| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Burn (Ex) A creature with the burn special attack deals fire damage in addition to damage dealt on a successful hit in melee. Those affected by the burn ability must also succeed on a Reflex save or catch fire, taking the listed damage for an additional 1d4 rounds at the start of its turn (DC 10 + 1/2 burning creature's racial HD + burning creature's Con modifier). A burning creature can attempt a new save as a full-round action. Dropping and rolling on the ground grants a +4 bonus on this save. Creatures that hit a burning creature with natural weapons or unarmed attacks take fire damage as though hit by the burning creature and must make a Reflex save to avoid catching on fire.
Format: burn (2d6, DC 15); Location: Special Attacks and individual attacks.
The bolded text, does it refer to the creature that has the burn ability, or the creature that is on fire?
I -think- it refers to the creature with the burn special attack. So for instance, a Jabberwock can shoot beams of fire from its eyes that have the burn special attack. This segment of the rule means creatures striking a Jabberwock with natural weapons or unarmed attacks also risk the 6d6 burn attack as well, right?
Or does it mean the guy who was hit by the jabberwock and is now burning ignites creatures that strike him? That seems less plausible, but then again he is on fire.
The burn (ex) special attack also says it applies to melee attacks, but Jabberwock has it as a beam attack.
It doesn't make any sense if it refers to creatures that have caught on fire (as they don't deal extra damage when they strike, and the text says "as though hit by the burning creature").
So in my opinion the text is simply poorly written, and refers to hitting the creature that has the burn ability.
So in my opinion the text is simply poorly written, and refers to hitting the creature that has the burn ability.
+1
Going to chop this up a bit to make it clearer:
Burn (Ex)
"Monster A" deals fire damage in addition to damage dealt on a successful hit in melee.
"Monster B" must also succeed on a Reflex save or catch fire, taking the listed damage for an additional 1d4 rounds at the start of its turn (DC 10 + 1/2 burning creature's racial HD + burning creature's Con modifier).
"Monster B that failed Reflex Roll" can attempt a new save as a full-round action. Dropping and rolling on the ground grants a +4 bonus on this save.
"Monster C" that hit
"Monster B that failed Reflex Roll" with natural weapons or unarmed attacks take fire damage as though hit by
"Monster A again" and must make a Reflex save to avoid catching on fire.
Format: burn (2d6, DC 15); Location: Special Attacks and individual attacks.
Monster A = A creature with the burn special attack
Monster B = Those affected by the burn ability
Monster B that failed Reflex Roll = A burning creature
Monster C = Creatures
Monster A again = the burning creature
The unclear part is Monster A again. Because the Burn damage comes from the creature with the Burn ability, that is the fire damage that comes through when Monster B that failed Reflex Roll is hit by a different Monster C with a natural or unarmed attack.
So you two believe that the "burning creature" in the final sentence is a different "burning creature" than the one in the previous sentence? You say it's the same "burning creature" as from the second sentence?
The same phrase is clearly used to indicate two different creatures in sentences 2 and 3, so why does sentence 4 have both of you saying it's the one from sentence 2, and not the one in 3?
I think sentence 4 shouldn't have used the phrase "the burning creature" at all, because that sentence doesn't have any meaning if it means the same creature as in sentence 3.
The reason is because the burning creature from sentence 3 has no ability to deal fire damage with its attacks (unless it naturally has such an ability), and sentence 4 references "as though hit by the burning creature".
Either way, I hit FAQ because the whole ability is confusingly written.
For what it's worth, the 3.5 version of the "burn" ability, as seen for instance in the fire elemental, was far clearer in its wording:
Burn (Ex)
A fire elemental’s slam attack deals bludgeoning damage plus fire damage from the elemental’s flaming body. Those hit by a fire elemental’s slam attack also must succeed on a Reflex save or catch on fire. The flame burns for 1d4 rounds. The save DC varies with the elemental’s size (see table). A burning creature can take a move action to put out the flame. The save DC is Constitution-based.
Creatures hitting a fire elemental with natural weapons or unarmed attacks take fire damage as though hit by the elemental’s attack, and also catch on fire unless they succeed on a Reflex save.
For that ability, there's no question at all on how to read it. You can catch on fire either by being hit by the elemental, or by striking the elemental. You don't catch on fire by hitting someone else who has caught on fire.
Of course, the PF "burn" ability can't reference a specific creature, since it is a Universal Monster Rule applicable to multiple creatures, but it should certainly not use "burning creature" to both reference "creature with the burn ability" and "creature that has caught fire" the way it currently does.
So in my opinion the text is simply poorly written, and refers to hitting the creature that has the burn ability.
I concur.