entirely clear from the creators.

For example, the mudslide spell inflict more damage on "creatures of the fire subtype who are actually aflame (such as salamanders, azers, and fire elementals)".

This put another layer to it. Living creatures from the Material Plane that have the fire subtype are usually made of flesh and blood (like fire giants) and don't have any special vulnerability to water (only to cold). Hence, they shouldn't be affected by the same things as actual creatures from the Elemental Plane of Fire.

Likewise, extract water elemental is said to have no effect on creatures with the fire subtype, when all that should matter is whether they have hydrous content in their body or not. The fire subtype doesn't otherwise grant immunity to desiccation damage -- but fire elementals are immune because there's no water in their bodies.

Adjudicating what should and shouldn't affect a normal humanoid latter gaining the fire subtype will require lots of DM reflection anyway.

[Crake]

That's theoretically possible, but setting gentleman's agreement aside, how often do you encounter a cleric with an effective turning level of twice your level? And who also has the fire domain? Is that something that happens to you guys a lot?

Well, I mean, a player of mine applied the fire subtype to themselves while we were running the sunless citadel modules, in between modules, and it just so happened there was a fire cleric in lord of the iron fortress, who gave them a right scare, so, I'm not saying it's gonna be common, but it's definitely a vulnerability you need to consider. Personally, I'm quite a status quo DM. If it makes sense for a fire cleric to be where the players are going, there's gonna be a fire cleric there, doesn't matter if one of the players would be screwed or not.

The question about getting twice your level though, that can easily be solved with negative levels, which, something like a wizard with enervation and the fire domain ability through that domain ACF could quite easily achieve, though i don't think clerics natively have any decent access to negative levels.

[Venger]

Well, I mean, a player of mine applied the fire subtype to themselves while we were running the sunless citadel modules, in between modules, and it just so happened there was a fire cleric in lord of the iron fortress, who gave them a right scare, so, I'm not saying it's gonna be common, but it's definitely a vulnerability you need to consider. Personally, I'm quite a status quo DM. If it makes sense for a fire cleric to be where the players are going, there's gonna be a fire cleric there, doesn't matter if one of the players would be screwed or not.

The question about getting twice your level though, that can easily be solved with negative levels, which, something like a wizard with enervation and the fire domain ability through that domain ACF could quite easily achieve, though i don't think clerics natively have any decent access to negative levels.
There's always energy drain, since the cleric will have to be really high level anyway. Or he could summon something with energy drain or have something with it in his rebuke pool

[liquidformat]

Not proof, but strong evidence from the incarnate construct line of spells. If they stopped working once the target was no longer valid, they would be absolutely nonfunctional, because they only target constructs and turn them into non-constructs. That suggests the implicit assumption is that they keep working even though the target is no longer valid.

I am not quite sure what your argument is here, incarnate construct is instantaneous so it only matters that you are a construct when casting the spell.

[Elkad]

+50% of 0 is 0. You're immune to both types.

No. Additive bonuses are the general rule. Just like a 2x crit on a 2x charge aren't 4x damage. It's one+one+one for 3x.

If I fireball you for 10d6, you take 10d6-10d6+5d6=5d6

[Venger]

No. Additive bonuses are the general rule. Just like a 2x crit on a 2x charge aren't 4x damage. It's one+one+one for 3x.

If I fireball you for 10d6, you take 10d6-10d6+5d6=5d6

Well, sure, but you're immune to that 5d6, so ultimately it's 0.

[Mr Adventurer]

No. Additive bonuses are the general rule. Just like a 2x crit on a 2x charge aren't 4x damage. It's one+one+one for 3x.

If I fireball you for 10d6, you take 10d6-10d6+5d6=5d6

So if I Twin a Dominate Monster, I can dominate a vampire because it's undead immunity only absorbs the first one? 100%+100%-100%=100%?

[liquidformat]

No. Additive bonuses are the general rule. Just like a 2x crit on a 2x charge aren't 4x damage. It's one+one+one for 3x.

If I fireball you for 10d6, you take 10d6-10d6+5d6=5d6

immunity isn't additive though it is absolute, at least in the system as prevented...