Absorption, Toxic Damage, and Immunity to Metabolic Hazards

Anthony · 08-28-2009, 02:55 PM

If you have IMH, you're immune to toxic damage, as I understand it. Would toxic damage still apply to your absorption, or would you also be unable to absorb it?

PK · 08-28-2009, 03:15 PM

Given what a questionable deal Absorption is, I always rule in favor of making it more useful, so I'd say yes, you can absorb the toxic damage. After all, it's not that you can't be "hit" by toxic attacks -- they just don't hurt you.

RyanW · 08-28-2009, 03:27 PM

Quote:

From Basic Set p80:
Resistant does not protect against effects that Damage Resistance or Protected Sense either stop or provide a HT bonus to resist.

Immunity to Metabolic hazards would protect against Toxic damage only if it has Blood/Contact/Respiratory Agent, or is a Follow-up. DR with Absorption would neither stop nor absorb any of those.

Anthony · 08-28-2009, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanW

Immunity to Metabolic hazards would protect against Toxic damage only if it has Blood/Contact/Respiratory Agent, or is a Follow-up. DR with Absorption would neither stop nor absorb any of those.

It's not an issue of how Immunity works, it's an issue of how Toxic attacks work -- Toxic attacks don't work vs objects, and IMH seems intended to place you in the object category for these purposes. It's pretty weird to have a Toxic attack go vs DR in the first place, but given that it does, IMH should protect.

RyanW · 08-28-2009, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's pretty weird to have a Toxic attack go vs DR in the first place, but given that it does, IMH should protect.

Searching all the books I have access to, I could find neither rules forbidding such attacks nor examples of them. I can't think of anything that would make any sense, either.

For my purposes, I'd simply say "Toxic attacks must have one of Blood Agent, Contact Agent, Follow-Up, Malediction, Respiratory Agent, or Sense-Based."

Anthony · 08-28-2009, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanW

Searching all the books I have access to, I could find neither rules forbidding such attacks nor examples of them. I can't think of anything that would make any sense, either.

I thought of it in response to the necromantic attack that heals undead.

08-28-2009, 02:55 PM	#1
Anthony Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Berkeley, CA	Absorption, Toxic Damage, and Immunity to Metabolic Hazards If you have IMH, you're immune to toxic damage, as I understand it. Would toxic damage still apply to your absorption, or would you also be unable to absorb it?

08-28-2009, 03:15 PM	#2
PK Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Dobbstown Sane Asylum	Re: Absorption, Toxic Damage, and Immunity to Metabolic Hazards Given what a questionable deal Absorption is, I always rule in favor of making it more useful, so I'd say yes, you can absorb the toxic damage. After all, it's not that you can't be "hit" by toxic attacks -- they just don't hurt you. __________________ Reverend Pee Kitty of the Order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Twitter) (LJ) MyGURPS: My house rules and *GURPS* resources. #SJGamesLive: I answered questions about *GURPS After the End* and more! {Watch Video} - {Read Transcript}