About Immunity

[Borg]

depends: Imagine there is this imp standing in front of you any fire passing is absorbed by him so nothing happening, that fire immunity is protecting you. It can only be resolved with a push or others, i doesn't find it so unlogical.

But wouldn't you say that this makes Immunity rather overpowered as just 1 Fire Immune Imp can Guard you against 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 other creatures with a fire attack.
As Kaarin also pointed out, numbers should mean something, you can't stop an army with one man ( except in Hollywood of course ) don't you think there's a mechanics issue here ?

[aridigas]

I would not call it a mechanics issue. It's rather a strategic issue. If your whole strategy is hard countered by just one fire immune imp, there is nothing wrong with mechanics. Mechanics allow you to lose T1 with 4 Hurl Boulders on your Mage.

I'm not saying you should ignore corner cares because they are rare or anything, not at all. But I don't Zink it is too strong to counter multiple Flame creatures with one fire immune guard. If something can't be set on fire, it doesn't matter if you try 1, 2 or a quadrillion ligthers, it just won't burn. You may not be able to stop an army with one man, but in Mage Wars they come at you one after another and you are immune to every single one of them. I honestly don't see a problem here.

[Mystery]

Those are fire attacks so do nothing to the imp, the lash of hellfire is not a lash which burns but just out of fire so it is only fire not a lash itself. So there is no physical contact. How does the army get it away?

The point is if a weapon has a damage type it means it is that type of attack. A gorgon archer for example has no poison type attack, it just has a poison effect. In a way it is a "physical" arrow which is impoisoned, so the arrow itself will still deal damage. While other attacks are the type itself (hard to understand if you think to physical) so lets take the fire elemental before the firebrand imp.

So this is an incorporeal fire thing, if it wants to attack the mage (behind the fire immune guard) the flames are "absorbed" by the fire immune creature and it can't pass to attack, and it does deal no damage to the imp either due to the immunity. The same counts for even more creatures. You talk about many creatures ok, if you are next to a wall you are definitly save as there are no other directions you could be attacked from apart from there where the imp protects you. Creatures have no direction of sight, so we could all imagine walking around.

No comes the more tricky part, you have a firebrand imp (we now only consider melee attack) which aparently also has a fire damage typ but his claws apear to be "physical" but its not different than the elemental it is also just a manifestation of mana and mage energy. The same as a suppresion cloak wizard which is guarding against 0-1mana oposing mage can protect everything in its zone. "It lacks the converted "vtar (magic)" to be able to achieve anything" In the imp case "its vtar (magic) has the wrong manifestations, a simple tanglevine or force push could solve the issue"

This is mage wars, magic is extremly logic


Conserning the trageting: The magic is universal, all taken from the v'tar pool whatsoever, so if you would target the imp with a circle of fire. That type of magic is "repulsed as it is does not enter this eternity where flames can't be", same counts for all these other target restrictions

coming back to balance here: This "feel of repulsion happens before counter spell, as this is an say it in jedi words disturbance in the force there which does not allow it (so no ghoul rot to trigger nullify on a necro). The targeting restrictions have to arise due to the fakt that enchantments are hidden, so you can't control if it would be an illegal move

[exid]

And for Adry's Sweeping, his scythe is made of fire, so yeah it doesnt affect the imp, but it still go throu it and keep swinging to the other creature. But yeah, Sweeping is very abstract.

the sweeping is stopped and extincted by the imp, the second creatures only feels a slight smell of smoke.

my explanation was false!
Adramalech sees the imp and is blocked by his "unburningity"... he doesn't attack and the imp keeps his guard marker...

that seems too powerfull to me.

[Mystery]

And for Adry's Sweeping, his scythe is made of fire, so yeah it doesnt affect the imp, but it still go throu it and keep swinging to the other creature. But yeah, Sweeping is very abstract.

the sweeping is stopped and extincted by the imp, the second creatures only feels a slight smell of smoke.

my explanation was false!
Adramalech sees the imp and is blocked by his "unburningity"... he doesn't attack and the imp keeps his guard marker...

that seems too powerfull to me.

do people run firebrand imps as counter to adramalech? so it can't be the too powerfull.
You could imagine it (without the restiction) if adramalech wants to attack he feels this "wall" of fire immunity and is repulsed and can't do it. Creature are spells, where is there immunity beginning? Skin/orb around/cube/whatever

[exid]

And for Adry's Sweeping, his scythe is made of fire, so yeah it doesnt affect the imp, but it still go throu it and keep swinging to the other creature. But yeah, Sweeping is very abstract.

the sweeping is stopped and extincted by the imp, the second creatures only feels a slight smell of smoke.

my explanation was false!
Adramalech sees the imp and is blocked by his "unburningity"... he doesn't attack and the imp keeps his guard marker...

that seems too powerfull to me.

do people run firebrand imps as counter to adramalech? so it can't be the too powerfull.
You could imagine it (without the restiction) if adramalech wants to attack he feels this "wall" of fire immunity and is repulsed and can't do it. Creature are spells, where is there immunity beginning? Skin/orb around/cube/whatever

i can imagine that there's an aura around an imune creature that blocs the attacker... but when the imp isn't guarding, Adramalech can attack ignoring the aura!

[Mystery]

yeah but not the imp, he still can't attack the imp

[exid]

yeah but not the imp, he still can't attack the imp

right, but why would the aura have effect around the imp only when he is guarding?

[Mystery]

when he is guarding he is standing in front of the mage protecting it. so to get to the mage adramalech has to get through the aura. If he is not guarding he is not constantly "in front" of the mage. The aura is always effecting as the imp himself is always immun. But only on guard the mage gets "in the influence range" of the aura

[exid]

when he is guarding he is standing in front of the mage protecting it. so to get to the mage adramalech has to get through the aura. If he is not guarding he is not constantly "in front" of the mage. The aura is always effecting as the imp himself is always immun. But only on guard the mage gets "in the influence range" of the aura

i can do with that!

[bigfatchef]

I think that all seems very artificial, if you can say so in a game of magic...

Immunity = just taking no damage is much more intuitiv. As Borg also said, I don't get it why not taking the easy way.

[ringkichard]

I think that all seems very artificial, if you can say so in a game of magic...

Immunity = just taking no damage is much more intuitiv. As Borg also said, I don't get it why not taking the easy way.

Because if I have a fire spell that says, "Destroy target creature" or whatever, you have to find a way to keep me from using it on the Imp. It's not enough that it takes no damage.

Or if there's an ability on an Arcane creature that says, "When you attack a non-mage creature, Banish it," it shouldn't be able to work on creatures with Arcane Immunity. And the surest way to prevent a corner case from wiggling around Immunity is to make it so strong that it prevents attacks and targeting and pretty much everything else.

[Kharhaz]

I think that all seems very artificial, if you can say so in a game of magic...

Immunity = just taking no damage is much more intuitiv. As Borg also said, I don't get it why not taking the easy way.

Because if I have a fire spell that says, "Destroy target creature" or whatever, you have to find a way to keep me from using it on the Imp. It's not enough that it takes no damage.

Or if there's an ability on an Arcane creature that says, "When you attack a non-mage creature, Banish it," it shouldn't be able to work on creatures with Arcane Immunity. And the surest way to prevent a corner case from wiggling around Immunity is to make it so strong that it prevents attacks and targeting and pretty much everything else.

To further illustrate kick's point:

weak on an iron golem
poison blood on a skeleton
poison gas cloud hindering ravenous ghoul
and sleep on a zombie brute

There is a lot of situations where immunity is needed for more than just damage

[Wildhorn]

I think that all seems very artificial, if you can say so in a game of magic...

Immunity = just taking no damage is much more intuitiv. As Borg also said, I don't get it why not taking the easy way.

Because if I have a fire spell that says, "Destroy target creature" or whatever, you have to find a way to keep me from using it on the Imp. It's not enough that it takes no damage.

Or if there's an ability on an Arcane creature that says, "When you attack a non-mage creature, Banish it," it shouldn't be able to work on creatures with Arcane Immunity. And the surest way to prevent a corner case from wiggling around Immunity is to make it so strong that it prevents attacks and targeting and pretty much everything else.

To further illustrate kick's point:

weak on an iron golem
poison blood on a skeleton
poison gas cloud hindering ravenous ghoul
and sleep on a zombie brute

There is a lot of situations where immunity is needed for more than just damage

Poison Blood on a skeleton does nothing. It is already Non-Living so they already have Finite Life trait.
Poison Gas doesn't hinder undead because they are Non-Living and Poison Gas Cloud state it only affect Living creatures.

BUt yeah, for the rest, Immunity need to be more than just for damage, but it should not prevent to target.
Not allowing to target is just the easy way to avoid problems, but cause silly situations that are not instinctive.

[bigfatchef]

You are right. Effects sometimes also need to be avoided. Things like sleep.
Also yes, the way to just prohibit targeting may be the easiest way to achieve this, but causes some silly situations.

On the other hand it stops some nice tricks. For example enchantment transfusion from “forbidden“ friendly targets to enemies (used as secret was of transportation), or moving burns from fire immune creatures to enemies (adramelech). I like those possibilities and would be a little sad if they wouldn't work. I can live with that, but it is just cooler with these strategies, if you know what i mean.