PlanetADnD.com

That she does

@Tristen: Is the drow's' s MR relevant versus the darkness?

No, because he was not the target and it is an area effect within his environment (the room) that doesn't harm or control him .

If it had been aimed at him specifically or was a spell that would affect his body or mind (fireball, stinking cloud, command, etc) he would get both a saving throw and a magical resistance check.

DMG p66 col 3 para 6 "...applies only if the successful casting of a spell would directly affect the resistant creature..." para 8 "...MR creatures are not immune to events that occur as the consequences of spells, only to the direct energy created or released by a spell..." [It's not normal darkness; it's magical darkness, ergo magical energy.]

DMG p67 col 1 para 4 "Area-Effect spells:...encompasses everything withing a set distance of a single point. I successful MR check enables the creature to ignore the effect of the spell." [Says nothing about being physically harmed or controlled; merely affected. Not being able to see counts as being effected.]

Chris1234 wrote:@Tristen: Is the drow's' s MR relevant versus the darkness?

I'd play it as "No" as well. It's an effect on an environment first.

Plus side: characters and opposition alike are affected. Give those Blind Fighters a use for a few rounds as well.

I'm sticking with No on this one chris. It doesn't make sense to me that he would miraculously be able to see in the darkness when nobody else can, and it makes even less sense for the entire spell itself to fail merely because he is in the area of effect. The only way i could see it working is if he manages to evade the area itself, but that is more like a savong throw effect.

It isn't affecting his ability to sense, it is affecting the available information in his proximity to sense. If it was something like a web spell i would say MR applies and it would be reasonable for a 'pocket' in the web to exist. He might be surrounded by webs (failed save) but not stuck to them (passed MR).

The spell doesn't fail. It just doesn't exist for him as stated in the DMG.
If you've read those two columns and decided on a different treatment then fair enough. But if you haven't read them recently please do. The same principle applies to a lot of other sensory spells: light, silence 15'r, stinking cloud and on your "doesnt apply if no damage, no control" interpretation then Faerie Fire bypasses MR too.

Faerie Fire would target an individual and would be susceptible to magic resistance.

I did read the cited passages. I maintain that in this case the darkness is an effect on the environment.

Sol Mazer wrote:...I'd play it as "No" as well. It's an effect on an environment first. Plus side: characters and opposition alike are affected. Give those Blind Fighters a use for a few rounds as well.

Hi Sol, I'm not overly bothered about the effect it's more bout the rightness or wrongness, but in passing, most monsters dont have a Dex AC bonus to lose. I agree it's an effect on the environment but you're missing that it's a magical orgoing effect on the environment, e.g magical fracturing of a volcano (instantaneous) would cause lava burns over which MR has no effect, but magically lowering (or raising) the temperature of the air within an AoE and keeping it low (or high) is an ongoing magical effect and MR would apply according to the DMG.

TristenC wrote:Faerie Fire would target an individual and would be susceptible to magic resistance. I did read the cited passages. I maintain that in this case the darkness is an effect on the environment.

Faerie Fire doesn't target an individual it's an AoE spell (10 square feet/lvl within 40'r) it is an ongoing magical effect that happens to affect an individual within that AoE and hence MR applies for that individual. I maintain darkness is the same, i.e. an ongoing magical effect that happens to affect an individual within that AoE. It's not just "darkness" as infravision magically bypasses darkness; it's a magical interference with infravision and thus a magical effect on an individual within that AoE. I can't put this any more clearly but seems we won't agree but you're the GM so you win.
In which case can I have a ruling on whether you allow MR to affect other sensory spells: affect normal fires, alarm, audible glamour, detect magic, grease, light, continual light, detect invisibility, detect evil/good, fog cloud, glitter dust, stinking cloud and entangle, chant, silence 15'r

There is one other passage that comes to mind, it might not be in any book, but hell its a something to play the game by:

"The DM is always right."

End of discussion, if Tristen Says its so, its so. Lets move on.

... but you're missing that it's a magical orgoing effect on the environment

I get that- I do not agree that the Drow MR applies.

I am glad to see that the rule systems from decades ago still inspires conversation though.
=^]

Faerie Fire starts by saying "[FF] enables the caster to outline one or more objects or creatures..."
The caster chooses targets within the area of effect, the same as for hold person.

Chris wrote: In which case can I have a ruling on whether you allow MR to affect other sensory spells:

No:
affect normal fires**, light*, continual light*, Fog Cloud,

Yes:
alarm (MR to triggering it, not to the sound produced), audible glamor (he would still hear it, but could know it to be false), detect magic*^* , grease*** , detect invisibility *^*, detect evil/good *^*, glitter dust, stinking cloud*^*^, entangle***, chant (could hear the chant, would not be affected by it), silence 15'r (could cast. Words spoken would not be heard by others within the area. Sounds would not be produced by others within the area and thus would not be present to hear by the MR creature)

* unless the MR creature was targeted
** i might make an exception here if the MR creature is holding a torch or something
*** a pocket of space the character's size +1' radius would Be clear around the MR creature. Same with Web it would not affect the remaining created substances
*^* the MR creature and any object in his posession. Could not bestow MR by holding someone, or touching something without carrying it.
*^*^ the MR creature would be immune to the harmful effects of the cloud

Back from vacation. While in Louisiana, I took a swamp tour, and look what I saw there:

Heheh. Salem

ausie wrote:But what if he is using both...? Technically the daggers are his primary weapon.. and secondary weapons are considered to hit at the same time.. or his daggers affect at +2 and the. The but/Headbutt 4 segments later.

2e doesn't use 'segments'.

Actually this is a pretty rare issue. As you say a dual weilding character hits with both weapons at the same time. In fact, the dmg is pretty clear:

DMG: Ch9 Combat
under Initiative and Multiple Attacks and Initiative:

"When multiple attacks result from different attack forms--for example claws and a bite or bite and tail, or a ranger with his two-weapon combat ability--the attacks occur at the same time."

So in Garroth's case it is both natural weapons and ranger dual-weilding. Since the natural attack is slowest it dictates when the attacks happen.