Ignoring things that ignore the ignoring of...

[Foxwarrior]

A punch elemental doesn't have a glass jaw, obviously its chin is a fist

[deaddmwalking]

A punch elemental doesn't have a glass jaw, obviously its chin is a fist

Behold a punch elemental:

[gatorized2]

For what it's worth, I like the way Prowlers and Paragons handles immunities. The standard way is to just buy the immunity you want, and there are no immunity override mechanics. There are ten damage types; in my games, I limit a character to no more than three damage type immunities (I've never actually seen a character take more than one, and most don't take any).

Then there are the conditional immunities, mainly energy absorption - immune to any energy attack of the chosen type whose rank doesn't exceed EA rank (and it's a passive defense if the attack does exceed your rank), and armor - immune to any non-mental attack whose rank doesn't exceed half your armor rank (and it's a passive defense against all non-mental attacks).

[JonSetanta]

Ok. Now that I have some free time off music production, I reread this thread while completely sober this time and please excuse my confusing post about limiting absolute immunity to "DR 100" or so.

In my current view, immunity should be absolute and an opponent needs to change debuff/damage type/strategy to adapt, but also this requires giving everyone multiple options that are not feat/class/species/spell dependent, but instead more like the 3e Disarm and Trip options for combat;
Spend some kind of renewable resource to simply change to a different "element" on your next turn.

[Neo Phonelobster Prime]

but also this requires giving everyone multiple options that are not feat/class/species/spell dependent,

Why?

For all the ground already covered that you just don't want to read we can either pretend a no bypasses world is good or even exists or we can just say "Werewolves, silver weapons, WTF is wrong with you?".

But ignoring the bit where you want to play the bypass without saying the word game by switching from fire to ice...

Why does that HAVE to be feat/class/species AND Spell independent?

One of the things about this thread that was fascinating, was once you had people so disconnected and committed to the absolute nonsense of denying that bypassing an immunity was bypassing an immunity as long as they didn't use the best word to describe it in rules terms. THEN they started to tack on even more insane nonsense. Just couldn't stop themselves.

So why this? Why does providing multiple elements to bypass elemental immunities so that a bypass element choice is basically always available for some reason specifically NEED to be deeply independent of basically every element of every character build?

Tell us a story.

Make this make sense.

[JonSetanta]

So why this? Why does providing multiple elements to bypass elemental immunities so that a bypass element choice is basically always available for some reason specifically NEED to be deeply independent of basically every element of every character build?

Tell us a story.

Make this make sense.

I'll give an example.

Players meet a character that is a fiend in disguise.

Combat begins.

What type of fiend? Devil? Demon? One of the other kinds that are mildly annoying yet immune to Force?

A spellcaster casts a spell.

Which element is it?
It can be any spell.
It will pretty much be a crapshoot as to whether the encounter starts off good for players, or the fiend chuckles because it was Magic Missile against something from Carceri, or Lightning bolt against a Tanar'ri.

IF the option to swap to a different element is there, most likely (unless they just flee) the caster will waste only one turn figuring out it's defense and adapt to it.

My turn: why would you not want combat to go like that?

[Neo Phonelobster Prime]

My turn: why would you not want combat to go like that?

No. You answered the wrong question.

The idea that every character ever should always be 1 action away from bypassing an immunity itself could use SOME explaining, which you did not actually explain any WHY of or even elaborate on the details, you just clarified what you had already stated you wanted then said "why not?". That, is not what I asked about.

I asked why this functionality could not be in any way tied to class, race, feats or even spells. A thing you said was REQUIRED to make this work somehow.

I can talk to you about the why nots and other issues of the rest of your setup but I asked you about a specific thing you just failed entirely to address.

And how did you miss that and limit yourself to talking about casting a spell instead even when you stated this ability needed to be independent of spell casting?

[JonSetanta]

Your statement doesn't "parse".

You asked A question, I read this entire thread twice over to even come close to the grumbling gargle of bait, and yet you persist.

Unless you want to actually, you know, offer ideas yourself for ME to pick at, this isn't a discussion, it's me feeding you and I just ran out.

This isn't a college essay to scribble red "FAIL" notes on. This is not a test to pass.

You're trolling, I see bait, I cautiously approach and notice a Lurking Grognard until the bridge, and I'm done.

There was a reason I had you on Ignore for about a year and you just did it again.
Get therapy and do some pushups.

[Foxwarrior]

Phonelobster is very bad at polite discussion, but I think his question is valid, so I'll attempt to translate:

You said:

this requires giving everyone multiple options that are not feat/class/species/spell dependent, but instead more like the 3e Disarm and Trip options for combat;

He wondered why the options have to be independent of any character building resource.

For example, in your wizard situation, the caster tries a spell on the monster, and it doesn't work, but they're a prepared spellcaster, they probably prepared 6 different level-appropriate spells today. Why don't they just cast a different spell that they prepared using their class features? Why is it better to give a generic maneuver that lets them switch any fire damage they do to cold damage (or whatever other generic solution)?

[JonSetanta]

Phonelobster is very bad at polite discussion, but I think his question is valid, so I'll attempt to translate:

You said:

this requires giving everyone multiple options that are not feat/class/species/spell dependent, but instead more like the 3e Disarm and Trip options for combat;

He wondered why the options have to be independent of any character building resource.

For example, in your wizard situation, the caster tries a spell on the monster, and it doesn't work, but they're a prepared spellcaster, they probably prepared 6 different level-appropriate spells today. Why don't they just cast a different spell that they prepared using their class features? Why is it better to give a generic maneuver that lets them switch any fire damage they do to cold damage (or whatever other generic solution)?

Thank you Fox, that makes more sense.

I keep putting out ideas, NEW things, not chewing on pre-existing rules, because I've been playing D&D since the Redbox and Blackmoor, I know that without new concepts that often seem totally non-sequiter the game stagnates and people stop playing it.

Hell, I've even proposed a few M:tG concepts a few years back through email to WOTC. One of them was the "Explore" mechanic. Directly.
The only stipulation with that, and I'm not going to mention who I discussed it with, is that my name isn't in the credits.
But yeah, Descend, Explore, and a giant GB fungus legend creature, among what... Ok.. spoilers... Thrulls are making a huge comeback.

Anyway. Ideas for this?
Non spell non class non race element options?

Is anyone a fan of Avatar the Last Airbender?

Everyone gets an element option. This concept is similar to the official 5e Plainscape box set for the Infernal Petitioner, wherein they may turn ALL and ANY physical attacks they make to fire damage.
That's not even racial, that's a soul power you just pick up from being... Dead.

So, actually lets take it a step further and say all damage a character deals, ALL of it, can be adjusted to their Soul Element, starting with 1 at level 1 and add one more every 4 levels.
Free.
Take a Move action to switch elements.

That's my proposal.

My reasoning: one of the core Tome design goals I keep bringing back up because it's very important.

"Options not abilities."

[Kaelik]

That's not an answer to Fox's question.

"I keep putting out new ideas" is not an answer to why, conceptually, characters should have non character building resources to get around all immunities.

I in general disagree with Phone Lobster in this thread, but in this specific case, I think it definitely does not follow that all characters in the ENTIRE GAME need to have something completely unrelated to their classes or feats that let's them bypass Mind Affecting Immunity with their spells.

No idea why a fighter would need that at all!

[JonSetanta]

No idea why a fighter would need that at all!

I had an AD&D warrior once that was devoured but a black pudding, which I believe are weak to Cold.

If ANYONE in the party could adapt to the encounter based on some... Soul ability... It wouldn't have been a TPK.

[Kaelik]

No idea why a fighter would need that at all!

I had an AD&D warrior once that was devoured but a black pudding, which I believe are weak to Cold.

If ANYONE in the party could adapt to the encounter based on some... Soul ability... It wouldn't have been a TPK.

This is in no way even remotely related to anything I said, and I'm starting to think you are actively trying to refuse to understand.

[JonSetanta]

I was trying to relate by example but if you want a direct answer, is non-lethal damage or any TGD "social combat homebrew" ruleset "mind effect"?

If even Intimidate doesn't work, bending a Mind-influencing Intimidate into say a Fire or Electric"damage" by pulling a Dragonball kind of flashy display were an option, does that relate?

[Kaelik]

No, absolutely none of that relates.

We are talking about how some enemies have the tag saying they are immune to mind affecting conditions, like skeletons.

Then, we have two positions:

1) Almost always, you should try to fight a skeleton by not using mind control, because it doesn't work, and you should have no ability to make it work.

2) It's okay for some people, mind control focused people, to be able to just use Mind Control on the skeletons who are immune to mind control, because that's their thing.

Then you came out of left field with a steel chair saying:

3) Actually, everyone in the ENTIRE GAME needs to have the ability to mind control enemies that are immune to mind control. It can't be a class feature or a feat, everyone has to have it in the whole game, as a special ability that anyone can activate.

Which has created unprecedented unity in the previously divided community in the form of WHAT? WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT THAT? THAT'S A TERRIBLE IDEA?

[Neo Phonelobster Prime]

I keep putting out ideas, NEW things, not chewing on pre-existing rules, because I've been playing D&D since the Redbox and Blackmoor, I know that without new concepts that often seem totally non-sequiter the game stagnates and people stop playing it.

New ideas are only of value if they are relevant and explainable and then also actually work.

The only thing in your ideas presented in the post I asked you about that was in ANY way new was the stated NEED to ensure that bypassing immunity had to be independent of all character build resources.

And if you cannot even describe much less justify that need then this innovative requirement... isn't actually innovative or a requirement.

If you cannot even describe it, if you cannot even recognize a simple question asking you to describe it, then it wasn't even really an idea now was it?

If you can't explain it, it was just word salad. Word salad will not stop gaming from stagnating. Word salad, is old news in gaming and has never been helpful.

[Thaluikhain]

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, in effect you don't have an ability or a spell or an attack or whatever that does, say "Fire Damage", you have "Element Damage" and you can choose between all the elements, and swap between them at will? When you buy fire ammunition you are also buying every other conceivable type of element ammunition and can swap the loadout for free?

Which, ok, it is a novel idea, and novel ideas do need to be entertained. But I'm not seeing any way this would be a good thing, unless the idea is to get rid of element damage mechanics, and just keep flavour. Which is niche at best.

[JonSetanta]

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, in effect you don't have an ability or a spell or an attack or whatever that does, say "Fire Damage", you have "Element Damage" and you can choose between all the elements, and swap between them at will? When you buy fire ammunition you are also buying every other conceivable type of element ammunition and can swap the loadout for free?

Which, ok, it is a novel idea, and novel ideas do need to be entertained. But I'm not seeing any way this would be a good thing, unless the idea is to get rid of element damage mechanics, and just keep flavour. Which is niche at best.

My intent was a limited subset of essentially Metamagic/Metadamage SL+0 element selections that players, and "boss" encounters, could choose from, and you understand my intention, but agreed it is niche and not for everybody.

Still, an idea is an idea, I've done all I can to offer what I thought up, it got pissed on, it feels of urine now, and I'm done with this thread.

Lobster, I can't see your trolling for another 364 days, we'll talk in a year.

[Neo Phonelobster Prime]

Still, an idea is an idea, I've done all I can to offer what I thought up, it got pissed on, it feels of urine now, and I'm done with this thread.

Lobster, I can't see your trolling for another 364 days, we'll talk in a year.

YOU PUT IN ZERO FUCKING EFFORT.

We still don't know WHY you did this, WHAT you thought it would achieve and HOW you think it would achieve it.

It seems like, you didn't consider those things at all and you aren't very good at hiding that fact.

The whole problem with your idea was this lack of effort, the inability to show working, the reluctance to even describe the most basic element of the supposed idea.

[deaddmwalking]

My intent was a limited subset of essentially Metamagic/Metadamage SL+0 element selections that players, and "boss" encounters, could choose from, and you understand my intention, but agreed it is niche and not for everybody.

Still, an idea is an idea, I've done all I can to offer what I thought up, it got pissed on, it feels of urine now, and I'm done with this thread.

Through 3 versions of your idea you left a lot of important things out. Every character can deal damage to their opponents. Wizards do a lot of things that aren't just damaging an opponent (like teleporting across the world). If your class is replacing wizards, you need to expand on the 'not damaging people' part a lot more. The Den isn't known for being particularly kind, but it is known for identifying the fundamental problems. When you bring your ideas here they'll leave better than they left if you respond to the criticism.

Now some criticism here is undoubtedly 'my preference is x, your idea provides y, therefore your idea is the worst thing ever', but I don't think that's what you're seeing here, right now.

I understand why it is frustrating that some characters are really good at something and some monsters are completely immune to that thing. How is a mundane fighter without magical gear supposed to deal with incorporeal undead? Would you give him an ability that says 'if you're fighting something immune to non-magical weapons, activate your SL+0 ability 'oops all magic' so your weapon is magical now? Would you make it a free action so the Fighter doesn't have to alter their normal patterns of engagement at all?

Letting a blaster character alter their blast so they can do exactly what they always do without even thinking about alternate tactics misses a whole lot of game space. Like automatically it obviates the need for any 'let's get this powerful weapon and then fight the monster' quest you might think of.

If you think something like that works with magical blasts of energy, why not with a rogue's sneak attack? If fire mages should be able to attack with frost damage when they fight something that's immune to fire, shouldn't a rogue be able to use their surprise attack when they can't get sneak attack? And if they're immune to sneak and surprise attacks, maybe Guileful attacks; and if they're immune to that they should be able to use Cunning Strikes (and essentially you now have 20 versions of sneak attack that are all exactly the same except some creatures are immune to 1 and you never use that version of your attack against them).

I don't think that solves as many problems as it creates.

[merxa]

and players characters should never fail, if they fail, instead just say they won. Oh you cast fireball, and the gm informed you the creature is immune to fire? well just say nuh uh, then suddenly the creature will combust into super flames or cold flames or radiant flames, or whatever is acceptable syntax for the current cultural zeitgeist, indeed, just let each person magically invoke in their own mind what it was, because it doesn't matter, all that matters is the creature died and the heroes won.

and the wizard, the cleric, not strong enough, we need tome classes to really play the game because anything else might mean someone dies sometimes, and actually let's just make death entirely player optional -- problem solved, death is in the eye of the beholder now.

gosh i'm really good at writing rules and coming up with ideas, maybe i should email wotc with my grand designs, just so you know, the next mtg expansion was mostly, well, entirely, my idea, not yours, mine.

[Kaelik]

LMAO, I somehow missed the part where he claimed to have invented the Explore mechanic. Apparently at the same time he invented the Descend mechanic, which debuted like 7 years after Explore.

Absolutely did not happen, completely delusional claims.

[Koumei]

problem solved, death is in the eye of the beholder now.

Literally true. Well, save vs death is in one of the eyes of the beholder, but still.

Anyway, I want to circle back to how 40k just mashes its face into weird problems and annoying chains of fixes to fixes to errata to fixes to edge-case problems. See, when 10th edition came out, they recognised the problem that this thread was mostly about (to begin with). "Wounds -> Armour Saves -> AP -> Invulnerable Saves -> Ignores Invulnerable Saves -> Special Daemon Invulnerable Saves -> Special Anti-Daemon Attacks". They're good at saying they understand problems and will fix them, not so good at actually fixing them. Long story short, 10th edition has gone through multiple rules changes so that they're at "Wounds -> Armour Saves -> AP -> Invulnerable Saves -> Devastating/Mortal Wounds -> Feel No Pain Save Against Mortal Wounds". It took them a lot of work to wind around to being not quite as much of a mess. And I suppose at least these are all things found in the base rule book and "Feel No Pain" isn't some special "only appears in one Codex"?

[Neo Phonelobster Prime]

10th edition seems to be doing a lot of rewriting for a game which relies on rules as printed paid for products with pre-orders and scarcity marketing.

But also, 10th edition couldn't manage to do what amounts to critical hit bonuses without breaking the entire fucking game with multiple factions/units.

My respect for GW rules and those who write them was low. But 10th edition is a new low. They make way to much money off that stuff to be this massively unprofessional.

You might have missed my experiences with 10th edition...

[Koumei]

Yeah, GW is (and always has been) a mess, and it's fascinating to see which ways that mess changes (from a safe distance of "not spending money on it or even playing it"). I did indeed miss your experiences, I'll go read that now.