1) does a character casting produce flame get a free touch as with other touch spells?
2) Can a character with multiple attacks use the full attack action to attack more than once per round with these spells?
3) Can a character with two-weapon fighting feats take TWF penalties to get extra attacks per round with these weapons?
4) Can a character with rapid shot take the penalty to toss an extra produce flame per round?
5) Can a wildshaped creature add produce flame damage to successful claw attacks and if so does a missed claw reduce the duration by 1 minute as if missing when throwing the flame?
I think that about covers it.
1) does a character casting produce flame get a free touch as with other touch spells?
2) Can a character with multiple attacks use the full attack action to attack more than once per round with these spells?
3) Can a character with two-weapon fighting feats take TWF penalties to get extra attacks per round with these weapons?
4) Can a character with rapid shot take the penalty to toss an extra produce flame per round?
5) Can a wildshaped creature add produce flame damage to successful claw attacks and if so does a missed claw reduce the duration by 1 minute as if missing when throwing the flame?
I think that about covers it.
I cannot remember where, but I think one of the developers said that unlike flame blade, which is a weaponlike spell, produce flame can only be used once per round since it takes a standard action to hurl the fire or touch an enemy.
1)You can attack on the same round you cast, but you're not allowed iterative attacks with this spell because it's not a weapon.
2)3)4)5)No.
I'll try to find the actual post though.
I had an elven druid archer, and he used Rapid Shot with Produce Flame. The text of the spell, in 3.0/3.5, said it instantaneously re-ignited in your hand when you threw it, so we took that to mean you could get extra uses of it a round if you had extra attacks.
1) does a character casting produce flame get a free touch as with other touch spells?
It's not a true touch spell. Otherwise, it would have "Range touch" like every other touch spell. It simply creates an effect that can be used to make touch attacks with; it doesn't give you a "free touch".
2) Can a character with multiple attacks use the full attack action to attack more than once per round with these spells?
No, as defined by James Jacobs. He's not "the final word" on spells, but it's as official as we have right now. The core argument is that they're not actually weapons. Weapons are associated with things like two-weapon fighting and iterative attacks. If you use a weapon-like spell (like flame blade), then you can use the spell for TWF/iterative attacks.
4) Can a character with rapid shot take the penalty to toss an extra produce flame per round?
Again, produce flame is not a weapon -- it's a spell effect. The rules intend that spell effects are not considered weapons unless they're weapon-like. Rapid Shot requires you to use a "ranged weapon", and since produce flame isn't weapon-like, it doesn't qualify as a weapon -- it's a spell.
5) Can a wildshaped creature add produce flame damage to successful claw attacks and if so does a missed claw reduce the duration by 1 minute as if missing when throwing the flame?
No, produce flame isn't a touch spell. You can't hold the charge and release the spell as part of an unarmed strike or natural attack. You must use the attack options provided by the spell.
Wouldn't that also mean that each of his arrows would lose "produce flame" as they left his bow?
My answers with regards to Produce Flame:
1) No, it's not a (ranged) touch spell, it's a spell that creates a flame in your hand.
2 & 4) Yes, certainly for the thrown version at any rate; it's treated as a thrown weapon that replenishes itself instantly once it's hurled.
3) Not with just one spell, no. I'd probably allow a PC to cast it twice, though (once for each hand).
5) It's not a touch range spell where you're "holding the charge", so you don't apply the rules in that section (e.g. that you can make an unarmed/natural attack while holding a charge and add the extra damage). Produce Flame creates a special weapon (like a Flame Blade, but different).
My answers with regards to Chill Touch:
1) Yes, it's a touch range spell.
2) No, it's implied that touching someone with a held touch spell is a standard action at least: "You can touch one friend as a
standard action"
3) No; see #2, and also note that you can't cast the spell twice without losing the first spell.
4 & 5) N/A
2 & 4) Yes, certainly for the thrown version at any rate; it's treated as a thrown weapon that replenishes itself instantly once it's hurled.
My argument with James was that because it mentions you can throw produce flame charges "as a thrown weapon" that the thrown version of the spell was weapon-like. However, he implied that because the spell itself wasn't weapon-like, even if it was thrown as a thrown weapon, it wasn't weapon-like and thus not an actual thrown weapon.
I'm not a big fan of this ruling, but until we get an FAQ, that's all we have |:
2 & 4) Yes, certainly for the thrown version at any rate; it's treated as a thrown weapon that replenishes itself instantly once it's hurled.My argument with James was that because it mentions you can throw produce flame charges "as a thrown weapon" that the thrown version of the spell was weapon-like.
James's opinions are just that: opinions. And likewise for my opinions.
Meabolex:
Do you really think it would be balanced to be able to toss 5 flames a round?
(Rapid shot, two-weapon fighting, improved two-weapon fighting, ...)
Even funnier if it's maximized.
So you have a, say, 9th level druid with maximize, rapid shot, twf, improved twf, making 5 ranged touch attacks a round, each doing 11 fire damage with a 4th level spell, or potentially 55 damage the first round and 44 damage the second (since he runs out after 9 shots).
Total of 99 damage (at least potentially)
The wizard has a maximized magic missile and does a mighty... 25 points of damage.
Even taking into account one requires a ranged touch and may miss a few times... that doesn't look right.
Even funnier if it's maximized.
So you have a, say, 9th level druid with maximize, rapid shot, twf, improved twf, making 5 ranged touch attacks a round, each doing 11 fire damage with a 4th level spell, or potentially 55 damage the first round and 44 damage the second (since he runs out after 9 shots).
Total of 99 damage (at least potentially)
Personally, I think using TWF with Produce Flame requires two Produce Flame spells. But leaving that aside, a maximum of 33 damage per round (average of 25.5 damage per round) spread over three rounds doesn't sound shocking, considering it takes a 4th level spell and a minimum of five specific feats (PBS, Rapid Shot, TWF, ITWF, Maximize Spell).
It's not really a whole lot better than a wizard casting an Empowered Flaming Sphere (which does 17.25 damage per round, on average, starting on round 1).
Meabolex:
Do you really think it would be balanced to be able to toss 5 flames a round?(Rapid shot, two-weapon fighting, improved two-weapon fighting, ...)
I'm not entirely convinced that the spell could be "dual-wielded" with Two-Weapon Fighting even if it were weapon-like. Casting the spell multiple times should simply refresh the duration on the spell -- it wouldn't create multiple flames in your palms. I could see it used with another throwing weapon -- even another throwing weapon-like spell -- but not two produce flame spells.
And in terms of balance, it shouldn't be able to outpace the damage of and ease of use of magic missile. Even though an attack roll is involved, multiple attack rolls could yield damage in excess of magic missile. But that takes a full round action and several feats versus the clean standard action of magic missile. I think overall it would be balanced in the later levels, particularly since you get no free attack on the round you cast produce flame.
Ok thanks for all the replies I'm going to chime in with my own thoughts regarding produce flame, chill touch isn't that complex except ont he multiple touches issue.
1) When casting the spell it does not have explicitly a range of touch. HOWEVER it needs to be one way or the other. You either get a free touch when you cast it, or you can make multiple attacks with it in following rounds to make up for doing nothing the round you cast it. I really don't see maximizing produce flame being that game breaking at the point where it's available.. probably subpar.. by a lot.
2) Touching someone is not a standard action, casting a touch spell is a standard action and you get a free touch when you cast it. Following rounds you should be able to full attack if you have touches left, again this is not game breaking.
3) According to the wording of the produce flame spell I think you should be able to do TWF with two copies of the spell to do so.
4) Rapid shot should apply if you can make iterative attacks.
5) Burning claws should hurt, again the multiple copies should apply. Missed attacks should reduce rounds left just like throwing and missing.
2) Touching someone is not a standard action, casting a touch spell is a standard action and you get a free touch when you cast it. Following rounds you should be able to full attack if you have touches left, again this is not game breaking.
Then what about this rule regarding touch spells: ""You can touch one friend as a standard action"? Is that a mistake, in your opinion?
from my reading of the spell there is nothing that says that attacking with produce flame as melee or ranged touch attack is standard action. All it says is;
"You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5)."
and
"Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120 feet as a thrown weapon."
that says to me, treat this like a touch attack weapon, including applicable feats, actions, iteratives, etc.
as for a free touch, it does not mention it, so I am not confident that is applicable. I usually play with it not having a free touch during the casting.
from my reading of the spell there is nothing that says that attacking with produce flame as melee or ranged touch attack is standard action.
Right, that's where the comment that James made came in. . .
3) According to the wording of the produce flame spell I think you should be able to do TWF with two copies of the spell to do so.
Ahh, I see what you're saying. . .
Flames as bright as a torch appear in your open hand.
If you have a hand with a produce flame effect in it, then you can't put another produce flame effect in it.
Hmmmm, it's a stretch, but I'd probably allow it. . . that is, if iterative attacks were allowed. I still prefer the cleaner "buff-like" spell overwriting itself with multiple casts.
The key interpretation comes from weapon-like versus not weapon-like. All weapon-like spells I'm aware of are not touch range spells -- they're effect spells. Touch spells are never weapon-like. But produce flame is kind of a boundary case -- it mentions being used as a thrown weapon, but the description describes it like a spell -- not as a weapon-like effect. Really, it could go either way, but until we have an FAQ, you'll just have to make a judgment call.
|
The thing about the "cast it once for each hand" is that you need somatic components. The spell states you hold it in your open hand, so one could argue that you could not do the motions correctly with one in your hand to cast it on the second hand.
In addition to providing illumination, the flames can be hurled or used to touch enemies. You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120 feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage as with the melee attack. No sooner do you hurl the flames than a new set appears in your hand. Each attack you make reduces the remaining duration by 1 minute. If an attack reduces the remaining duration to 0 minutes or less, the spell ends after the attack resolves.
I would say that it could get extra attacks since it says "as a thrown weapon". Even at as a Ranger 19/Druid 1, you would have 4 attacks that do 1d6+5. I'd take a magic bow over that any day. Multi-attacks are hardly an balance issue, in fact it would make it not become useless after low levels.
Thrown weapons add Str mod to damage, have a range increment, and don't ignore armor.
I think it's a huge mistake thinking 'as a thrown weapon' is anything other than meaning 'you need a hand free,' because _none_ of the listed qualities of the attack resemble thrown weapons at all.
|
|
Thrown weapons add Str mod to damage, have a range increment, and don't ignore armor.
I think it's a huge mistake thinking 'as a thrown weapon' is anything other than meaning 'you need a hand free,' because _none_ of the listed qualities of the attack resemble thrown weapons at all.
The spell flame blade resolves as a melee touch attack and does not use strength modifiers to damage
Yes, but... you... and th... huh.
Got me there! I'll jump sides... plonk.
Oh, and regarding somatic components... the spell actually states the flames 'appear in your open hand.' There's nothing about the hand being 'occupied' in any way.
And even if it did, this wouldn't prevent you from using your OTHER hand to fulfil the somatic component; you just need one free hand to cast somatic components. You cast the spell with your free hand and BAM now it's on fire.
On the one hand, it takes two rounds to set up both hands for your fiery cavalcade. On the other, you can do so in the minute or so before a combat and get most of your attacks.
Flurry of flame, and then on round three you decide what to do next.
(What's fun is imagining this as a magic item...)
The spell flame blade resolves as a melee touch attack and does not use strength modifiers to damageThrown weapons add Str mod to damage, have a range increment, and don't ignore armor.
I think it's a huge mistake thinking 'as a thrown weapon' is anything other than meaning 'you need a hand free,' because _none_ of the listed qualities of the attack resemble thrown weapons at all.
Well, flame blade says in its spell description that it does that. Produce flame does not have that text. If you treat it as a thrown weapon, you should add a Strength modifier unless the spell text says not to.
I think that's more evidence to point to not being considered a true thrown weapon (even though the text misleadingly implies that it is).
The produce flame text effectively does say not to, by saying 'deal same damage as melee.'
Also, the internal logic is the same; both spells function as a weapon, except they are touch attacks rather than regular attacks, elemental instead of physical, and do not add Str to damage.
The produce flame text effectively does say not to, by saying 'deal same damage as melee.'
Also, the internal logic is the same; both spells function as a weapon, except they are touch attacks rather than regular attacks, elemental instead of physical, and do not add Str to damage.
But one spell is wielded like a weapon. The core argument about whether or not produce flame is a weapon-like spell hinges from the argument that the thrown version is "like a throwing weapon". I imagine most posters aren't arguing that the melee version is weapon-like. If it is like a throwing weapon and the text doesn't forbid Strength damage on the rolls, then you should get the extra damage.
The text says 'deal damage as melee.'
Given the effect, other similar cases, and the range of possible meanings, I think the intent is clear. If you feel otherwise, so be it.
Assuming, for the moment, you can't add Str:
A 12th level druid with rapid shot could use Produce Flame to make 3 1d6+5 fire attacks (-2/-7/-2) at range per round, for 4 rounds (average damage 102).
A 12th level wizard could cast scorching ray and do 3 4d6 rays (0/0/0) in one round (average damage 42).
So the druid does more than twice as much damage, but needs to sink a feat in, has less chance to hit, and has to spread that damage over 5 rounds (1 for casting).
I think the intent is clear. If you feel otherwise, so be it.
Actually, no one can agree on the intent due to ambiguity (:
James Jacobs says it's a spell -- not weapon-like -- no iterative attacks, done.
I'm starting to think that pretty much sums it up.
If you are Using 3.5 splat in your game...
What if you used a Twin spell Produce flame? would that then give you a flame in each hand?
hogarth wrote:It's not really a whole lot better than a wizard casting an Empowered Flaming Sphere (which does 17.25 damage per round, on average, starting on round 1).
Check that, Empowered Flaming Sphere does, on average, 15.75 (10.5 + 5.25) damage per round.
hogarth wrote:Check that, Empowered Flaming Sphere does, on average, 15.75 (10.5 + 5.25) damage per round.
It's not really a whole lot better than a wizard casting an Empowered Flaming Sphere (which does 17.25 damage per round, on average, starting on round 1).
Me fail math? That's unpossible!
The text says 'deal damage as melee.'
Given the effect, other similar cases, and the range of possible meanings, I think the intent is clear. If you feel otherwise, so be it.
Assuming, for the moment, you can't add Str:
A 12th level druid with rapid shot could use Produce Flame to make 3 1d6+5 fire attacks (-2/-7/-2) at range per round, for 4 rounds (average damage 102).
A 12th level wizard could cast scorching ray and do 3 4d6 rays (0/0/0) in one round (average damage 42).So the druid does more than twice as much damage, but needs to sink a feat in, has less chance to hit, and has to spread that damage over 5 rounds (1 for casting).
no it doesn't. It says if you throw the flame it will "deal the same damage as with the melee attack."
adding strength damage to melee or ranged touch attacks, seems out of place to me, although I don't know of a specific rule outlawing. My DM would laugh in my face if I tried imply it did.
I see no problem with produce flame being used as a weapon. Comparing it magic missile is not fair for a variety of reasons. MM doesn't require a touch attack OR a saving throw, so there is no way for it to scale with BAB. Thusly it tops out at level 9. Comparing it chill touch would be much more apropos.
Reading Chill touch, it says nothing about only allowing one touch per round, just one touch attack per level. Its damage does not increase, however it has a str damage component which is worth +5 damage any day. So it seems inline with produce flame.
as for the vs wizard damage break down. you compared the druid taking 4 rounds for his spell, and wizard taking 1 round. That doesn't strike you as skewed? you gotta keep the economy of actions the same for this to be a useful comparison. The produce flame may last longer than a scorching ray, but the scorching ray does more damage on average per round (4d6 averages 12 damage per hit, the average for produce flame is 8).
Anburaid:
Uh, thank you for vehemently agreeing with me.
That was pretty much my point.
huh?
whoops. Didn't see you switch sides there :D
I do sometimes get carried away...