In all the games sessions I've played over the years we (DM and players) always just assumed it was flammable <shrug>. In the end if there is a disagreement between DM and players it goes to Rule 0.
That being said, if it's considered flammable I'd rather use margarine instead of butter on my enemies; ever heard of the Mont Blanc Tunnel Fire of 1999?
...the fire burned for 53 hours and reached temperatures of 1,000 °C (1,832 °F) mainly because of the margarine load in the trailer...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
alright, lets read through the grease spell
Does the spell state that it's flammable? No? Then it isn't. This is how I'll run it in my home games and how it runs in PFS. I've never gotten why people insist that the grease spell is flammable.School conjuration (creation); Level bard 1, sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (butter)
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target one object or 10-ft. square
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Save see text; SR no
A grease spell covers a solid surface with a layer of slippery grease. Any creature in the area when the spell is cast must make a successful Reflex save or fall. A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failure means it can't move that round (and must then make a Reflex save or fall), while failure by 5 or more means it falls (see the Acrobatics skill for details). Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed.The spell can also be used to create a greasy coating on an item. Material objects not in use are always affected by this spell, while an object wielded or employed by a creature requires its bearer to make a Reflex saving throw to avoid the effect. If the initial saving throw fails, the creature immediately drops the item. A saving throw must be made in each round that the creature attempts to pick up or use the greased item. A creature wearing greased armor or clothing gains a +10 circumstance bonus on Escape Artist checks and combat maneuver checks made to escape a grapple, and to their CMD to avoid being grappled.
Lets look at other things in the books
Clothing, Traveler's Outfit
This set of clothes consists of boots, a wool skirt or breeches, a sturdy belt, a shirt (perhaps with a vest or jacket), and an ample cloak with a hood.All characters begin play with one outfit, valued at 10 gp or less. Additional outfits can be purchased normally.
Doesn't say its flammable. So it must not be. Sometimes you just have to think a tad more critically.
The reason A LOT of players think Grease is flammable is because in real life Grease fires happen. Trust me I work in insurance...they suck. And because some of us that played DDO saw how Burning Hands could light Grease on fire.
Does the rulebook DEFINITELY spell out whether it is or not? No. Does the rulebook containt thousands of subtle differences, failures to clarify and leave a lot up to the GM? Yes.
|
Ah like you're stubbornly insisting that grease could be caught on fire?Except that I'm not. All I did was rebut your (bad) arguments, not argue for the opposite position. In fact, if you were willing to take a moment to read my posts, you would also see that I've acknowledged that both rulings are fine
aw alright i'll present my points properly at the end...
and I even noted a very good piece of evidence suggested by someone else in favor of it not being flammable and asked for the citation (which sadly hasn't come yet).
Yeah pity, i went to look for that, couldn't find it...
Apparently, <stuff>
Apparently I should not go though these boards while drinking cider... oh well, I've sobered up a bit now/
First off, Grease does not mention anything about it being flammable or being able to burn in its spell description. Yet web does:
The strands of a web spell are flammable. A flaming weapon can slash them away as easily as a hand brushes away cobwebs. Any fire can set the webs alight and burn away one 5-foot square in 1 round. All creatures within flaming webs take 2d4 points of fire damage from the flames.
Secondly for everyone stating that grease burns in real life, so why not let the spell burn? to help answer this question let us do a science!!
Note: This argument assumes what Kevin has said applies.The reason why people think Grease is flammable is the simple logic of sympathetic magic. In 1st ed, when it showed up as a 1st level spell in the Unearthed Arcana, the material component was a pork rind, butter, or similar greasy material. It logically follows that what you're conjuring is more of what you use as a material component. A pork rind conjures lard. Butter conjures butter. Goose grease conjures more goose grease.
So the gasoline/petrol you put in your car while in a liquid state isn't actually flammable, the fumes are and at room temperature gasoline/petrol is evaporating (creating fumes). Now the same thing happens with butter, it just needs to be a liquid first and hot enough to evaporate before it'll burn. The thing is, at this temperature the butter will burn you if you touch it. Here lies the problem with the grease spell being flammable. The substance you need to be coated in needs to be hot enough to be producing fumes and if this substance happens to be butter or some kind of lard then it'll actually burn (cause fire damage) just by being on the target.
"But it can't be fire damage if there is no fire"(or similar argument)
Not true, the spell "Geyser" does fire damage while being composed of water.
EDIT
Here is an item that doesn't say it doesn't burn, but really it should
Yes, and that item doesn't have a large entry like grease thus falls into the 'GM discretion' area
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After this thread I'm going to assume every conjuration spell is highly flammable until explicitly told otherwise by a developer.
Bring on the flaming walls of stone!
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
and I even noted a very good piece of evidence suggested by someone else in favor of it not being flammable and asked for the citation (which sadly hasn't come yet).Yeah pity, i went to look for that, couldn't find it...
Here you go. (Last part of the post.)
let us do a science!!
I'm going to start using this phrase from now on! :D
|
|
Shield, Heavy; Wooden or Steel
You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A heavy shield is so heavy that you can't use your shield hand for anything else.Benefit:
Wooden or Steel: Wooden and steel shields offer the same basic protection, though they respond differently to spells and effects.
Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield. See “shield, heavy” on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a heavy shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a heavy shield as a one-handed weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its Armor Class bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
There ya go. Long entry on something that should burn and still since it doesn't say it then it must not.
Sorry folks wood doesn't burn in this game so we have to move to Alchemical Acid if we plan on slowly melting away and pillaging villages.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fireball does not catch anything on fire. Remember, it's magic, try not to use too much "logical thinking".
Wrong. Fireball sets combustibles in the area alight.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/fireball
|
|
Fireball does not catch anything on fire. Remember, it's magic, try not to use too much "logical thinking".Wrong. Fireball sets combustibles in the area alight.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/fireball
But read all the different things you may think are combustible on SRD. None of them say they are flammable so they must not be.
|
|
I found it. Not flammable, as I thought.
Developer Comment
By the way, the fireball thing is new to Pathfinder, it was not so in 3.5, and I get confused.
Food is an item on the equipment chart, but there are no rules for eating or what happens if you don't.
Food doesn't have any hit points. Does that make food invulnerable to chewing?
I think a little bit of creativity and common sense are acceptable in a tabletop role-playing game....
Not to derail, but there are rules for food. Environmental Rules section:
After this thread I'm going to assume every conjuration thread is highly flammable until explicitly told otherwise by a moderator.
fixed it for you ;P
I found it. Not flammable, as I thought.
Developer CommentBy the way, the fireball thing is new to Pathfinder, it was not so in 3.5, and I get confused.
Hmm James Jacobs says no but Kevin Murphy says yes. . . .
What do we do?
|
|
Shield, Heavy; Wooden or Steel
You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A heavy shield is so heavy that you can't use your shield hand for anything else.Benefit:
Wooden or Steel: Wooden and steel shields offer the same basic protection, though they respond differently to spells and effects.
Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield. See “shield, heavy” on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a heavy shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a heavy shield as a one-handed weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its Armor Class bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
There ya go. Long entry on something that should burn and still since it doesn't say it then it must not.
Sorry folks wood doesn't burn in this game so we have to move to Alchemical Acid if we plan on slowly melting away and pillaging villages.
Go look over Chapter 7 of the core rule book
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I found it. Not flammable, as I thought.
Developer Comment
Good enough for me. Thanks for doing the digging!
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I found it. Not flammable, as I thought.
Developer CommentBy the way, the fireball thing is new to Pathfinder, it was not so in 3.5, and I get confused.
Well, while James Jacobs did say "Nope" in response to the question of "flammable," he also said "It's a 1st level spell, and a really good one at that. Allowing it to explode into fire at the slightest spark makes it too bad-ass."
Something that explodes into fire at the slightest spark is Sterno. I agree that that would be too powerful, but so would something that was "not flammable" even when exposed to, say, dragonfire.
You have to look at stuff logically and figure out something that makes sense. I think grease should be butter like it says in the spell component. And if what we're talking about here is butter, it is at best lamp oil. Look here at the rules for lamp oil:
A pint of oil burns for 6 hours in a lantern or lamp. You can also use a flask of oil as a splash weapon. Use the rules for alchemist's fire (see Special Substances and Items on Table: Goods and Services), except that it takes a full-round action to prepare a flask with a fuse. Once it is thrown, there is a 50% chance of the flask igniting successfully.
You can pour a pint of oil on the ground to cover an area 5 feet square, provided that the surface is smooth. If lit, the oil burns for 2 rounds and deals 1d3 points of fire damage to each creature in the area.
Anything with a 50% chance of lighting or not is something that doesn't explode at the "slightest spark." There are no rules for igniting lamp oil once it's spread on the ground, but it's reasonable to assume it's the same full-round action followed by a 50% chance of success.
As a GM, I'd adjust that 50% chance up or down depending on what's going on. If there were already an existing fire, you'd just be throwing fuel on the fire so I'd give it a 100% chance of catching. If it were in a place without oxygen--for example, underwater--it wouldn't ignite at all.
Just apply common sense. If Grease is utterly non-flammable, then it could be used to extinguish fires by smothering them. I doubt that's an intended application, but it's what happens if it can't burn.
|
|
I think grease should be butter like it says in the spell component. And if what we're talking about here is butter, it is at best lamp oil.
Read my post. Butter at room temperature does not catch alight
Would it if a molotov cocktail was thrown at it?
So Alchemist's fire = yes, flint and steel = no?
|
|
Pretty much, but since I can see where this is going;
From Kevin's previous link about butter oil lambs it's clear that butter burning is an exothermic reaction, which is nice and all, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the amount of energy it would put out compared to a molotov cocktail would be rather insignificant. Or in Pathfinder terms, the fire damage from a burning grease spell would be insignificant compared to the alchemist's fire that started it, so much so that it wouldn't effect the damage.
In the end the Alchemist's fire would probably destroy the grease without increasing the damage.
Just remember that if you're house-ruling flammability into grease whenever the spellcasters are using it offensively, make sure you keep them just as highly flammable when they use the spell on themselves defensively.
The weird thing is that instantaneous spells, like burning hands, don't set things on fire unless they say they do.
Characters exposed to burning oil, bonfires, and non-instantaneous magic fires might find their clothes, hair, or equipment on fire. Spells with an instantaneous duration don't normally set a character on fire, since the heat and flame from these come and go in a flash.
Yes, technically that's characters catching fire, but the same principle applies.
Nothing says the grease is actually made of butter. There are plenty of material components that don't actually become part of the spell.
Nothing suggests that the grease is actually flammable. I tend to go with what's written as much as I can. Spellcasters already have the upper hand in the game. Giving them more than what's described only makes them more potent.
That being said, I also do enjoy when players think outside the box and use spells and equipment in ways that were not intended. I wouldn't allow it to deal much damage and I would probably have it use up the grease in the spell quickly. There is no reason why the spell should be more potent than other first level spells.
Lets just change the name of the grease spell to "summon butter" while keeping everything else the same. It's also of great use a BBQ parties.
I knew this thread would bring out the munchkins from their munchkin holes.
How about "Summon Bacon Grease"?
Actually, it's more like "Create Temporary Bacon Grease".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing says the grease is actually made of butter.
The principles of sympathetic magic says that it should be. And if you check two other similar Conjuration (Creation) spells, Minor Creation and Major Creation, the material component is "a tiny piece of matter of the same sort of item you plan to create."
If both Minor and Major Creation work that way, there's no logical reason why the butter used for Grease should instead conjure I Can't Believe It's Not Butter.
There are plenty of material components that don't actually become part of the spell.
Those components are usually based on other magical principles or are puns based on sayings like the "penny for your thoughts" for ESP or the marbles you lose for Feeblemind.
Nothing suggests that the grease is actually flammable.
Nothing suggests it isn't except a ruling from James based on game balance, not metaphysics.
I tend to go with what's written as much as I can.
I tend to follow the spirit rather than the letter. The letters have changed from edition to edition sometimes for game balance, but often just to sound better or just different. Sometimes this inadvertently loses meanings that were clearer with the previous phrasing.
Spellcasters already have the upper hand in the game.
True but immaterial. The question is whether a magically conjured item can be used in the same manner as its mundane counterpart.
Let's say a party needs to chop firewood for some important reason like not freezing to death. They do not have an axe. The fighter has a sword. It can work but this would likely damage the blade. But the party has two clerics, both of whom can cast Spiritual Weapon. The holy weapon of one of the clerics is a whip, but the other cleric's god uses an axe.
Now the question: Can the spiritual weapon be used to chop wood, and is it reasonable to say that the spiritual whip will work just as well as a real whip--meaning not at all--while a spiritual axe will work as well as a real axe, which is somewhat better than a sword for the purpose of chopping wood?
Same thing here. If it's magically conjured butter, why can't it work just as well or badly as real butter?
Giving them more than what's described only makes them more potent.
I'm only wanting what is described, which is a conjuration (creation) spell that involves butter.
If it's instead some strange spell that magically decreases the friction coefficient of the affected area, making all items in it miraculously slick and slippery, it should be a Transmutation spell.
Similarly, if the conjured substance is actual butter which behaves in all ways like real butter, including burning, that means it can be removed by mundane means such as soap and water or magical means such as Prestidigitation which has among its uses cleaning an area. Yes, that's using a cantrip to cancel a 1st level spell, but if it's grease then it should behave as grease, not some strange metaphysical substance that is somehow aware of game mechanics.
That being said, I also do enjoy when players think outside the box and use spells and equipment in ways that were not intended.
Some spells are designed exactly with this in mind. I remember when a GM had a black dragon hiding its eggs in a pool of acid and my character used Minor Creation to conjure nine cubic feet of powdered lye via Craft Alchemy and the knowledge that lye is derived from wood ash which easily falls under "vegetable substance."
I wouldn't allow it to deal much damage and I would probably have it use up the grease in the spell quickly.
Both of which are fine and logical.
There is no reason why the spell should be more potent than other first level spells.
Some spells are more potent than others even at the same level. And having Grease conjure magical butter that is exactly as flammable as mundane butter can be a double-edge sword.
Cripes. Somebody thinks this is a FAQ candidate?
Listen, this question has been coming up for decades. I've had it brought up at my table on at least three occasions. But what it really is, is another example of something that doesn't need to be said.
The spell description describes the created substance as a "slippery grease" and a "greasy coating." At no point does it describe the substance as a flammable grease.
As has been pointed out by many developers in these threads, not everything a thing ISN'T needs to be put in the description of that thing. Only what it IS.
By the reasoning of the OP, the grease spell should take care to mention that it is neither:
... flammable, nor cold, does not deal force damage, provides no deflection bonus, is not crackling with electricity, will not summon creatures, will not charm your opponent, is not the residue of a shoggoth, is not sent to you by a Flying Spaghetti Monster, is not the feces of an owlbear, is not edible, cannot assuage your thirst, is not good as a salad dressing, is not beer, cannot count, will not do your taxes for you, is not suitable as a mustache wax, should be kept away from children...
Eh, I think there are more important things for the FAQ than if butter is flamable or not.
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
That being said, I also do enjoy when players think outside the box and use spells and equipment in ways that were not intended.
Some spells are designed exactly with this in mind. I remember when a GM had a black dragon hiding its eggs in a pool of acid and my character used Minor Creation to conjure nine cubic feet of powdered lye via Craft Alchemy and the knowledge that lye is derived from wood ash which easily falls under "vegetable substance."
I hope that GM had the result be that 50 times the volume of the acid pool worth of caustic foam exploded into the surrounding area when he did that, because that is exactly what happens when you add a base to an acid.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope that GM had the result be that 50 times the volume of the acid pool worth of caustic foam exploded into the surrounding area when he did that, because that is exactly what happens when you add a base to an acid.Bob_Loblaw wrote:
That being said, I also do enjoy when players think outside the box and use spells and equipment in ways that were not intended.
Some spells are designed exactly with this in mind. I remember when a GM had a black dragon hiding its eggs in a pool of acid and my character used Minor Creation to conjure nine cubic feet of powdered lye via Craft Alchemy and the knowledge that lye is derived from wood ash which easily falls under "vegetable substance."
He didn't, but only because his dragon was hovering over the pool at that moment and he didn't want his BBEG taken out by a knowledge of chemistry.
I conjured the lye at range because I knew what should have happened.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
OMG! I just realized if it was summon butter you could eat it, but have no calories/fat because it would disappear from existence after the spell timer runs out!
Best Diet plan EVER!
OMG! I just realized if it was summon butter you could eat it, but have no calories/fat because it would disappear from existence after the spell timer runs out!
Best Diet plan EVER!
The best part is that your body actually spends calories to process the butter, so you actually gain a net-loss of calories!
The best part is that your body actually spends calories to process the butter, so you actually gain a net-loss of calories!OMG! I just realized if it was summon butter you could eat it, but have no calories/fat because it would disappear from existence after the spell timer runs out!
Best Diet plan EVER!
I repeat: BEST. DIET. EVER!
I found it. Not flammable, as I thought.
Developer CommentBy the way, the fireball thing is new to Pathfinder, it was not so in 3.5, and I get confused.
Hmm James Jacobs says no but Kevin Murphy says yes. . . .
What do we do?
The free Beginner Box player pack lists it as "non-flammable". Tiebreaker?
hah, so it does.
You make a 10-foot square slippery with nonflammable grease.
Creatures in the area must make a Reflex save (DC 11 + your
INT Mod) or fall prone. A creature in the area can move at half
speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failing the check means the
creature can’t move and must make a Reflex save or fall prone.
|
Can we also fill the "invisible but tangible field of force" that mage armor creates with water via the create water spell? After all, nothing says that you cannot, and tangible means that you can touch it (and thus it is solid).
Also, via sympathetic magic, it takes cured leather, and you use that to create things that hold water all the time.
Sorry, just getting into the silly of it.
If there are any gaps at the top of the armor and not at the bottom, I guess so.
That is a wonderful mental image. Dye the water red!
And uh, wear waterproof clothes.
If there are any gaps at the top of the armor and not at the bottom, I guess so.
That is a wonderful mental image. Dye the water red!
And uh, wear waterproof clothes.
And crash thru walls yelling, "OH YEAH!"
Can we also fill the "invisible but tangible field of force" that mage armor creates with water via the create water spell? After all, nothing says that you cannot, and tangible means that you can touch it (and thus it is solid).
Also, via sympathetic magic, it takes cured leather, and you use that to create things that hold water all the time.
Sorry, just getting into the silly of it.
So anyone who casts mage armor must hold their breath for 1 hr/level?
Is the nonflammable grease waterproof?