Yea. It's the Polymorph spell itself by explicitly stating that the excess damage is carried over. It gives no specific indication about what to do with that damage so the only reasonable conclusion is to follow the general rules of the game. Saying the excess damage ignores any immunities or resistances or vulnerabilities of the normal form would be extrapolating a new specific rule that isn't stated anywhere.
I mean - you have to admit that this is at least the RAI if not explicitly RAW - especially since there's nothing that can overcome immunities anywhere else.
The normal flow of damage is "apply damage negation, apply damage resistance, apply what remains to hit points". The question is whether overflow damage restarts the entire cycle or just continues step 3.
Unless something official I don't know of settles this,it would have to depend on the dms ruling.
Immunity is usually due to the innate nature of the creature with it (for example, you wouldn't expect a fire elemental to take fire damage...its made of fire, and a dragon should probably be immune to the deadly element it is expelling from its mouth), so removing it is in some ways a paradox; I would be very careful in allowing this. Even in the case of a Wish, I would probably only reduce it to resistance and for a very limited time (a minute, or less even)
Immunity is usually due to the innate nature of the creature with it (for example, you wouldn't expect a fire elemental to take fire damage...its made of fire, and a dragon should probably be immune to the deadly element it is expelling from its mouth), so removing it is in some ways a paradox; I would be very careful in allowing this. Even in the case of a Wish, I would probably only reduce it to resistance and for a very limited time (a minute, or less even)
Eh, removing an immunity is pretty tame by the standards of what failed saves can do. A no-save method of removing immunities could be an issue.
First thing that popped into my head as an in-game solution is a subclass feature from Grave Domain Clerics: Channel Divinity: Path to the Grave. As an action, you choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you, cursing it until the end of your next turn. The next time you or an ally of yours hits the cursed creature with an attack, the creature has vulnerability to all of that attack’s damage, and then the curse ends.
"Vulnerability to all of that attack's damage" seems to suggest that it would bypass resistance, immunity, or any other effects/items that would reduce damage. Granted this is limited duration and subject to limited use, but considering the OP question, "EDIT:in other words,I want to be able to have:any spell or effect you create ignores resistance to fire damage and treats immunity to fire damage as resistance to fire damage" ... the answer is yeah, and it's better than what you were willing to settle for.
First thing that popped into my head as an in-game solution is a subclass feature from Grave Domain Clerics: Channel Divinity: Path to the Grave. As an action, you choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you, cursing it until the end of your next turn. The next time you or an ally of yours hits the cursed creature with an attack, the creature has vulnerability to all of that attack’s damage, and then the curse ends.
"Vulnerability to all of that attack's damage" seems to suggest that it would bypass resistance, immunity, or any other effects/items that would reduce damage. Granted this is limited duration and subject to limited use, but considering the OP question, "EDIT:in other words,I want to be able to have:any spell or effect you create ignores resistance to fire damage and treats immunity to fire damage as resistance to fire damage" ... the answer is yeah, and it's better than what you were willing to settle for.
Thoughts?
That ability provides Vulnerability which doubles the damage taken. Two times nothing is still nothing.
First thing that popped into my head as an in-game solution is a subclass feature from Grave Domain Clerics: Channel Divinity: Path to the Grave. As an action, you choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you, cursing it until the end of your next turn. The next time you or an ally of yours hits the cursed creature with an attack, the creature has vulnerability to all of that attack’s damage, and then the curse ends.
"Vulnerability to all of that attack's damage" seems to suggest that it would bypass resistance, immunity, or any other effects/items that would reduce damage. Granted this is limited duration and subject to limited use, but considering the OP question, "EDIT:in other words,I want to be able to have:any spell or effect you create ignores resistance to fire damage and treats immunity to fire damage as resistance to fire damage" ... the answer is yeah, and it's better than what you were willing to settle for.
Thoughts?
Vulnerability and Resistance cancel out. Immunity still overrides, though. The effect of combining vulnerability and immunity is 'you double the zero damage you took'.
As a GM, I've been thinking about this as well. mostly because a character really wants to be fire based and is in my hell campaign where everything is immune to fire.
What I'm thinking of home brewing is something like Hiei's "Dragon of the Darkness Flame" that takes a toll to really unleash. Just cuz getting past immunity is really powerful.
I'm calling it Soul Flame which is strong enough to burn devils BUT they have to spend either a soul coin or their Temp HP from killing a creature and do a CON save in order to keep it up.
No one mentioning evocation wizards feature "overchannel" is criminal.
How does Overchannel overcome immunity? It just stops you needing to roll for damage by letting you use maximum value of the dice. It doesn't make the enemy take damage it would normally be immune to.
How does Overchannel overcome immunity? It just stops you needing to roll for damage by letting you use maximum value of the dice. It doesn't make the enemy take damage it would normally be immune to.
It overcomes the caster's immunity, though that seems fairly useless.
I was sure that the way it was worded all damage in that one worded session, both the maximum damage and the necrotic damage ignored immunities. But I might be biased from MTG where the block of text is one ruling.
I was sure that the way it was worded all damage in that one worded session, both the maximum damage and the necrotic damage ignored immunities. But I might be biased from MTG where the block of text is one ruling.
It's only the casters own damage that can't be negated. The damage to the target of the spell uses the normal rules.
Unless something official I don't know of settles this,it would have to depend on the dms ruling.
Immunity is usually due to the innate nature of the creature with it (for example, you wouldn't expect a fire elemental to take fire damage...its made of fire, and a dragon should probably be immune to the deadly element it is expelling from its mouth), so removing it is in some ways a paradox; I would be very careful in allowing this. Even in the case of a Wish, I would probably only reduce it to resistance and for a very limited time (a minute, or less even)
Eh, removing an immunity is pretty tame by the standards of what failed saves can do. A no-save method of removing immunities could be an issue.
First thing that popped into my head as an in-game solution is a subclass feature from Grave Domain Clerics: Channel Divinity: Path to the Grave. As an action, you choose one creature you can see within 30 feet of you, cursing it until the end of your next turn. The next time you or an ally of yours hits the cursed creature with an attack, the creature has vulnerability to all of that attack’s damage, and then the curse ends.
"Vulnerability to all of that attack's damage" seems to suggest that it would bypass resistance, immunity, or any other effects/items that would reduce damage. Granted this is limited duration and subject to limited use, but considering the OP question, "EDIT:in other words,I want to be able to have:any spell or effect you create ignores resistance to fire damage and treats immunity to fire damage as resistance to fire damage" ... the answer is yeah, and it's better than what you were willing to settle for.
Thoughts?
That ability provides Vulnerability which doubles the damage taken. Two times nothing is still nothing.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Vulnerability and Resistance cancel out. Immunity still overrides, though. The effect of combining vulnerability and immunity is 'you double the zero damage you took'.
As a GM, I've been thinking about this as well. mostly because a character really wants to be fire based and is in my hell campaign where everything is immune to fire.
What I'm thinking of home brewing is something like Hiei's "Dragon of the Darkness Flame" that takes a toll to really unleash. Just cuz getting past immunity is really powerful.
I'm calling it Soul Flame which is strong enough to burn devils BUT they have to spend either a soul coin or their Temp HP from killing a creature and do a CON save in order to keep it up.
Still workshopping this for potential "balance"
No one mentioning evocation wizards feature "overchannel" is criminal.
How does Overchannel overcome immunity? It just stops you needing to roll for damage by letting you use maximum value of the dice. It doesn't make the enemy take damage it would normally be immune to.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
It overcomes the caster's immunity, though that seems fairly useless.
I was sure that the way it was worded all damage in that one worded session, both the maximum damage and the necrotic damage ignored immunities.
But I might be biased from MTG where the block of text is one ruling.
It's only the casters own damage that can't be negated. The damage to the target of the spell uses the normal rules.