Subject: MYSTARA-L Digest - 29 Jan 2002 to 30 Jan 2002 (#2002-30) From: Automatic digest processor Date: 31/01/2002, 19:00 To: Recipients of MYSTARA-L digests Reply-to: Mystara RPG Discussion There are 18 messages totalling 639 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. OT: Anyone from Denmark 2. IMPORTANTE VIRUS!!!!!! (3) 3. Is dragon breath magic? (12) 4. AM (was: Is dragon breath magic?) (2) ******************************************************************** The Other Worlds Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/OtherWorlds.asp The Mystara Homepage: http://www.dnd.starflung.com/ To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM with UNSUB MYSTARA-L in the body of the message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:17:05 +0200 From: Saarela Sami Subject: OT: Anyone from Denmark Hello all, Sorry about the OT material, but I'm going to visit Denmark (Copenhagen to be exact) in a few weeks. I'd be interested to know whether there is anything in Copenhagen to see, RPG-wise I mean. Any good shops and such worth visiting. Please don't reply to the list, but to me directly ( sami.saarela@sanoma.fi ). No use cluttering the list with OT material. Thank you. - Sami ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 02:24:38 +0100 From: Eijerzz * Subject: IMPORTANTE VIRUS!!!!!! > Giovanni wrote: Attenzione! Il temuto virus SULFNBK.EXE =E8 un file di sistema di = windows. Per cui non cancellatelo: tutti lo avete sicuramente, e se = controllate, avr=E0 una data di creazione di lunga antecedente ai 14 = giorni previsti. Se si trattasse davvero di un virus, primo l'antivirus = che sicuramente avete tutti installato sul vostro computer lo avrebbe = riconosciuto, secondo, avrebbe una data di creazione pi=F9 vicina di 14 = giorni (il tempo di latenza promesso). In effetti si tratta di uno = scherzo, per cui non inviate questa e-mail a nessuno, e cerchiamo di = interrompere questa catena, che ha iniziato a girare almeno l'anno = scorso (per lo meno a me =E8 arrivata l'estate scorsa, non so se gira = anche da prima). Scusatemi tutti per il falso allarme, ma a me =E8 arrivata una mail da = un amico che mi spiegava come ero stato infettato da questo "virus". Ho pensato di contattare tutti quelli della mia rubrica per avvisarli = del "pericolo". A questo punto posso solo fare a tutti le mie scuse. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 18:18:48 -0000 From: Richard Tongue Subject: Re: IMPORTANTE VIRUS!!!!!! Erm...translation please? Richard Tongue ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 10:52:56 -0800 From: The Stalker Subject: Is dragon breath magic? As a DM I've come to ponder this because it will soon become important IMC (I have no quarrel with my players over this, but then only because it is not relevant yet, and I prefer to have my ruling before any discussion begins on the subject). The essence of this is the fire breath of red dragons. I can understand an argument that would support it being magical since dragons are clearly magical creatures, so their breath weapon might be seen as a magical attack. The fact that Rings of Fire Resistance (at least in 2e) renders the wearer completely immune to standard fire, but only grants only a minor benefit against breath weapons and magical attacks like Fireballs seem to suggest that dragon breath is indeed magical. On the other hand, I don't think a person with high magic resistance (not that any PC IMC has it) should be able to ignore damage from dragon breath if he makes his magic resistance check. After all, red dragon breath is still fire! How about someone protected by an Anti-Magic Shell? While I think that should allow some bonus, I would still not allow it to make the caster immune to fire breath, as it is still fire (someone protected by an Anti-Magic Shell would not be immune to normal fire at all). Spells like Fire Shield or Prismatic Wall/Sphere are a different matter, though - those are spells with specific notes on how they resist fire attacks, which then takes precedence over the issue of magic vs. non-magic IMO. How do other DMs deal with this? - The Stalker ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:42:36 +0100 From: la Volpe Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? Personally I've solved the problem considering non-magical all physical magical effects. There is no chance to use antimagic against dragon breath, meteor storms and fireballs and so on. Period. AM is considered just against illusions and similar magic. Iulius Sergius Scaevola Captain of the XXth Cohort Port Lucinius, Thyatis ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:44:58 +0100 From: Jacob Skytte Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? The Stalker wrote: > As a DM I've come to ponder this because it will soon become important = IMC > (I have no quarrel with my players over this, but then only because it = is > not relevant yet, and I prefer to have my ruling before any discussion > begins on the subject). I've always considered dragon breath a purely natural attack but with = the intensity of a magical one (dragons are just so special), so regular = protections won't help and magical ones will only give limited = protection (such as the ring of fire resistance against red dragon = breath). I've never heard an argument. On the other hand I did have an = argument with a DM once about the area of effect of red dragon breath. = He gave in and my character (a halfling of course) survived one more = round than the rest of the party. ;) Jacob Skytte scythe@wanadoo.dk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 21:04:32 +0100 From: Agathokles Subject: Re: IMPORTANTE VIRUS!!!!!! Richard Tongue wrote: > > Erm...translation please? He was apologising for his virux hoax message (posted yesterday). -- Giampaolo Agosta agathokles@libero.it agosta@elet.polimi.it http://digilander.iol.it/agathokles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 21:09:05 +0100 From: Agathokles Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? The Stalker wrote: > > As a DM I've come to ponder this because it will soon become important IMC > > How do other DMs deal with this? Myself, I consider breath weapons to be non-magical, but stronger than the common manifestation of their element--a fire breath weapon is more powerful than a common fire. In game terms, AM as no effect on breath weapon, as do rings/potions of fire protection (though powerful rings/potions of fire protection, like those made from the plumes of a Phoenix, would offer some protection). -- Giampaolo Agosta agathokles@libero.it agosta@elet.polimi.it http://digilander.iol.it/agathokles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 12:07:53 -0800 From: Joe Kelly Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? IMC, Dragons can cast magic, but they are not magical creatures. Their = breath weapons are just like many other creatures in our world who fire = spray at insects to eat for pray (fish, snakes, frogs). Same with dragons. = It's just part of their makeup. Any argument to this reasoning is simple. = Elves aren't real either or Unicorns. But then, this is fantasy. And don't = forget. You're the DM(god) so it's up to you. :) JK Wolf >>> alphatian@ANGELFIRE.COM 01/30/02 10:52AM >>> As a DM I've come to ponder this because it will soon become important IMC (I have no quarrel with my players over this, but then only because it is not relevant yet, and I prefer to have my ruling before any discussion begins on the subject). The essence of this is the fire breath of red dragons. I can understand an argument that would support it being magical since dragons are clearly magical creatures, so their breath weapon might be seen as a magical attack. The fact that Rings of Fire Resistance (at least in 2e) renders = the wearer completely immune to standard fire, but only grants only a minor benefit against breath weapons and magical attacks like Fireballs seem to suggest that dragon breath is indeed magical. On the other hand, I don't think a person with high magic resistance (not that any PC IMC has it) should be able to ignore damage from dragon breath if he makes his magic resistance check. After all, red dragon breath is still fire! How about someone protected by an Anti-Magic Shell? While I think that should allow some bonus, I would still not allow it to make the caster immune to fire breath, as it is still fire (someone protected by an Anti-Magic Shell would not be immune to normal fire at all). Spells like Fire Shield or Prismatic Wall/Sphere are a different matter, though - those are spells with specific notes on how they resist fire attacks, which then takes precedence over the issue of magic vs. non-magic IMO. How do other DMs deal with this? - The Stalker ******************************************************************** The Other Worlds Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/OtherWorlds.asp The Mystara Homepage: http://www.dnd.starflung.com/ To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM with UNSUB MYSTARA-L in the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 16:36:23 -0800 From: The Stalker Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:44:58 +0100, Jacob Skytte wrote: (snipped my own comments) > > I've always considered dragon breath a purely natural attack but with the intensity of a magical one (dragons are just so special), so regular protections won't help and magical ones will only give limited protection (such as the ring of fire resistance against red dragon breath). > Of all the replies so far (thanks everyone), this is the one I agree the most with. I like the way you put it because, yes, it's a natural attack, but one made stronger through magic. So how do you deal with this in game terms? Does general protections against magic (magic resistance, etc.) have any affect at all, or do only spells and items that specifically state their protection against such attacks offer any protections at all? > I've never heard an argument. On the other hand I did have an argument with a DM once about the area of effect of red dragon breath. He gave in and my character (a halfling of course) survived one more round than the rest of the party. ;) > I guess the dragon thought he needed to cook for just another minute then: "No, not quite done yet!" :) - The Stalker (almost singed by a red dragon himself once...) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 01:45:25 +0100 From: Daniel Mayer Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? Hi, all! I understand dragon fire as very-hot-kind-of-sulphur-liquid-gaseous fire. It's clearly non-magical, but hotter than the fire in a forge. So the ring of fire resistance is without doubt hopeless underpowered to negate this short and intense heat while powerful enough to stand in the midst of a burning house. I used special spells versus such strong fires (lava, etc., too). Clerical spells vs. fire of 4th+ lvl are strong enough to block dragon fire completely, but theres always a throw-back-effect remaining. hope to have enlightened sunken Alphatia Daniel Mayer aka Laren Nightmaser, Tower of Dreams ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 16:41:21 -0800 From: The Stalker Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:42:36 +0100, la Volpe wrote: > Personally I've solved the problem considering non-magical all physical > magical > effects. There is no chance to use antimagic against dragon breath, > meteor > storms and fireballs and so on. Period. AM is considered just against > illusions > and similar magic. > GAH!! [The Stalker is speechless with horror, the Stalker being speechless a rare enough occurrance by itself...] So let me get this straight: IYC magic resistance/anti-magic offer *no* protection against Fireballs or other offensive fire spells at all ??!!!! Boy, I'm glad I'm not a wizard IYC! Particularly not since I'm Alphatian, and I know you much you love us! ;) - The Stalker ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:08:03 -0800 From: Chris Furneaux Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? > The essence of this is the fire breath of red > dragons. I can understand an > argument that would support it being magical since > dragons are clearly > magical creatures, so their breath weapon might be > seen as a magical > attack. The fact that Rings of Fire Resistance (at > least in 2e) renders the > wearer completely immune to standard fire, but only > grants only a minor > benefit against breath weapons and magical attacks > like Fireballs seem to > suggest that dragon breath is indeed magical. Well if I was argueing it to my players I would say it is both magical and non-magical. I would probally call it a magical prjection of *real* fire. If it is a liquid that the dragon contains and when it is beathed out combusts, that explains why big dragons do more dammage (more liquid), and also why they can only breath a few times a day. I would probally say that: -The liquid is manufactured in the dragons glands which happen to be magical. -The liquid would have both normal and magical properties. -The ignition to the fire would likely be magical -The liquid is naturally combustible but the magical component makes it burn hotter, more controled, and more readily. Thus: -A person with AM would still be effected because it is still normal fire(and see below). -A person with a ring of fire protection would still be harmed because it is magically hot, and the fumes from the combustion could be just as damaging. Perhaps the breath is acidic and so damages that way when fire doesn't work. This however is not realised by *anyone* because it seems like the effects of fire (and not many know about acids and such). -A person with both is still harmed if it is acidic, (a person with protection from all three might be ok though) and if the breath is not acidic or fuming etc, then the person could survive (possibly needing a extra powerful fire protection though). All DM's choice though. Some interesting posibilities with these options: -different experiences of red dragon breath. In a complete anti magic field, the breath may not ignite if it is magically ignited. (if it just combusts with air then it will still (DM's choice)). -It might be possible to try and collect this liquid for magical items... but if it is inside the dragon at the time of death then it decays... thus extreemly hard to get (On a side note, my PC's are currently trying to capture several dragons alive for someone, and I think this will be why). -It could relate the different species of dragons better... all are a similar substance, red's combusts better, blacks are more acidic, whiles cause a reaction that sucks up heat (thus cold), greens breath vaporises into an poisonous acidic cloud of gas. -Could better explain rings of protection from dragon breath. Comments? I think I will write up a more solid/definate form of this, but will wait to see if anyone has anything to add or if there are any major holes. Chris. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:09:14 -0800 From: davek Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? CM7 the one for elves only, has a precedent for dragon breath not being affected by AM. At one point, it is possible for the PCs to be trapped between a beholder on one side, and a red dragon on the other side at the entrance. The text states that the dragon will not use its breath weapon, for fear of hitting the beholder. Dave Keyser ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:31:38 -0800 From: Chris Furneaux Subject: Re: AM (was: Is dragon breath magic?) > >Personally I've solved the problem considering > non-magical all physical magical > >effects. There is no chance to use antimagic > against dragon breath, meteor > >storms and fireballs and so on. Period. AM is > considered just against illusions > >and similar magic. > > GAH!! [The Stalker is speechless with horror, the > Stalker being speechless > a rare enough occurrance by itself...] I must say I find it strange too, but then if you think about it there are spells like stoneform which creates *real* non magical stone. I can't see why AM would nesecarally stop a very fast flying rock, even if it was created from thin air and magically given speed. If theres a rock there at the end then it's not really magical. OTOH the rock might begin to lose speed if it entered an AM field, and could not be targeted anymore. If the AM is sufficently big, mobile targets could try to dodge. Also the range may drop upon entry to an AM field, but it could be ruled that the speed is only given to the rock at the start and after that it is already dropping (and that's the range of the spell). Similarly, a fireball could be like a flame thrower, the flames are hot and the fires real, the magic is to continuously create the combustibles and to control their movement. A large AM field would see a fireball die within feet, but a personal one would offer little protection. Same for Ice storm: magically created real water and magically made cold, still real, but the control of it is magical. This AM fields effects it the same as it would a fireball. OTOH there is no reason the spell could not just be magical fire, rock, or ice... up to you. Chris... who is in a reasoning mood today. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 22:14:38 -0500 From: Christopher M Cherrington Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? > -----Original Message----- > Behalf Of Chris Furneaux > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 8:08 PM > > > Well if I was argueing it to my players I would say it > is both magical and non-magical. > I would just tell the players they are more than willing to test their own opinions in front of a red dragon. And that they should hope it is not as confusing as testing on a ruby dragon :0 another tidbit on dragons... IMC, dragons don't necessarily mate with their own kind, and when they produce eggs, it does not mean they will all be of the same kind. This also means not all reds are chaotic, or all golds are lawful. Some greens can even spit acid or fire, but not chlorine. This all comes down to the common belief's or 'old wives tales'. Just like a female dwarf has a beard. Until you really see one, you just don't know any better. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:36:47 -0800 From: The Stalker Subject: Re: Is dragon breath magic? On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 01:45:25 +0100, Daniel Mayer wrote: (snip) > > hope to have enlightened sunken Alphatia Thanks, but I don't think they have much use for fire-protection in sunken Alphatia - I hear it's not a big problem there :) - The Stalker, quite dry and comfortable on the ground, thank you! ;) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:51:23 -0800 From: The Stalker Subject: Re: AM (was: Is dragon breath magic?) On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:31:38 -0800, Chris Furneaux wrote: (Snip) > > I must say I find it strange too, but then if you > think about it there are spells like stoneform which > creates *real* non magical stone. I can't see why AM > would nesecarally stop a very fast flying rock, even > if it was created from thin air and magically given > speed. If theres a rock there at the end then it's not > really magical. Hmm, yes. Good point. > OTOH the rock might begin to lose > speed if it entered an AM field, and could not be > targeted anymore. It should lose speed fast, I think, since the force that was moving it forward, namely magic, cannot continue to support it inside the AM area. > If the AM is sufficently big, mobile > targets could try to dodge. Also the range may drop > upon entry to an AM field, but it could be ruled that > the speed is only given to the rock at the start and > after that it is already dropping (and that's the > range of the spell). You could make the case either way, though I'd prefer the former for the simple reason that AM areas should at least have an effect on most spells. > Similarly, a fireball could be like a flame thrower, > the flames are hot and the fires real, the magic is to > continuously create the combustibles and to control > their movement. A large AM field would see a fireball > die within feet, but a personal one would offer little > protection. This I'm less certain about. After all, the flames were brought about by magic, and the existence of Delayed Blast Fireballs suggest that the caster has a significant amount of control over the spell's effect, and thus that it is guided to a great degree by magic... > Same for Ice storm: magically created real water and > magically made cold, still real, but the control of it > is magical. This AM fields effects it the same as it > would a fireball. > So, a red dragon's AM/Magic Resistance wouldn't help against the Cone of Cold or Ice Storm spell of a mage at all? To me, that doesn't seem right either, somehow... > OTOH there is no reason the spell could not just be > magical fire, rock, or ice... up to you. > > Chris... who is in a reasoning mood today. > So it would seem... Thanks for that, btw :) - The Stalker ------------------------------ End of MYSTARA-L Digest - 29 Jan 2002 to 30 Jan 2002 (#2002-30) ***************************************************************