What D&D/Pathfinder monsters could survive a nuke?

>>51348259
Anything that is immune to both poison and fire.

>>51348259
Tarrasque, obviously. Mass nuclear destruction may bring it to 0 HP, but it'll regenerate in a couple decades.

Though some of the fluff does make it out to be an Avatar of the planet. Worldwide nuclear apocalypse could make the earth sick enough to kill Tarry outright.

>>51348310
>>51348310
Tarrasque is immune to poison and fire. Nukes also don't do epic damage since they don't have a caster level. Would the Tarrasque even care?

>>51348352
Nuclear isn't poison and fire. It's more akin to force damage, or pure destruction at core, and an argument that nuclear fallout isn't poison, because it essentially mutates your cells to death rather than straight up poisoning them with chemicals. That's like saying that poison will protect you from vampirism.

My necromancer.
>Phylactery.
Warforged.

>>51348440
Ridiculous, we're not talking about anything other than massive levels of combustion and radiation, the "force" effect is nonsense, explosions cause pressure changes, and do this no matter what the size, you're talking about something that increases exponentially with the size of the cooresponding explosion.

Answer:
Any Construct with Fire Immunity.
Any Elemental with Fire Immunity.
Any Fey with Fire Immunity. (Presumably, fey are not typically given a relationship with things like radiation, fault of setting)
Any Undead with Fire immunity.

I could go on.

>>51352534
Fire immunity wouldn't protect from the explosion itself though. You'd need immunity to bashing as well.

Many things have that sure, but the point stands there. A Nuke isn't just a fire bomb.

>>51352806
bsahing?

This is about D&D Pathfinder, not White Wolf.

>>51352841
Right, I already looked it up and recognized it was bludgeoning but figured might as well go with Bashing. You obviously knew what I meant, after all. Language is a beautiful thing.

>>51348259
Assuming that it deals fire, force, thunder, and radiant damage from the initial blast, and necrotic damage in the crater (radiation)? Probably the Tarrasque and not much else.

>>51354447
Gamma Rays from the blast could be construed as Necrotic in the initial blast as well. A Nuke can instantly kill you just from the immense radiation alone.

Anything with more than like 8 HD could probably do it. Between DR and resistance out the asshole.

>>51348259
Anything with Improved Evasion.

I suspect a nuke would deal massive fire and bludgeoning damage in a large area, half that damage to all targets in an even greater area. Reflex save for half (or quarter as the case may be).

The initial blast radius then has a strong affinity to the plane of negative energy, while the half damage area has a weak affinity.

>>51348282
except about 50% of a nuke's destructive force comes from compressive blast waves

Fireball - fire
Thermal radiation - radiant
Shockwave - bludgeoning or thunder
Radiation - Poison or necrotic

>>51357111
>XXd6 to all creatures and objects within X miles. Half this damage to all creatures and objects from X miles to Y miles. Half of this damage is fire, the other half is bludgeoning. A reflex save (DC ??) reduces this damage to half.

>The affected region out to X miles gains a major affinity for negative energy. Each round, those within must make a DC 25 Fortitude save or gain a negative level. A creature whose negative levels equal its current levels or Hit Dice is slain, becoming a wraith. The death wardspell protects a traveler from the damage and energy drain.

>The effected region from X miles to Y miles gains a minor affinity for negative energy. Living creatures in this area take 1d6 points of damage per round. At 0 hit points or lower, they crumble into ash.

>After Xd10 years the minor affinity disappears and the major affinity becomes minor. After another Xd10 years the effects vanish.

>>51348259
I think that the type of damage are: radiant and/or necrotic (radiation), fire, force, so anything with that immunities. That said, I don-t think anything short of godhood power level could survive that explosion, even with immunities. It's a little game-breaking

Why do so many think that poison immunity would help against radiation?
Just because the term radiation poisining is used to describe the effects caused by it doesn't make it actual poison
While the net result may be the same: cells either dying or proliferating, dangerous substances are something entirely different than high energy particles that just strip your atoms of their ions and work in very different way

File: nuke_5e.png (68KB, 620x1202px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 620x1202px

Here's very slap-dashed version of nuke for 5e. Kinda based on Carey Sublette's FAQ, I guess I could have found US' nuclear test data somewhere, but really, it probably isn't worth it.

It's pretty gross, and I am not sure whatever the damage of airblast should be. Thunder feels simple enough, but it could be bludgeoning or perhaps even force. Thermal radiation is also one weird, I guess it would be radiant ( looking at sunbeam ).

>>51357215

I think pathfinder considers things like that non-lethal though.

So basically nukes in pathfinder would be an explosion of lvl 1 monk basic attacks, followed by a sorceror spamming a necrotic/fire cantrip.

Anything incorporeal since a nuke isn't magic?

>>51358827

Neutrinos would hit them as they're also incorporeal.

So imagine being hit with ALL the beta radiation of a nuke, without the drop off with distance that usually is associated with beta radiation travelling through air, and you get an idea what being slammed by a nuke's neutrino output would be like.

Ghosts on the other side of the planet would be suffering from radiation poisoning every time a nuke goes off.