4 replaced http://rpg.stackexchange.com/ with https://rpg.stackexchange.com/
source | link

This means that the creature can't benefit from any beneficial spell it is immune to, even if it were to cast it itself! However, Spell Immunity has "Specific Rules" which over-rule the "general rule" explicitly allowing the creature the option/ability to receive these benefits. Neither of these "Specific Rules" for Spell Immunity comes into play for our Demilich because his Immunity was specifically NOT redefined to do so. (in order to avoid confusion, I left out the referenced rules as to avoid unnecessary confusion in an already lengthy and somewhat convoluted answer, however, the links to the abilities and my other answermy other answer both go into detail)

2 While this answer is definitely 1 interpretation of the RAW, I believe that considering the conversion from 3.0 -> 3.5 & all the erratas that these rules in-particular are written along a much larger grey line than most others. That said, I think this is a solid answer but would still recommend sticking with my previous answerprevious answer ruling in the opposite.

This means that the creature can't benefit from any beneficial spell it is immune to, even if it were to cast it itself! However, Spell Immunity has "Specific Rules" which over-rule the "general rule" explicitly allowing the creature the option/ability to receive these benefits. Neither of these "Specific Rules" for Spell Immunity comes into play for our Demilich because his Immunity was specifically NOT redefined to do so. (in order to avoid confusion, I left out the referenced rules as to avoid unnecessary confusion in an already lengthy and somewhat convoluted answer, however, the links to the abilities and my other answer both go into detail)

2 While this answer is definitely 1 interpretation of the RAW, I believe that considering the conversion from 3.0 -> 3.5 & all the erratas that these rules in-particular are written along a much larger grey line than most others. That said, I think this is a solid answer but would still recommend sticking with my previous answer ruling in the opposite.

This means that the creature can't benefit from any beneficial spell it is immune to, even if it were to cast it itself! However, Spell Immunity has "Specific Rules" which over-rule the "general rule" explicitly allowing the creature the option/ability to receive these benefits. Neither of these "Specific Rules" for Spell Immunity comes into play for our Demilich because his Immunity was specifically NOT redefined to do so. (in order to avoid confusion, I left out the referenced rules as to avoid unnecessary confusion in an already lengthy and somewhat convoluted answer, however, the links to the abilities and my other answer both go into detail)

2 While this answer is definitely 1 interpretation of the RAW, I believe that considering the conversion from 3.0 -> 3.5 & all the erratas that these rules in-particular are written along a much larger grey line than most others. That said, I think this is a solid answer but would still recommend sticking with my previous answer ruling in the opposite.

3 Removed RAI references
source | link

Such drastic "changesIMHO," (read: following RAW vs RAI) Such a strict & narrow reading of the rules weakens the creature so much one would have to ask what Lich would ever seek to "progress" to this level! Surely with these restrictions placed on it it wouldn't be worthy of a CR29?5

2 While this answer is definitely 1 interpretation of the RAW, I don't believe it was RAI andthat considering the conversion from 3.0 -> 3.5 & all the erratas that these rules in-particular are written along a much larger grey line than most others. That said, I think this is a solid answer but would still recommend sticking with my previous answer ruling in the opposite.

5Final Note If going 100% RAW & ruling the Demilich can't cast this (Astral Projection) or any of it's own spells on itself I think you have to rework the CR. There is simply no way that a Demilich who can't cast many of it's own "Self Buff" spells (whether from it's own spell casting or magic item) can be a CR29! (the list of spells that allow spell resistance is quite expansive, too much to type here, and this list only grows with every splat book added)

Such drastic "changes" (read: following RAW vs RAI) weakens the creature so much one would have to ask what Lich would ever seek to "progress" to this level!

2 While this answer is RAW, I don't believe it was RAI and I would recommend sticking with my previous answer.

Final Note If going 100% RAW & ruling the Demilich can't cast this (Astral Projection) or any of it's own spells on itself I think you have to rework the CR. There is simply no way that a Demilich who can't cast many of it's own "Self Buff" spells (whether from it's own spell casting or magic item) can be a CR29! (the list of spells that allow spell resistance is quite expansive, too much to type here, and this list only grows with every splat book added)

IMHO, Such a strict & narrow reading of the rules weakens the creature so much one would have to ask what Lich would ever seek to "progress" to this level! Surely with these restrictions placed on it it wouldn't be worthy of a CR29?5

2 While this answer is definitely 1 interpretation of the RAW, I believe that considering the conversion from 3.0 -> 3.5 & all the erratas that these rules in-particular are written along a much larger grey line than most others. That said, I think this is a solid answer but would still recommend sticking with my previous answer ruling in the opposite.

5Final Note If going 100% RAW & ruling the Demilich can't cast this (Astral Projection) or any of it's own spells on itself I think you have to rework the CR. There is simply no way that a Demilich who can't cast many of it's own "Self Buff" spells (whether from it's own spell casting or magic item) can be a CR29! (the list of spells that allow spell resistance is quite expansive, too much to type here, and this list only grows with every splat book added)

2 Updated Definition Source (Rules Compendium)
source | link

To get our answer first we have to look for the definition of "Magic Immunity." Unfortunately as I stated above, "Magic Immunity" The first & only place it is never independently defined; asdefined is in, it doesn't have the "Rules Compendium." While this is not a block similar"Primary Source" when it comes to "Spell Immunity" or "Spell Resistance"deciding which book takes precedence during a rules conflict, since there are no other definitions, let alone any that conflict, that doesn't matter and it's ruling stands.

However Furthermore, we do see it in the 3.0 -> 3.5 conversion guides listed several times. Each & each time it is correcting/updating creatures ingiving the MM to be definedexact same definition as this:

To get our answer first we have to look for the definition of "Magic Immunity." Unfortunately as I stated above, "Magic Immunity" is never independently defined; as in, it doesn't have a block similar to "Spell Immunity" or "Spell Resistance".

However, we do see it in the 3.0 -> 3.5 conversion guides listed several times. Each time it is correcting/updating creatures in the MM to be defined as:

To get our answer first we have to look for the definition of "Magic Immunity." The first & only place it is defined is in the "Rules Compendium." While this is not a "Primary Source" when it comes to deciding which book takes precedence during a rules conflict, since there are no other definitions, let alone any that conflict, that doesn't matter and it's ruling stands. Furthermore, we do see it in the 3.0 -> 3.5 conversion guides listed several times & each time it is giving the exact same definition as this:

1
source | link