Lightning Stun??? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Lightning Stun??? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
XDeathGodX
03-06-07, 01:42 AM ok question, if a sorc/wizard casts a continous lightning spell on a person thatis wearing a lot of metal do they take extra damage, and or possibly get stunned? and what if their not wearing any metal, do they still take penalties?
Andyr
03-06-07, 01:34 PM By the rules as written, no.

A couple of electricity effects (e.g. the psionic power Energy Ray) act differently against metal-armoured targets, but I don't think the spell Lightning bolt does anything special (beyond melting some types of metal).
Renvale999
03-06-07, 05:47 PM I've always ruled that you take an additional 1D6 damage from lightning effects in metal armor and 2D6 damage if you're in more than 6 inches of water.

But that's cause I like to toy with fighter's in full plate standing in puddles..lots of fun :D
Stigger
03-06-07, 06:53 PM I house rule it pretty much the same Renvale... though with a few modifications for a few types of armor. Kinda surprising how many of my players decided to invest in electricity resistant items after one particularly nasty lightning storm... :D
Renvale999
03-06-07, 08:02 PM I house rule it pretty much the same Renvale... though with a few modifications for a few types of armor. Kinda surprising how many of my players decided to invest in electricity resistant items after one particularly nasty lightning storm... :D

I don't really use lightening bolt that often though, for some reason. I like to toy with my guys when I can. I once kited(if you play online games you know what I mean lol) a mage in the party. I cast Ray of enfeeblement (did 10 points of str damage, which he only had 8) and then cast Fear.

LOL, Terrified and can't run away, absolutely one of my best DM moments. Player wasn't happy though, hehe.
XDeathGodX
03-06-07, 09:25 PM yea but i was more so talking about continous spells, like lightning ball, or using a wall of fire, energy subbed out with lightning. wouldnt that make the person stunned or have more damage delt to them if they were wearing metal?
dragonheart
03-06-07, 10:01 PM Actually if you think about it the person inside the armour should be unaffected - unaffected by the lightning. in order to wear metal armour of essentially any sort you also wear a variety of padding underneath it that keeps the metal from touching you directly (only the simplest helms rest directly on the head all others rest on a set of straps like those in "hardhats" so the blows aren't directly transfered destroying the purpose of the helm) in a case like that (unless wet feet are invovled) the charge is transfered to the outside of the suit but inside just as it is with airplanes in storms or even your car when hit by lightning. To some extent this even happpens with people when hit by lightning - you are less injured when wet since the charge can run over your body through the electrolyte (sweat salt + water) and doens't have to arc through the insulatar that is your skin to reach the electrolytes in your body (blood, lymph, nerves, cell fluids etc). weird eh? if you want to be true to the physics then a person in armour should take less damage rather than more from lighting.
Stigger
03-07-07, 04:59 AM Damned physics... well, if gunpowder doesn't work and smokepowder does, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to alter that little tidbit of actual scientific trivia... :D

And yes, well aware of kiting... do it fairly often actually with my NT (anarchy).
Karsus the Mad
03-07-07, 11:28 AM Damned physics... well, if gunpowder doesn't work and smokepowder does, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to alter that little tidbit of actual scientific trivia... :D

And yes, well aware of kiting... do it fairly often actually with my NT (anarchy).
Since electricity tech doesn't work due to physics not allowing it, then being non-magically shocked isn't possible either:P That's prolly why there isn't any increase or decrease in damage due to circumstance (wearing metal armor, standing in water, etc).
Stigger
03-07-07, 02:54 PM You know I've heard that on numerous occassion, but have no idea where it comes from... where does it go into what does and doesn't work technologically? Looked for it, but either I'm looking in the wrong place, or I'm blind, one of the two.
Karsus the Mad
03-07-07, 02:59 PM You know I've heard that on numerous occassion, but have no idea where it comes from... where does it go into what does and doesn't work technologically? Looked for it, but either I'm looking in the wrong place, or I'm blind, one of the two.
I've seen people swear it's in 2e FRCS, but I've never seen it and for one reason or another they refuse to qoute it word for word. I ignore it myself. It makes no sense on numerous levels. Especially since there's two Lantanese artificer devices powers that non-magically reproduce electricity effects:P That's answer enough for me.
Stigger
03-07-07, 03:04 PM Ah, one of those bits of mysterious lore that scuttles away when you shine a light towards it... gotcha. Good, makes me feel better then that I'm not being completely lazy academically.
Karsus the Mad
03-07-07, 03:21 PM Ah, one of those bits of mysterious lore that scuttles away when you shine a light towards it... gotcha. Good, makes me feel better then that I'm not being completely lazy academically.
If you have the 2e FRCS, could you look it up for me? I'd love to be able to put the nails in the coffin for this particular FR X-File I have being investigated:P.
Ashathar
03-07-07, 10:26 PM It's on page 9 of the Running the Realms book of the 2E campaign boxed set, in the section titled "Characters from Other Worlds." It reads (emphasis mine):

The physics of the Realms are slightly out of synchronization with the rest of the planes, so that many technological devices which operate on electronics do not function. Equivalent devices may be developed by player characters. DMs should put some thought into what they will allow into their campaign worlds. DMs may choose to eliminate the use of gunpowder (or its magical equivalent, smoke powder) from the Realms, at their option.

Take that as you will.
Karsus the Mad
03-07-07, 10:29 PM It's on page 9 of the Running the Realms book of the 2E campaign boxed set, in the section titled "Characters from Other Worlds." It reads (emphasis mine):

Take that as you will.
:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:
Thank ye my good Ashathar. I have been waiting for 2 years for someone to actually post it.
That's one FR X-File case closed. Next, Larloch blowing up Toril!:D
Stigger
03-08-07, 01:39 AM Hmmm... gotta reread that one then. Thanks for that. :)
Karsus the Mad
03-08-07, 10:55 AM I find "many" and "equivalent" to be interesting. It's hardly as definitive and concrete as I've been led to believe. My crazy inventor gnome's idea for a dead magic device is on the go! Beware disbelievers of Gond....only PC's may stop him:evillaugh Are there any brave enough to attempt to ruin his nutty plans? Good possibility!

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
XDeathGodX 03-06-07, 01:42 AM	ok question, if a sorc/wizard casts a continous lightning spell on a person thatis wearing a lot of metal do they take extra damage, and or possibly get stunned? and what if their not wearing any metal, do they still take penalties?
Andyr 03-06-07, 01:34 PM	By the rules as written, no. A couple of electricity effects (e.g. the psionic power Energy Ray) act differently against metal-armoured targets, but I don't think the spell Lightning bolt does anything special (beyond melting some types of metal).
Renvale999 03-06-07, 05:47 PM	I've always ruled that you take an additional 1D6 damage from lightning effects in metal armor and 2D6 damage if you're in more than 6 inches of water. But that's cause I like to toy with fighter's in full plate standing in puddles..lots of fun :D
Stigger 03-06-07, 06:53 PM	I house rule it pretty much the same Renvale... though with a few modifications for a few types of armor. Kinda surprising how many of my players decided to invest in electricity resistant items after one particularly nasty lightning storm... :D
Renvale999 03-06-07, 08:02 PM	I house rule it pretty much the same Renvale... though with a few modifications for a few types of armor. Kinda surprising how many of my players decided to invest in electricity resistant items after one particularly nasty lightning storm... :D I don't really use lightening bolt that often though, for some reason. I like to toy with my guys when I can. I once kited(if you play online games you know what I mean lol) a mage in the party. I cast Ray of enfeeblement (did 10 points of str damage, which he only had 8) and then cast Fear. LOL, Terrified and can't run away, absolutely one of my best DM moments. Player wasn't happy though, hehe.
XDeathGodX 03-06-07, 09:25 PM	yea but i was more so talking about continous spells, like lightning ball, or using a wall of fire, energy subbed out with lightning. wouldnt that make the person stunned or have more damage delt to them if they were wearing metal?
dragonheart 03-06-07, 10:01 PM	Actually if you think about it the person inside the armour should be unaffected - unaffected by the lightning. in order to wear metal armour of essentially any sort you also wear a variety of padding underneath it that keeps the metal from touching you directly (only the simplest helms rest directly on the head all others rest on a set of straps like those in "hardhats" so the blows aren't directly transfered destroying the purpose of the helm) in a case like that (unless wet feet are invovled) the charge is transfered to the outside of the suit but inside just as it is with airplanes in storms or even your car when hit by lightning. To some extent this even happpens with people when hit by lightning - you are less injured when wet since the charge can run over your body through the electrolyte (sweat salt + water) and doens't have to arc through the insulatar that is your skin to reach the electrolytes in your body (blood, lymph, nerves, cell fluids etc). weird eh? if you want to be true to the physics then a person in armour should take less damage rather than more from lighting.
Stigger 03-07-07, 04:59 AM	Damned physics... well, if gunpowder doesn't work and smokepowder does, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to alter that little tidbit of actual scientific trivia... :D And yes, well aware of kiting... do it fairly often actually with my NT (anarchy).
Karsus the Mad 03-07-07, 11:28 AM	Damned physics... well, if gunpowder doesn't work and smokepowder does, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to alter that little tidbit of actual scientific trivia... :D And yes, well aware of kiting... do it fairly often actually with my NT (anarchy). Since electricity tech doesn't work due to physics not allowing it, then being non-magically shocked isn't possible either:P That's prolly why there isn't any increase or decrease in damage due to circumstance (wearing metal armor, standing in water, etc).
Stigger 03-07-07, 02:54 PM	You know I've heard that on numerous occassion, but have no idea where it comes from... where does it go into what does and doesn't work technologically? Looked for it, but either I'm looking in the wrong place, or I'm blind, one of the two.
Karsus the Mad 03-07-07, 02:59 PM	You know I've heard that on numerous occassion, but have no idea where it comes from... where does it go into what does and doesn't work technologically? Looked for it, but either I'm looking in the wrong place, or I'm blind, one of the two. I've seen people swear it's in 2e FRCS, but I've never seen it and for one reason or another they refuse to qoute it word for word. I ignore it myself. It makes no sense on numerous levels. Especially since there's two Lantanese artificer devices powers that non-magically reproduce electricity effects:P That's answer enough for me.
Stigger 03-07-07, 03:04 PM	Ah, one of those bits of mysterious lore that scuttles away when you shine a light towards it... gotcha. Good, makes me feel better then that I'm not being completely lazy academically.
Karsus the Mad 03-07-07, 03:21 PM	Ah, one of those bits of mysterious lore that scuttles away when you shine a light towards it... gotcha. Good, makes me feel better then that I'm not being completely lazy academically. If you have the 2e FRCS, could you look it up for me? I'd love to be able to put the nails in the coffin for this particular FR X-File I have being investigated:P.
Ashathar 03-07-07, 10:26 PM	It's on page 9 of the Running the Realms book of the 2E campaign boxed set, in the section titled "Characters from Other Worlds." It reads (emphasis mine): The physics of the Realms are slightly out of synchronization with the rest of the planes, so that many technological devices which operate on electronics do not function. Equivalent devices may be developed by player characters. DMs should put some thought into what they will allow into their campaign worlds. DMs may choose to eliminate the use of gunpowder (or its magical equivalent, smoke powder) from the Realms, at their option. Take that as you will.
Karsus the Mad 03-07-07, 10:29 PM	It's on page 9 of the Running the Realms book of the 2E campaign boxed set, in the section titled "Characters from Other Worlds." It reads (emphasis mine): Take that as you will. :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: Thank ye my good Ashathar. I have been waiting for 2 years for someone to actually post it. That's one FR X-File case closed. Next, Larloch blowing up Toril!:D
Stigger 03-08-07, 01:39 AM	Hmmm... gotta reread that one then. Thanks for that. :)
Karsus the Mad 03-08-07, 10:55 AM	I find "many" and "equivalent" to be interesting. It's hardly as definitive and concrete as I've been led to believe. My crazy inventor gnome's idea for a dead magic device is on the go! Beware disbelievers of Gond....only PC's may stop him:evillaugh Are there any brave enough to attempt to ruin his nutty plans? Good possibility!