作者 主题: 【AD&D2E】贤者问答 法术攻防合集  (阅读 5197 次)

副标题: 关于魔抗、解魔、反魔、免疫、抗力

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
【AD&D2E】贤者问答 法术攻防合集
« 于: 2022-04-26, 周二 12:39:11 »
个人整理,因为并非规则书,不会按规则书的质量翻译,仅保证意思一致。

很大程度上解决了2版魔抗和免疫等会导致游戏出现各种无解或荒谬局面的问题,其整体逻辑与后世也是相对一致的,保持了背景画风的不变,希望对大家有用。

来自龙杂148到龙杂251,也就是ADND2E时期。全文搜索了这几个关键词,以下按类别分楼,时间总体倒序排列(除连续问题),同类越靠后的越旧。

在龙杂218文章时,mr已经奠定了三版sr的雏形(或者说博德之门的很多“特性”真不是生软自己乱来的)

基本上除了不讲道理的滥强咒法球,以及后世被调整了学派到咒法的墙,后世不吃sr的基本上放到二版都不吃mr,比如触手,冰风暴,雾,侦测,黑暗术,化石为泥。咒法和转化两大王道学派因此诞生,反过来死灵和附魔、塑能则几乎全体吃mr。

此外后世的多体目标法术(三版Target法术,5版target you can see型法术)在这个时候已经提出了是按目标法术结算,aoe立即和持续散发也产生了分野,这将影响到法术反转/吸收系列的单体防护技术。
« 上次编辑: 2022-05-02, 周一 06:28:59 由 星海恋 »

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
太长不看版
« 回帖 #1 于: 2022-04-26, 周二 12:41:03 »
二楼提供太长不看版,提供直接的结论,但建议还是参照完整条目甚至原文

龙杂218文章本身就比较浓缩,建议大家完整阅读。

MR生效前提:法术or类法术+直接作用

生物永不抵抗自身法术,魔抗保物品

压制魔抗时只能半速移动,并需要维持专注

通常吃MR的学派:塑能,附魔(除对物品附魔),死灵(除召唤),转化(改变敌人)

通常不吃MR的学派:咒法(除制造能量),转化(改变环境),预言,幻术(除直接伤害)

防护系看是否伤害/阻挡/限制生物活动。

范围内选择多个目标的如 缓慢术 魔法飞弹 属于个人目标法术(你可以想象为施法者施放了多次单体法术),但仍然只魔抗生物自己不吃(这个主要是影响法术反转)

防护圣甲虫和MR,仅对以生物或身上物品为目标的解魔生效,对包含生物的区域解魔无效,即使被扒buff可能间接导致致命后果。(但按照二版先攻,提前指定的区域解魔可能会被移动躲掉,个人认为是个合理怀疑)

MR导致 防护邪恶一类的法术崩溃,仅仅对阻碍魔抗生物进入的情况有用,对非召唤/异界生物不适用。

魔抗不叠取高

MR抵抗时停成功(译者注:应该是来自被冻结或者试图进入范围),会导致时停直接崩溃

(本条强烈推荐参考原文)MR生物会穿过石墙且墙不崩溃,MR会抵消直接瞄准人的AOE法术(大概可以参考博德之门,点地板施法可能会因为读条打空,点人施法吃法术反转),光亮术/气化水体等改变环境的转化系法术不吃MR,即使法术可能对魔抗生物间接致命。

魔抗是否生效取决于法术效果是直接还是间接,冰风暴的冰雹是直接,但雨夹雪的滑倒和挡视线是间接因此有效。直接接触到生物才计算魔抗,因此魔法飞弹仍然会命中(我怀疑这影响石皮),但魔抗后不受伤害。

反魔场会因阻止召唤生物而被其魔抗击溃。魔抗生物也无法向内施法。魔抗永远无法使非神器奇物在反魔场中运作。(或许与龙杂218冲突,但也可能反魔场对物品也是间接效果——如同后世)


法术 法术免疫 不能作用于有任何魔法防护的单位,至少不能是给通用豁免加值和免疫/抗力的。

对自身的抵抗火焰这种吸收伤害法术,吸收的是最终伤害,在一切豁免和抗力物品减免之后。

石皮不保专注,+N武器免疫也不保。打断施法专注来自的是“被击中”

自由行动戒指除了赋予水下自由活动外,只防魔法效果,不可类比。


精灵的抗力,仅适用于睡眠/魅惑效果,不包括其他附魔系法术,如命令定身暗示指使。也不防占据和非魔法睡眠如命令术:睡。

德鲁伊的免疫林地生物魅惑只对天生能力有效,对职业施法无效。林地生物与否看怪物图鉴气候/地形。
« 上次编辑: 2022-05-02, 周一 06:41:56 由 星海恋 »

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
魔抗和解魔
« 回帖 #2 于: 2022-04-26, 周二 13:58:49 »
Q:防护圣甲虫 允许对 驱散魔法 或 魔邓肯裂解术 进行豁免吗?如果一名角色带有防护圣甲虫+2,那么对通常不允许豁免的法术其豁免为多少?例如:一名角色同时有防护圣甲虫+2,防护戒指+2,以及防护斗篷+2。那么他对于魔法飞弹的豁免是多少?

A:防护圣甲虫有时允许对 驱散魔法 豁免,取决于法术到底是怎么用的(注意:他这句话很有误导性,请看完下文)。如果直接释放在甲虫的穿戴者或者他的物品上,穿点者将获得一次豁免的机会且甲虫的加值生效。(技术上讲,物品进行豁免,但这个豁免就等于穿戴者的数值,见 驱散魔法 的描述)但如果 驱散魔法,魔邓肯裂解术,或是黑暗术释放在了一个包括了穿戴者的范围,则穿戴者不获得任何豁免,因为法术并非直接以他为目标。甲虫的穿戴者可能会觉得其法术被驱散或裂解很不便,甚至会危急生命,但这也只是法术消失的间接结果。有魔抗MR的生物在位于这些法术范围内时也同理处置,此时不适用魔抗掷骰,因为该法术并非直接生效于魔抗生物。当穿戴者受到不允许豁免的法术攻击影响时,例如魔法飞弹——穿戴者获得20加上其他豁免加值的豁免。因此,你的例子里,他将获得16的豁免,无所谓他穿戴的圣甲虫有多少加值。我知道某些人判定圣甲虫的基础豁免20来自于其首个加值(因此+2防护圣甲虫的基础豁免是19)。在我看来这也是一个合理的房规。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. Does a scarab of protection allow saving throws against spells such as dispel magic and Mordenkainen’s disjunction? If a character has one of the rare scarabs of protection +2, how do you calculate the saving throw bonus against effects that normally allow no saving throws? For example, a character has a scarab of protection +2, a ring of protection +2, and a cloak of protection +2. What is the character’s saving throw number against a magic missile spell?

A. A scarab of protection sometimes allows a saving throw against dispel magic and similar spells, depending on how the spell is used. If a the dispel is cast directly on the scarab wearer or his items, the wearer has a saving throw and the scarab’s bonus applies. (Technically, the items gets the saving throw, but its exactly the same as the wearer’s, see the dispel magic spell description). If a spell such as dispel magic, MordenkainenÂ’s disjunction, or continual darkness is cast on the area containing the scarab wearer, the wearer gains no saving throw because the spell is not directed at him. The scarab wearer might find it inconvenient , or even fatal , to have spells affecting him dispelled or disjoined, but that’s just a consequence of the spell being there. The situation is similar to what happens when a magic-resistant creature finds itself in one of these spell’s areas of effect, there is no magic resistance roll because the spell in question is not working directly against the creature. According to the scarab of protection description, when the wearer is subjected to a spell attack that allows no saving throw, such as magic missile, the wearer gains a saving throw of 20 plus any other magical saving throw bonuses he might have; the character in your example would get a saving throw of 16 against the magic missile spell no matter what kind of scarab he was wearing. I know of some referees who rule that the base saving throw of 20 accounts for the scarab’s first plus (and who give a base saving throw of 19 to characters wearing a scarab of protection +2). This seems a reasonable house rule to me.

Q:为什么魔法抗力MR对 防护邪恶 这样的防御法术有效,却对 石肤术 这样的防御法术无效?

A:如同“贤者问答”(龙杂218中关于魔抗的文章)曾解释过的,魔抗仅适用于魔抗生物被法术直接影响时。类似 石肤术 的法术,其从物理攻击中保护受术者,绝不会吃魔抗。防护邪恶某些时刻会吃魔抗——仅仅是在该法术的第三个效果(构成一个屏障阻止逼退异位面和咒唤生物)生效时,魔法抗力才会对法术产生作用。该法术的另外两个效果,仅使得受术者更难被伤害,不受魔法抗力影响(尽管如果魔抗生物突破第三个效果的掷骰成功时,整个法术会一起崩溃)。例如,小矮灵 有着恐怖的魔抗,但是因为小矮灵不会被该法术阻挡(因为其并非咒唤或异界生物),其魔抗对防护邪恶无效。

剧透 -  原文:

Q. Why does magic resistance work against a defensive spell such as protection from evil when it doesnÂ’t work against a defensive spell such as stoneskin?

A. As “Sage Advice” (and the article on magic resistance in issue #218) has explained before, magic resistance applies only when the creature with magic resistance is directly affected by the spell. A spell such as stoneskin, which protects the recipient from physical attacks, is never subject to magic resistance. Protection from evil is sometimes subject to magic resistance. Only when the spell’s third effect (which forms a barrier against planar and conjured creatures and forces such creatures to recoil) comes into play does magic resistance have any affect on the spell. The spell’s other two effects, which make the spell’s recipient harder to hurt, are not subject to magic resistance (though if a magic resistence roll suceeds against the the third effect the whole spell collapses). For example, a leprechaun has a formidable magic resistance, but because a leprechaun is not hedged out by the spell (because it is not a conjured or planar creature), its magic resistance does not affect protection from evil spells.

Q:角色装备两件赋予魔抗的物品会发生什么?比如魔抗护符和大法师法袍?

A:取决于DM,但我强烈推荐只取高。换言之,在你这个例子里,20%MR的魔抗护符和5%MR的大法师法袍,角色仅获得20%的戒指魔抗。我推荐这个规则对天生魔抗生物如卓尔或塔纳利也适用。魔抗MR在ADND 2E中是非常强力的能力,一旦DM任其失控,游戏平衡就将飞出窗外。如果你在玩ADND 1E,那里魔抗会被施法者等级穿透,且魔抗生物的移动不会导致魔法效果崩溃,则你可以对魔抗宽松一点。即使如此,也需小心。高等级游戏或许容错度低一些,但低级时,魔抗在旧版游戏中比今天更加恐怖。如果你决定让旧版ADND战役中的魔抗叠加,相似来源的魔抗也不应叠加。身穿 大法师袍 的卓尔或许可以增加5%的魔抗,法师或许也可以叠加魔抗护符和大法师袍。但没有角色可以——尽管他们理论上可以佩戴两枚魔抗护符并相加。只有最高的一枚护符应该生效。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. What happens when a character wears two items that bestow magic resistance, say an amulet of magic resistance and a robe of the archmagi?

A. This is up to the DM, but I strongly recommend that only the most powerful item functions. In other words, if the character in your example had an amulet of magic resistance, 20% along with the robe of the archmagi, which grants 5% magic resistance, the character still would have only a 20% magic resistance (from the ring). I recommend that you apply this rule even for naturally magic resistant creatures such as drow or tanarÂ’ri. Magic resistance in the AD&D 2nd Edition game is a powerful ability, and once the DM lets it get out of hand, your game balance probably will go right out the window. If youÂ’re playing the AD&D 1st Edition game, where magic resistance is adjusted according to the level of the caster and a magic-resistant creature canÂ’t necessarily walk around causing magical effects to collapse, you can afford to be a little more lenient. Even then, be careful. High-level games give you a little more breathing room; at low level, magic resistance in the original game is even more formidable that it is in the current game. If you decide to make magic resistance cumulative in your original AD&D campaign, you still should not allow magic resistance to accumulate if it comes from similar sources. A drow wearing a robe of the archmagi could add the 5% to her natural magic resistance, and wizard could add the values of a robe of the archmagi and an amulet of magic resistance. No character, however should be able to wear two amulets of magic resistance and add their effects together, only the most powerful amulet should function.

Q:如果生物的魔法抗力MR抵抗了 时间停止 会怎么样?在施法者进行他的1-3轮时,魔抗生物能获得多少轮动作呢?如果该生物也跟着动作1-3轮,敌对法术可以这样吗?如果生物只能动一轮,那施法者可能可以自由攻击他一两轮,这生物似乎没有从他成功的魔抗掷骰中受益太多。

A:事实上,两种情况都不对。时间停止 是一个范围持续in-place效果(见下文译者注),(见PH102页或DMG67页);如果魔抗掷骰成功,则时间停止崩溃。这可能伴随着爆裂,烟尘或其他戏剧性效果。

译者注:ADND2E的时停,是一个有15尺半径范围,持续时间特殊的法术。不同于后世。它的效果是,在施法的这一轮内,范围内施法者加速,其他人冻结。范围外其他人正常动这一轮,但不许进入时间调整的区域。也就是说这是一个Dota的虚空大。参照防护邪恶,抵抗可能来自被冻结/禁止进入,在外面的人理所当然是不应抵抗时停的,范围外的魔抗生物并不会崩溃时停,否则整个宇宙中总有某个魔抗生物能够抵抗时停。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. What happens if a creature with magic resistance successfully resists a time stop spell? How many rounds of actions does the creature get while the time stop caster is taking his 1-3 rounds of free actions? If the creature is free to act for 1-3 rounds, it gains from a hostile spell. If the creature only gets one round of action, the caster might be free to attack it for one or two rounds, which doesnÂ’t grant the creature much benefit from its successful resistance roll.

A. Actually, neither of these two situations would arise. Time stop is an in-place effect (see PH, page 102 or DMG, page 67); if a magic-resistance roll succeeds, the time stop collapses, perhaps with a thunderclap, puff of smoke, or other dramatic effect.

Q:请明确魔法抗力MR在以下情况的效果:
1、某人施法 石墙术 且其倒塌到了一个魔抗生物头上。
2、一个卓尔(有魔抗和强光惩罚的精灵)在光亮术或恒久之光的光芒里。
3、有魔抗的、只能在水中呼吸的水生生物,位于气化水体法术之中。

(译注本条目强烈建议参照原文)
A:在龙杂175(67页)贤者问答讨论过魔抗,看起来现在是时候把这个问题详细研究清楚了。大部分此类问题的解答都非常直观,用一些常识结合对魔抗规则的仔细阅读(PHB,102-103页;DMG66-67页),应该可以终结这些问题。当魔法抗力的效果需要判定的时候,当然前提是如果存在MR的话,DM应该考虑两个关键因素。第一,涉及到的魔法是什么类型的?规则提供了四种类型:以个人为目标的法术、区域影响法术、范围持续法术、和永久性法术。第二,“袭来”的法术是直接影响了魔抗生物,还是这种影响仅仅是魔法存在于该处导致的间接结果?不幸的是,没有一个坚实而快速的规则(除了书里写过的那些)用来确定应适用哪种条件。以下是我的理解:
1、石墙术 是一个永久魔法效果(其持续时间在法术详述中有标明)。且魔法“墙”是塑能法术,塑能法术直接产生或创造法术效果。当 石墙术 落在某个魔抗生物的头上,或是仅仅该生物试图穿过石墙,这时魔法效果直接作用于生物,魔抗生效。如果魔抗掷骰成功,该生物无伤穿过了墙。鉴于石墙是个永久效果,因而也不会受到影响,石墙不会被解消或是留下一个可供其他生物穿越的洞。
2、光亮术 和 恒久之光 法术相对复杂。两者都是范围持续法术,其在某个特定地点或物品上持续工作。然而,恒久之光法术同时也是永久的,且两者都可以直接作用于生物以致盲敌人。当用于致盲一个生物时,两个法术都视作以个人为目标的法术,魔法抗力适用。这是因为此时施法者在试图以某单一生物为目标,若魔法抗力成功,则法术将彻底无效(任何单独瞄准魔法抗力生物的区域影响法术同理)。但当魔抗生物位于或者进入这两种法术的区域时状况则完全相反。两个法术都是转化系,转化系会改变生物、环境或物件,而这种改变产生了法术效果。在 光亮术 和 恒久之光 的例子里,这些法术改变了区域或物体使其发光。一种对其机理的解释是区域内的原子受到激发所以他们发射出可见光。光线有中心源点(所以光可以被不透明容器遮蔽),但这是目标物体或区域在发光,并非法术。鉴于魔法影响的是区域而非生物,魔法抗力对此无效(光只是法术导致的间接结果)。这对这些法术的逆向效果也同理;某个生物可能在黑暗中有极端不利,但鉴于魔法并非直接影响生物,魔法抗力与其无关。
3、气化水体同样是一个范围持续法术,但其也是一个影响区域,而非影响区域中的生物的转化系法术。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. Please clarify the effects of magic resistance in the following situations: 1) Someone casts a wall of stone spell so that it falls on top of the magic-resistant creature; 2) A drow (an elven race that has magic resistance and suffers various penalties in bright light) is enveloped in a light or continual light spell; and 3) A magic resistant marine creature that breathes only water finds itself within an airy water spell.

A. "Sage Advice" discussed magic resistance in issue #175 (page 76), but it seems to be time to study the subject in more detail. Most of these answers are pretty straightforward; a little common sense and a careful rereading of the magic resistance rules (PH, pages 102-103; DMG, pages 66-67) should put these matters to rest. When adjudicating the effects, if any, of magic resistance, the DM has to consider two factors. First, what type of magic is involved? The rules make four distinctions: individually targeted spells, area effect spells, in-place spells, and permanent spells. Second, does the "incoming" magic directly affect the magic resistant creature, or is the effect on the creature merely a consequence of the magic being there? Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules (beyond what is already printed in the books) to decide which conditions apply. Here is my reasoning: 1) A wall of stone is a permanent magical effect (its duration is so listed in the spell description). Furthermore, magical "wall" spells are evocations, which directly bring forth or create their effects. When the wall of stone falls on top of a magic resistant creature, or even if the creature tries to walk through a stationary wall, the magical effect is acting directly on the creature. Magic resistance applies; if the magic-resistance roll succeeds, the creature passes harmlessly through the wall. Since the wall of stone is permanent, there is no effect on it; that is, the wall is not dispelled or pierced with a hole that other creatures can pass through. 2) Light and continual light spells are a little harder to figure out. Both are in place effects, operating continuously in a particular place or on a particular item. However, continual light also is permanent, and both spells can be cast directly against a creature to blind it. When used to blind a creature, either of these spells is treated as an individually targeted effect, and magic resistance applies. Since the caster is targeting a single creature only when trying to blind an opponent with either spell, the effect is completely negated if the magic resistance roll succeeds (as it is for any area-effect spell targeted solely at the magic-resistant creature). However, an entirely different set of circumstances prevails when a magic resistant creature moves into or otherwise finds itself inside either spells area of effect. Both spells are alterations, magic that works a change on a creature, area, or object, and this change produces the spells effects. In the case of light and continual light, these spells change an area or object so that it emits light. One explanation of how this works is that the atoms in the area of effect are excited so that they emit visible light. The light has a central focus (so the light can be hidden by an opaque container), but it is the target object or area that emits the light, not the spell. Since the magic affects the area and not the creature, magic resistance does not apply (the light is a consequence of the spell). The same holds true for the reverse of these spells; a creature might be very badly affected by darkness or continual darkness, but, since the magic does not directly affect the creature, magic resistance is irrelevant. 3) Airy water also is an in-place spell, but it is also an alteration that affects an area, not the creatures within the area.

Q:我认为魔法抗力能从自然现象中保护生物,如 冰风暴 的冰雹。那其可以抵抗 涅斯图的光耀指挥棒 (《灰鹰冒险》,60页)吗?这法术是从光辉准元素位面引来自然现象。这法术的自动反击攻击施法者的能力怎么运作?

A:是否是自然现象与是否吃魔抗无关。魔法创造的效果仅在其为间接结果时忽视魔抗。处理魔抗的规则(PHB102页,DMG66页)使用 地震术 造成的裂隙作为例子。地震术并非制造裂隙,而是制造震动,震动产生裂隙。另一个例子是,闪电是一种自然现象,在主物质位面和其他地方都是。但无论如何,闪电束 是一个吃魔抗的区域影响法术。当然,魔抗无法从被闪电束砸断的巨型钟乳石或危墙下保护生物。也不能免受 操控天气 或 召唤气象 法术产生的随机雷暴闪电。这后两者并非制造或控制了闪电,他们仅仅是改变和激发了大气提高了产生闪电的概率。但要注意 召雷术 是创造并直接引导闪电,因此每道闪电依然是吃魔抗的区域效果。法术 冰风暴 可以制造出吃魔抗的冰弹,如同其他区域影响法术。但当 冰风暴 选择雨夹雪效果时,魔抗生物仍将目盲,减速,并可能滑倒,因为这些效果是间接的。涅斯图的光耀指挥棒是一个吃魔抗的“范围持续”魔法效果。如果指挥棒击中某个魔抗生物且魔抗掷骰成功,则指挥棒崩溃。魔抗永远不会生效,直到某个法术或类法术效果直接接触到抵抗生物,所以自动命中的法术,如魔法飞弹,仍然会命中(译注:这会影响石皮层数),但若魔抗骰成功,则不受伤害。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. I understand that magic resistance can protect a creature against natural effects such as the hailstones of an ice storm. Can it also protect a creature from the effects of a Nystul 's radiant baton (Greyhawk Adventures, page 60), which creates a natural effect drawn from the quasi-elemental plane of radiance? What about the spell's ability to automatically strike a creature that has struck the caster during a round?

A. Whether or not an effect is natural has no bearing on whether or not it is subject to magic resistance. Magically created effects ignore magic resistance only if they are consequential. The rules governing magic resistance (PHB, page 102, or DMG, page 66) use crevices created by an earthquake spell as an example. The spell earthquake does not create crevices; it creates tremors that in turn create crevices. As another example, lightning is a natural effect on the prime material plane and elsewhere. Nevertheless, a lightning bolt is an area-effect spell subject to magic resistance. Magic resistance, however, cannot protect a creature against a huge stalactite or weakened wall broken loose by a lightning bolt. Nor can it protect an exposed creature from random lighting strikes generated from a thunderstorm created by control weather or weather summoning spells. These last two spells do not create or control lightning; they change and agitate the atmosphere in such a way as to make lightning possible. Note that call lightning creates and directs lightning on demand, and that each stroke called is an area effect subject to magic resistance. The spell ice storm can create damage inflicting missiles that are subject to magic resistance, as is any other area of effect spell. However, a magic-resistant creature still is blinded, slowed, and vulnerable to slipping and falling if subjected to the sleet version of an ice storm, because these are consequential effects. A Nystul’s radiant baton is an "in place" magical effect subject to magic resistance. If the spell's baton strikes a magic-resistant creature and the magic-resistance roll succeeds, the baton collapses. Magic resistance never comes into play until a spell or spell-like effect comes into contact with a resistant creature, so spell effects that automatically hit, such as magic missiles, still hit, though they do no damage if the magic-resistance roll succeeds.

Q:反魔场可以压制天生魔法抗力吗?魔法物品带来的魔法抗力呢?

A:魔法抗力仅在反魔场可以直接作用于抵抗生物时生效。一个咒唤或是召唤魔抗生物会被反魔场阻挡在外。因此其魔抗,无论来源,都会有效。如果魔抗掷骰成功,反魔场崩溃,如同其他各种范围持续法术(见DMG67页)。如果魔抗生物并非咒唤或召唤,其不会被阻挡在外,但其魔法或魔法物品会在反魔场中停止工作。如果咒唤或召唤生物的魔抗掷骰失败,其将被反魔场阻挡在外,但其其他能力和物品将正常工作。但反魔场仍将持续压制生物向内施展的任何魔法效果。在所有情况下,魔抗都不会允许非神器在反魔场内继续生效。注意,魔抗生物在反魔场内依然具有魔抗,但这通常无关紧要因为没有烦人的法术可以在其内生效。

译注:这条看起来和龙杂218文章的人物魔抗延伸到物品冲突。且龙杂218是后出的。但也可以理解为反魔场压制魔法物品和压制魔法的断网效果本身也是间接的,就算物品有魔抗也无济于事?

剧透 -  原文:
Q. Will an anti-magic shell spell negate innate magic resistance? What about magic resistance from a magical item?

A. Magic resistance comes into play only when the anti-magic shell spell could directly affect the resistant creature. A conjured or summoned magic-resistant creature would be hedged out by an anti-magic shell, and its magic resistance, regardless of its source, would come into play. If the magic-resistance roll succeeds, the anti-magic shell collapses, as would any other in-place spell (see the DMG, page 67). If the magic-resistant creature is not conjured or summoned, it is not hedged out, but its magic and magical items cease functioning while within the anti-magic shell. If a conjured or summoned creature fails its magic resistance roll, it is hedged out by the anti-magic shell and all its abilities and items work normally. However, the anti-magic shell continues to negate any of the creature.s magical effects that are cast into it. In no case does magic resistance allow non-artifact magical items to continue functioning inside an intact anti-magic shell. Note that a magic resistant creature inside an anti-magic shell still is magic resistant, but this usually is irrelevant as no mortal magic works within that spell.
« 上次编辑: 2022-04-27, 周三 01:41:21 由 星海恋 »

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
法术免疫与伤害吸收
« 回帖 #3 于: 2022-04-26, 周二 16:42:57 »
Q:如228期指出,4环祭司法术 法术免疫 无法在受术者使用其他形式魔法防护时生效。这是意味着受术者不能从任何形式的魔法防护中收益,还是仅仅是对指定免疫的法术有效的魔法防护?例如,一枚防护戒指+1会导致对魔法飞弹的法术免疫失效吗?或者仅仅是那些直接对当前法术有关的效果才会,例如佩戴火焰抗力戒指的同时使用法术免疫指定火球术。最后一个问题:角色可以同时拥有多个法术免疫吗。

A:法术免疫 这一法术不能与任何其他形式的魔法防护同时生效,这也包括另一个法术免疫。这与魔法防护的形式无关。当然DM或许希望设计一些特例,比如魔法护甲,防御护腕等等,但任何提供通用豁免加值(例如防护戒指)或是带给使用者对某类型攻击的免疫或部分抗力(如温暖戒指或火焰抗力戒指)的物品都应阻碍法术免疫的运作。

剧透 -  原文:

Q. As you pointed out back in issue #228, the fourth-level priest spell spell immunity doesn’t work if the recipient also uses other forms of magical protection. Does this mean that the spell recipient cannot benefit from any form of magical protection, or just not from magical protections relevant to the current use of the spell immunity spell? For example, does a ring of protection +1 count against a spell immunity effect vs. magic missile spells? Or do only those spells and items directly linked to the current spell immunity effect apply, such as a ring of fire resistance when used with spell immunity effect vs. fireball spells? One final question: Can a character benefit from more than one spell immunity effect at a time?

A. A spell immunity spell does not function with any other form of magical protection, including itself. It doesn’t matter what form the magical protection takes. The DM might want to designate certain exceptions, such as magical armor or bracers of defense, but anything that provides a universal saving throw bonus (such as a ring of protection) or which renders the user immune or partially resistant to a specific attack form (such as a ring or warmth or a ring of fire resistance) should interfere with spell immunity,

Q:三环祭司法术 防护火焰 当对自身施法的时候,可以抵抗掉12点每等级的火焰伤害。如果该火焰伤害可以豁免减半,那角色是先豁免减半再吸收吗?如果玩家同时装备火焰抗力戒指呢?如果有魔法抗力MR呢?

A:防护火焰吸收的伤害是生物实际应该承受的,如果角色有幸通过魔抗避免了伤害,那就根本不占用总吸收值。如果实际伤害因防御装置或豁免减少,则只有最终被减少后的伤害计入法术抵抗总额。

剧透 -  原文:

Q. The third-level priest spell protection from fire negates 12 points of fire damage per caster level if the caster uses it on himself. If an incoming fire attack allows a saving throw for half damage, does the character get to attempt a saving throw to reduce the damage subtracted from the spell’s total? What if the character also is wearing a ring of fire resistance? What of the caster also has magic resistance?

A. A protection from fire spell negates fire damage that the protected creature actually suffers. If the character can avoid damage altogether courtesy of a magic resistance roll, then no damage is subtracted from the spell’s total. If the actual damage inflicted is reduced due to a successful saving throw or a protective device, then only the reduced damage is subtracted from the spell’s total.

译注:著名的石皮不保专注出处,设计师的RAI讲的非常明确,并且对玩家远程打断来说也是公平的(飞弹/普通箭矢),难以施法本身就是ADND重要的读条风味来源。但是这论证过程属实暴露出了设计师臆想了法术博弈的过程,译者并不支持其逻辑。

Q:如果法师对自己施展了 石肤术 ,之后在施放另一个法术时被近战击中,第二个法术会被破坏还是法师可以因石肤术抵消伤害而维持专注?

A:第二个法术会被打断,正如一次成功的命中会破坏法术生效(PHB85页)。注意此处的关键因素是成功的攻击,而非伤害。游戏的逻辑认为即使是非伤害命中也能打断专注。你很难在有某人试图拿你当沙袋练习时,保持你的思维集中于像法术一样复杂的事物,即使他的攻击并不未对你造成伤害。多种非伤害命中都可以打断施法:捂嘴、锁臂、或者仅仅是击倒。当然伤害永远会打断专注。比如,一位施法者在火球或吐息中受伤,即使他通过了豁免只受一半伤害,他施放中的法术也会被打断。这种设计对游戏平衡性至关重要。施法者的设计就是施法过程中对物理攻击非常脆弱的,而他们的对手则必须提前预测到法术施展才能在放出之前予以打断。(译注:我要吐槽,事实上这并没有任何预判损失,因为直接盯着施法者打就是最优选择,不需要考虑他到底这轮会不会施法——他也没别的可干,相反防御性法术才有巨大的预判损失,而且还不像攻击有很大的失败率)施法者不应通过 石肤术 等绕过这一限制。类似的,免疫普通武器的施法者(比如巫妖或是有职业的吸血鬼)受到成功的攻击也会破坏他们的法术。某些DM甚至允许额外的“攻击”加值——如果角色的攻击特别声明仅试图打断施法。理由是非伤害的碰撞要比奔着致命去的攻击容易得多。这样的规则在目标是一个高等级主母,有着负数AC的时候是一种平衡,但对于1级只有10AC的法师就不讲道理的太难了。如果要给的话,给予这种加值也应该谨慎。我建议奖励应该被限制在+4以内,且在目标的AC一侧计算,不应让惩罚后的AC比10更差。


剧透 -  原文:
Q. If a wizard casts a stone skin spell on himself, then is struck in melee while casting another spell, is the second spell disrupted or is the wizard able to maintain concentration because the stone skin's protection negates damage?

A. The second spell is disrupted, as a successful hit ruins a spell in progress (Player 's Handbook, page 85). Note that a successful attack, not damage, is the critical factor here. Game logic assumes that even a non-damaging hit can disrupt concentration. It's tough to keep your mind focused on something as complex as a spell when someone's using your head for batting practice, even if the blows aren't hurting you. Many kinds of non-damaging hits can disrupt spell-casting: a hand clamped over the mouth, an arm-lock, or just being knocked down. However, damage always breaks concentration. If, for example, a spell-caster takes damage from a fireball or breath weapon, any spell in progress is lost even if the caster made his saving throw and took only half damage. These distinctions also are important to game balance. Spell-casters are intended to be vulnerable to physical attacks during spell-casting, and their opponents must be given a chance to anticipate the spell and disrupt it before it goes off. Spell-casters can't get around this limitation by using spells such as stone skin. Likewise, spell-casting monsters that are immune to normal weapons (such as liches and vampires with character abilities) can have their spells ruined by any successful attacker. Some DMs even allow "attack" bonuses when characters make attacks specifically to disrupt a spell. The reasoning here is that a non-damaging jostle or cross block is easier to make than a potentially lethal blow. While this sort of ruling tends to be an equalizer when the target spell-caster is a high-level evil patriarch with an armour class in the negative numbers, it can be unreasonably tough on a 1st-level wizard with AC 10. Apply such bonuses carefully, if at all. I suggest that bonuses be limited to +4 or less, and you might consider applying them to the target's armour class rather than to the "to hit" roll. If you use the armour class adjustment method, do not allow an armour class to be adjusted to worse than 10.

Q:行动自如戒指 会让盗贼忽视重甲盗贼技能惩罚吗?他能允许法师穿甲施法吗?允许重甲角色全速移动吗?穿戴者能游泳吗?

A:行动自如戒指 保护穿戴者免遭限制或禁止行动的魔法效果,并且允许穿戴者在水下活动不承受水阻。但它不免除重载惩罚,也不免除盔甲限制(不仅对贼)。在此强调,ADND中的魔法功能是具体而特化的;副作用,即使是合乎逻辑的,也常常不会发生。佩戴 行动自如戒指 的角色可以忽略 纠缠术 的效果,但其并不获得德鲁伊那样穿过树丛的能力。同样,认为角色不能在水中漂浮或游泳是没有道理的。(另一方面,个别DM可以判定确实不能,这将导致玩家在水边冒险时产生新问题)佩戴 行动自如戒指 应该可以免疫 纠缠绳 的攻击,但仍会在物理层面被非魔法的绳子束缚。注意此戒指并不赋予穿戴者忽略屏障的能力,像是普通墙壁或是 力场监牢。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. Would a ring of free action negate thieving penalties for wearing heavy armour? Would it allow a wizard to cast spells while wearing armour? Would it allow an armoured character to move at full (12) rate? Can the wearer swim?

A. A ring of free action protects its wearer from magical effects that hinder or immobilize, and allows the wearer to function underwater without hindrance due to water resistance. It does not negate encumbrance penalties, nor does it allow characters to ignore armour restrictions due to character class (not even thieves). It is important to note that magic in the AD&D game is specific and specialised; collateral effects, even those suggested by logic, usually do not occur. While a character wearing a ring of free action can ignore the effects of an entangle spell, the wearer is not granted the ability to freely move through underbrush as can a druid. Likewise, there is no reason to assume that the wearer cannot float or swim in water. (On the other hand, individual DMs might rule that this is the case, and thus give the character a new problem to think about while adventuring in or near the water.) The wearer of a ring of free action would be immune to attacks from a rope of entanglement, but could be physically restrained and bound with any normal rope. Note that the ring also does not empower the wearer to ignore barriers such as normal walls or a force cage spell.

« 上次编辑: 2022-04-27, 周三 23:45:47 由 星海恋 »

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
Re: 【AD&D】贤者问答 法术攻防合集
« 回帖 #4 于: 2022-04-27, 周三 00:11:40 »
Q:精灵和半精灵的魔抗到底对什么魔法有效

A:老问题,我这个月又收到好几封来信。我不想给出一个具体列表,鉴于扩展还在不断增加新法术。精灵和半精灵抗力适用于,陷入他人持续性影响或睡眠的大部分法术以及类法术。例如 魅惑怪物,魅惑人类,魅惑人和哺乳动物,支配,慑心目光(仅限魅惑,其睡眠正常生效,恐惧和恶心同样),火焰魅惑,群体魅惑,以及睡眠术。魔法设备以及生物的特殊攻击中那些复制法术效果的,如魅惑镜片,眼魔的魅惑射线,吸血鬼的魅惑凝视,都受精灵和半精灵魔抗影响。但造成睡眠的喷吐武器,如黄铜龙的睡眠吐息,不吃魔抗。迷诱权杖 和 统治权杖;命令法杖的魅惑效果,这些也不吃魔抗。只是失能或造成部分控制的法术和其他效果,如定身法术,催眠,暗示,使命术,指使术,都不吃精灵魔抗。如果有其他合理的疑问,则DM决定。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. Exactly which spells are subject to elven and half-elven magic resistance?

A. The question is an old one, but I received several letters on the topic this month. I would prefer to avoid giving an actual list, because new spells are being added to the game all the time. Elven and half-elven resistance to sleep and charm spells applies to most spells, and spell-like effects that cause the subject to fall asleep or fall under another character's continuing influence. Such effects include: charm monster, charm person, charm person or mammal, domination, eyebite (charm effect only, the sleep effect works normally on elves and half-elves, as do the fear and sicken effects), fire charm, mass charm, and sleep. Magical devices and creature special attacks that duplicate these spells, such as eyes of charming, the beholder's charm rays, and the vampire's charm gaze also are subject to elven and halfelven resistance. Sleep-inducing breath weapons, such as the brass dragon's sleep gas, are not. Neither are the rod of beguiling or the rod of rulership; charm effects from a staff of commanding are. Spells and other effects that merely incapacitate the subjects or that allow only limited control, such as hold spells, hypnosis, suggestion, quest, and geas are not subject the eleven or half-eleven resistance. When there is a reasonable doubt, the DM must decide.

Q:大概是个老问题,但是精灵的睡眠与魅惑抗力在我的团里造成了很大困扰。精灵的抗力对所有附魔/魅惑学派的法术都有用吗?还是只对如 魅惑人类,魅惑怪物,睡眠术 这些?如果对全部附魔/魅惑系生效,那我认为精灵作为一个玩家种族实在是过强理应被ban。

A:确实是个旧问题,贤者问答回答过,这次给出一个更明确的回答:精灵抗力适用那些允许持续操控受术者的法术和类法术。这包括 魅惑人类,魅惑怪物,支配,火焰魅惑,吸血鬼的魅惑凝视,海妖之歌,以及其他种种。但是精灵抗力并不适用于有限控制或造成失能:例如 命令术,人类定身术,暗示,使命术,指使术。精灵抗力也不对占据身体的外来效果生效,如魔魂壶。任何导致受术者陷入附魔睡眠的效果,如 睡眠术,慑心目光的睡眠效果,都吃精灵抗力。但是敌人用 命令术 或 暗示术 让精灵入睡,此时精灵抗力无效,这种情况导致的睡眠并非“魔法”睡眠,因而可以被强噪声,常见干扰之类唤醒。

剧透 -  原文:
Q. It seems to be an old question, but the question of an elf’s resistance to sleep and charm spells has raised its ugly head our local campaign. Does elf resistance count against any spell of the school of Enchantment/Charm or only against the spells charm person, charm monster, and sleep? If it works against the whole school of Enchantment/Charm, I do indeed think that the race of elves is far too strong to be a player character race and thus should be banned from play.

A. Yeah, its an old question, one the Sage has answered before, but here’s a better answer: An elf’s resistance applies to spells and spell-like effects that allow continuing control over the recipient. These include charm person, charm monster, domination, fire charm, a vampire’s charm gaze, a harpy’s song, and many others. An elf’s resistance does not apply to effects that allow limited control or impose a disability, such as command, hold person, suggestion, quest, or geas. Nor does an elf’s resistance prevent outside influences from usurping control of the body, such as magic jar. Any effect that causes the recipient to fall into an enchanted slumber, such as the sleep spell or the sleep effect of the eyebite spell, is subject to elven resistance. If an opponent uses a command or suggestion spell to induce an elf to fall asleep, the elf does not gain the benefit of his resistance, but the resulting sleep is not "magical" sleep, and the elf can awaken in response to loud noise, general discomfort, or the like.

Q:德鲁伊的对林地生物魅惑抗力只对天生能力有效还是对所有附魔/魅惑系法术都有效?另外到底林地生物包含什么东西?德鲁伊免疫住在树边上生物释放的 魅惑人类 法术吗?

A:本能力的设计意图很清楚,是让德鲁伊免疫那些始终住在林子里的奇幻生物的天生能力。这让德鲁伊得以保持其林地长者和守护者的形象,免于为森林sylven生物淘气的魅惑能力所苦,毕竟不能指望这些生物使用她们的能力时会讲道理。德鲁伊利用了给予森林生物魅惑的同源能力实现了这一免疫。这种免疫并不保护德鲁伊受 魅惑人类 或 魅惑人和哺乳动物的影响,即使这些法术是由其他德鲁伊或林地生物如绿龙施法的。他们施法的力量来自另一源头。林地生物是指任何与森林设定相关的生物,如树精,林精,或水妖精。如果有疑问,则查询生物在《怪物图鉴》中的“气候/地形”一栏。通常生活在非森林地形的生物,如吸血鬼,可以正常魅惑德鲁伊。

(译注:从这条我们也知道了为什么林地生物包含龙语和巨人语,这不能理解为所有的龙和巨人都是林地生物,仅仅某些是)


剧透 -  原文:
Q. Does the druidical resistance to charms cast by woodland creatures protect only against innate abilities or against enchantment/charm spells in general? What constitutes a woodland creature, anyway? Is a druid immune to charm person spells cast by any creature that lives near a tree?

A. The intent behind this ability clearly is to make the druid immune to the innate charm abilities possessed by fantastic creatures who live permanently in the forest. This keeps the druids status as master and protector of the forest from being undermined by capricious charm attempts from sylvan creatures who cannot be counted on to use their abilities with common sense. The druid gains this ability because he taps into the same base of power that grants sylvan creatures their charm abilities. The immunity does not protect the druid from spells such as charm person or charm person or mammal, even when cast by other druids or woodland creatures such as green dragons; their power comes from a different source. A woodland creature is any creature normally associated with a sylvan setting, such as a dryad, hamadryad, or nymph. When in doubt, check the creature's "Climate/Terrain" heading in the Monstrous Compendium. Creatures that typically live in non-forested terrain, such as vampires, can charm druids normally.

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
Re: 【AD&D】贤者问答 法术攻防合集
« 回帖 #5 于: 2022-04-27, 周三 01:24:32 »
留一楼备用,可能拿来放其他免疫

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
龙杂218文章:处理魔抗的步骤 by Skip Williams
« 回帖 #6 于: 2022-04-27, 周三 01:26:34 »
如果你对魔法抗力MR如何工作仍有疑问,别紧张,这很正常。魔抗被广泛误解了,从ODND引入开始就给DM造成了很大困扰。


在只有三本小册子构成的初代游戏中。有种叫balrog的怪物,有75%几率抵抗施放在其身上的魔法。这个时候没有其他怪物具有类似的能力,DM也不知道该怎么窗户里。大部分人当做balrog的魔抗是一种特殊豁免,投掷1d100取代正常的1d20以决定法术是否生效。当然,这意味着成功抵抗了火球术的balrog仍然要受到一半伤害。不过最后,明确了魔抗是一种生物在豁免之外的额外优势,成功魔抗可以完全免疫法术。

目前,ADND游戏中海量的魔法效果让判定魔抗变成了个技术活,不过这是个大家都能掌握的技术。


步骤

在所有情况下,你都可以按如下三步决定魔抗是否工作。

第一步:确定魔法效果是适用于魔抗。只有生物和魔法装置施放的法术和类法术适用于魔抗。喷吐武器,凝视武器,特殊攻击(例如疾病,能量吸取,或麻痹),魔法战斗加值,毒素等都不受。高贵权力之杖 的恐惧效果吃魔抗,因为这是个类法术效果(译注:尽管没指向具体法术,但物品自己写了)。权杖的战斗加值(如权杖硬头锤形态的+2)则不吃。


第二步:确定魔法效果是否 直接 影响魔抗生物。如果魔法创造或释放出的能量不切实作用于魔抗生物,魔抗就没用。如果魔法作用于其他任何东西(如空气,地面,室内的光线)且生物仅仅是作为结果被间接影响,那就不进行魔抗掷骰。
生物的确可能被法术的非直接影响伤害。例如 恒久之光 法术,会因光敏伤害卓尔使其暴露在光源之下时承受相当的惩罚。但是恒久之光,通常被放在一个包含卓尔的区域上,并使区域明亮,而非以卓尔自身为目标。所以这个效果是间接的。


第三步:确定如果魔抗掷骰可用并成功后会发生什么。成功掷骰的结果取决于该魔法的类型。在魔抗的问题上,我们将魔法分为四类(见PHB第九章的详细信息):

以个人为目标的法术:若魔抗掷骰成功将被完全无效。

区域影响法术:若魔抗掷骰成功则魔抗生物本人不吃,但法术并非失效。区域内的其他生物和物品仍然会受到法术影响。

范围持续法术:若魔抗掷骰成功,将崩溃并不再持续。

永久性法术:若魔抗掷骰成功,则魔抗生物不受其影响,但法术并非失效。永久法术仍然继续工作,且影响区域内的其他生物依然承受法术效果。

以上,就是关于魔抗的一切了。


解惑
还有疑问?以下是各步骤中会遇到的常见困难。

第一步:这里最常见的问题是确定什么是法术或类法术,又有哪些不是。所有法术都有可能适用于魔抗。如果使用者记忆并施法,这就是个法术。除此之外,所有如同某法术运作的效果也适用于魔抗。使用你的常识。这个效果看起来类似法术吗?如果答案为是,则其就有可能是。(某些时候直接按字面,如果怪物描述中包含类法术能力列表,那这些都是类法术。)
生物可能同时有适用于和不适用于魔抗的能力。例如,男首斯芬克斯的祭司法术适用于魔抗,但其吼叫不适用(这更像是喷吐武器)。底栖魔鱼的奴役能力适用于魔抗(译注:在开了灵能以后,底栖魔鱼将变为灵能生物,估计就不吃了),但粘液云则不适用(粘液云是其身体制造的)。祭司的法术适用于魔抗,但斥退不死能力不是(不想发书,斥退不死仅在特定条件下生效)。


第二步:核心困难一般是确定效果是否在目标身上直接生效。许多效果因为是间接的而不吃魔抗。最简单的判断直接与间接的方法是考虑效果的魔法学派。

塑能:这类法术几乎总是吃魔抗。如果塑能法术造成伤害,则其要么是个以个人为目标的法术,要么是个区域影响法术如 冰风暴 ,参照具体情况。

墙型法术是范围持续法术。如果其造成伤害,困住生物,或是限制移动,则其吃魔抗。

附魔/魅惑:这些法术几乎总是吃魔抗,且被认为是以个人为目标的法术,除非法术是在附魔一个物体并用于对抗某个生物的——这是间接法术。例如 附魔武器 法术,永远不吃魔抗。同时影响多个目标的附魔/魅惑视作以个人为目标的法术(译注:例如人类定身,你可以参照后世看不到目标时是否能够对地板施法来理解,想来其他范围多少内选取N个目标的法术同理),但只有影响魔抗生物的那部分被抵消。

咒法/召唤:这些法术几乎永远不吃魔抗,除非法术咒唤了某种形式的能量(译注:3版咒法球那种创造非物质的东西在这里是吃魔抗的),例如震慑真言或是虹光喷射。前者是以个人为目标的法术,后者是区域影响法术。召唤生物的法术永不吃魔抗。部分咒法法术会落入灰色地带,例如 艾伐黑触手 ,可以视作召唤生物(因此不吃魔抗)或是一个范围持续效果。自行选择其一并始终保持这一判定。

防护:这些法术有时吃魔抗。此时目标生物必须被伤害,改变,或是使某些行为受限。感知能力的改变,比如 回避侦测 ,不算在内。

幻术:这些法术几乎永不吃魔抗。进行直接攻击的法术,例如 魅影杀手 或是 目盲术 属于例外。

转化:这些法术通常吃魔抗,尤其是当他们试图转化目标生物的时候。但如果转化系法术的目标是空间的一点而非生物,则其不吃魔抗。化石为泥 和 法师之眼 改变的是生物周边环境,并非生物本身,所以永不吃魔抗。

预言:这些并非直接影响生物的法术,因此不吃魔抗,就算它们会揭示对生物非常有害的信息。

死灵:大部分此类法术改变目标生物的生命力,因此吃魔抗。召唤生物的死灵法术,如 召唤幽影 ,或是侦测生物的,如 侦测亡灵 ,均不吃魔抗。


第三步:这一步通常没什么问题,但要小心那些装作范围效果的以个人为目标的法术。此类法术有 魔法飞弹,人类定身术 ,怪物定身术,以及在有限范围内影响多个目标的 缓慢术 。尽管它们是以个人为目标的法术,成功的魔抗掷骰仍然只抵消魔抗生物自身直接受到的影响(译注:这个判定真正的关键影响在法术吸收/法术反转上,非个人目标法术无法被吸收/反转)。

区域影响法术不会被成功的魔抗掷骰无效化。走在无底深坑上方桥上的 巴特兹 被闪电束轰击可以过魔抗无伤,但是桥不行。

墙型法术是范围持续法术(除非他们是永久的);如果魔抗掷骰对非永久墙成功,则整个墙都会崩溃。这对认为自己可以高枕无忧的法师来说非常恐怖。


杂注
魔抗生物自身的能力,法术,魔法效果永远正常生效。魔抗永不干涉来自魔抗生物的效果。同样的,魔抗延伸至生物的物品。如果魔抗成功,生物的物品也会受到保护。魔法抗力可以被自愿降下——如果魔抗生物希望的话。这需要进行专注,且此时生物除半速移动外不能执行任何动作。一旦降下抗力,该轮中指向生物的任何法术都会正常生效。

魔抗独立于豁免生效,如果魔抗掷骰失败,生物依然可以豁免(如果法术能豁免)。自愿降下魔抗的生物自动在魔抗掷骰中失败,但仍然有他应有的豁免。

对墙型法术在此特别注明。如果(比如像我作者自己)对穿过墙的魔抗生物导致整个墙型法术崩溃感到不对劲,我建议你将所有墙型法术视作永久性法术。魔抗生物掷骰成功可以穿过,但墙不会崩溃。如果魔抗失败,则该生物一整天内都不可再次尝试穿越。

剧透 -  原文:
Magic Resistance, Step by Step

by Skip Williams


magic resistance ought to work, don’t
worry, you’re in good company. Magic
resistance is widely misunderstood, and
has been giving DMs fits since it was introduced
back in the original D&D® game.
The first version of the game was a set
of three slim booklets in a nondescript
brown box. One of the monsters included
in the set was the balrog, which had a 75%
chance to resist spells cast at it. At the
time, no other monster in the game had
that ability and DMs didn’t quite know
what to do with it. Most people treated the
balrog’s magic resistance as a special saving
throw, rolling 1d100 instead of 1d20 to
see if a spell cast at a balrog worked or
not. Of course, this meant that a balrog
that successfully resisted a fireball still
suffered half damage from the blast. Eventually,
however, word got out that magic
resistance was something that a creature
enjoyed in addition to a saving throw, and
that successful resistance made the creature
immune to the spell.
These days, the sheer diversity of magic
in the AD&D® game makes adjudicating
magic resistance something of an art, but
it’s an art anyone can master.
The Steps
No matter what the circumstances, you
can decide how magic resistance works by
following three basic steps:
Step One: Decide if the magical effect
can be subject to magic resistance at all.
Only spells and spell-like abilities from
creatures and magical devices are subject
to magic resistance. Breath weapons, gaze
weapons, special attacks (such as disease,
energy drain, or paralysis), magical combat
bonuses, and psionics are not. A fear
effect from rod of lordly might is subject
to magic resistance, because it is a spelllike
effect. The rods combat bonuses (such
as the +2 bonus from the rod’s mace
form) are not.
Step Two: Decide if magic affects the
resistant creature directly. Magic resistance
has no effect unless the energy created
or released by the magic actually goes
to work on the resistant creature. If the
magic acts on anything else (the air, the
ground, the room’s light) and the creature
is affected as a consequence, there is no
magic resistance roll.
Creatures can be harmed by a spell
without being directly affected. For example,
a continual light
spell, harms a drow elf because drow are
sensitive to light and suffer considerable
penalties when exposed it. Continual light,
however, usually is cast on the area containing
the drow, making it bright, not on
the drow itself. So, the effect is indirect.
Step Three: Decide what happens to the
magic if a magic resistance roll is called
for and it succeeds. The result of a successful
roll depends on the type of magic
involved. For purposes of magic resistance,
we’ll split magic into just four types.
(See Chapter 9 of the Players Handbook
for details):
Individually targeted spells, which are
completely negated if the resistance roll
succeeds.
Area-effect spells, which have no effect
on the resistant creature if the resistance
roll succeeds, but are not negated. Other
creatures and objects within the area of
effect are still subject to the spell.
In-place spells, which collapse and cease
to exist if the resistance roll succeeds.
Permanent spells, which have no effect
on the resistant creature if the resistance
roll succeeds, but are not negated. The
permanent spell continues to function and
other creatures within the area of effect
remain subject to the spell.
There, now you know everything you
need to know about magic resistance.
Troubleshooting
Having problems? Here are the difficulties
most commonly encountered at each step:
Step One: The most frequent problem
here is deciding what is a spell or spell-like
effect and what isn’t. All spells are potentially
subject to magic resistance. If the
user memorizes it and casts it, it‘s a spell.
Beyond that, anything that works like a
spell is also subject to magic resistance.
Use your common sense. Does the effect
in question seem spell-like? If so, it probably
is. (Sometimes it pays to get literal. If a
monster’s description contains a list of
spell-like abilities, then everything in the
list is spell-like.)
A creature can have some abilities that
are subject to magic resistance and some
that are not. For example, an androsphinx
’s priest spells are subject to magic
resistance, but its roar is not (it’s more like
a breath weapon than a spell). An aboleth’s
enslavement power is subject to magic
resistance, but its mucous cloud is not (the
cloud is produced in the aboleth’s body). A
cleric’s spells are subject to magic resistance,
but the character’s undead turning
ability is not (unlike a spell, undead turning
works only under certain specific
conditions).
Step Two: The chief difficulty here usually
is deciding whether the effect in question
actually works directly on the target.
Many effects are not subject to magic
resistance because they are indirect. The
easiest way to decide if an effect is direct
or indirect is to consider the school of
magic involved.
Evocations: These spells are almost
always subject to magic resistance. If an
evocation spell inflicts damage, it is either
an individually targeted spell or an area
effect like ice storm, depending on the spell.
Wall spells are in-place effects. They are
subject to magic resistance if they inflict
damage, entrap, or restrict movement.
Enchantments/Charms: These are almost
always subject to magic resistance and are
treated as individually targeted effects
unless the spell enchants an object that is
then employed against a creature—these
are indirect spells. An enchanted weapon
spell, for example, is never subject to
magic resistance. Enchantment/charms
that effect several creatures simultaneously
are treated as individually targeted
effects, but only the portion targeted at a
resistant creature can be negated.
Conjurations/Summonings: These are
almost never subject to magic resistance
unless the spell conjures some form or
energy, such as a power word, stun or a
prismatic spray. The former is an individually
targeted effect, the latter is an area
effect. Spells that summon creatures are
never subject to magic resistance. A few
conjurations fall into a gray area. Evard’s
black tentacles, for example, can be treated
as a summoned creature (and therefore
not subject to magic resistance) or as an
in-place effect. Pick one and then stick
with your choice.
Abjurations: These are sometimes subject
to magic resistance. The target crea
ture must be harmed, changed, or
restricted in some manner. Perception
changes, such as non-detection, don’t
count.
Illusions: These spells are almost never
subject to magic resistance. Illusions that
inflict a direct attack, such as phantasmal
killer or blindness,
are exceptions.
Alterations: These usually are subject to
magic resistance, especially if they transform
the target creature. Alteration spells
are not subject to magic resistance if they
are targeted on a point in space instead of
a creature. Transmute rock to mud and
wizard eye change a creature’s surroundings,
not the creature itself, and are never
subject to magic resistance.
Divinations: These do not affect creatures
directly and are not subject to magic
resistance, even though what they reveal
about a creature might be very damaging.
Necromancy: Most of these spells alter
the target creature’s life force and are
subject to magic resistance. Necromancy
spells that summon creatures, such as
summon shadow, or detect creatures,
such as detect undead, are not subject to
magic resistance.
Step Three: This step usually doesn’t
give people much trouble, but beware of
individually targeted effects masquerading
as area effects. Spells such as magic missile,
hold person, hold monster, and slow
affect several creatures within a limited
area. Nevertheless, they are individually
targeted spells, though a successful resistance
roll still applies only to the portion of
the spell directed at the resistant creature.
Area effects are not negated by a successful
resistance roll. A baatezu caught in
a lightning bolt while crossing a bridge
over a bottomless pit can avoid the spell’s
effects, but the bridge can’t.
Wall spells are in-place effects (unless
they are permanent); if a resistance roll
succeeds against a nonpermanent wall, the
whole wall collapses. This can be quite
terrifying for a mage who thought he was
safe and sound.
Miscellaneous Notes
A magic-resistant creature’s own abilities,
spells, and magical items always work
normally; magic resistance never interferes
with magic that comes from the
resistant creature. Also, magic resistance
extends to a creature’s items. If its resist
resistance
succeeds, the creature’s items are
protected, too. Magic resistance can be
voluntarily lowered whenever the resistant
creature wishes. Doing so takes some
concentration, and cannot be done while
the creature takes any action other than
moving at half normal speed. Once resistance
is lowered, every spell directed at the
creature that round works normally.
Magic resistance works in addition to a
saving throw, if the resistance roll fails,
the creature is entitled to a saving throw
(if one applies). A creature that has voluntarily
lowered its resistance fails its resistance
roll automatically, but it still gains
any saving throw it normally would be
entitled to.
A special note about wall spells: If (like
me) you’re uncomfortable with the
thought of magic resistant creatures running
around collapsing wall spells, I suggest
that you treat all wall spells as
permanent effects. Magic resistant creatures
can walk through them if their resistance
rolls succeed, but the wall does
not collapse. If the resistance roll fails, the
creature cannot try to penetrate the wall
again that day.
« 上次编辑: 2022-08-16, 周二 13:53:33 由 星海恋 »

离线 星海恋

  • Guard
  • **
  • 帖子数: 236
  • 苹果币: 0
Re: 【AD&D2E】贤者问答 法术攻防合集
« 回帖 #7 于: 2022-05-02, 周一 06:42:21 »
完结收工

离线 莱斯利格林

  • Peasant
  • 帖子数: 14
  • 苹果币: 0
Re: 【AD&D2E】贤者问答 法术攻防合集
« 回帖 #8 于: 2022-05-02, 周一 14:13:02 »
赞美海棠大佬!!!

离线 Even Paladin

  • Peasant
  • 帖子数: 9
  • 苹果币: 0
Re: 【AD&D2E】贤者问答 法术攻防合集
« 回帖 #9 于: 2022-05-04, 周三 22:08:22 »
海棠姥爷辛苦了!