|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Ok, I have a flame oracle focused on damage over time instead of flat out destroying everything in one hit.
He has Burning Magic (su), Burning Spell (metamagic feat), uses alchemical power components (alchemist fire), and spells that deal fire damage.
After really reading through the rules, it seems like I am unable to stack Burning Magic from different spells because it is the ability and not the spell doing the burning. So if I were to hit with burning hands, the enemies fail their saves and take 1 damage a turn at the start of their turn for 1d4 rounds. If, during that time I cast fireball and they fail their saves (and are still alive), the first burning spell stays active but irrelevant and the new one from fireball deals 3 damage a turn for 1d4 rounds. If the second trigger of burning magic (from fireball) runs out of duration before the first trigger from burning hands, the burning hands trigger continues to deal its damage.
Am I right?
With this in mind, if someone manages to extinguish the fire by using a move action and making a save equal to the spells DC, they still have to do the same thing for each application of the burning magic since the previous versions have different durations, deal different amounts of damage and can very easily have different dc's. This would be very much like dispel magic in a sense.
So far so good?
With that in mind, if I use a metamagic rod/feat of burning spells, the spell is now modified to deal 2x Spell level in damage on the start of the next turn. By RAW, burning spell appears to infinitely trigger (and no gm would allow that, pfs or no). I say this because metamagic is an alteration or modification of a spell and the damage from burning spell would count as the spells damage and then trigger itself every round with no save or anything. So for arguments sake, it triggers, does 2x spell level in damage and is done. It also does not interact with Burning magic (though gods of Golarion I wish it did) so there is no opportunity to deal the metamagic damage off of the supernatural ability triggers. Right?
(And yeah, that would totally be awesome and cool to do that).
Penultimately, alchemical power components are modifications to a spell. The use of a power component only changes/adds/modifies an effect on a given spell. When using alchemist fire, several spells now cause burning on the subsequent round (as if struck by an alchemist fire) and the burning can be undone like normal alchemist fire. But this effect is now part of the spell. Does this now mean that if I say, cast an alchemically powered, burning spelled flaming sphere, move it to a foe and they fail their save and take 3d6, that on their next round burning magic (su) triggers causing them to take 2 damage for 1d4 rounds, burning spell triggers causing them to take 4 damage at the start of their next turn and the alchemical modification to the spell causes them to take 1d6 damage at the start of their next turn as well?
Does this then not also mean that because the alchemical modification to the spell made the spell deal damage at the start of the next turn, that it triggers the burning spell metamagic that was still attacked to it for another 4 points of damage on the start of the turn following that?
Finally, burning magic and alchemical power components (alchemist fire) set their targets on fire. However, each form of being set on fire has its own rules for extinguishing the flame and come from markedly different sources. Each attempt at flame extinguishing also requires radically different actions or dc's to be met. So despite the effect being similar, am I right that they are not the same and actually stack?
You are engulfed by a supernatural flame that burns with an uncanny resilence, furthermore, you are coated in mystical fires wich burn with a life all their own, fueled by an eldritch source of arcane power. Take a lot of damage. That's my take. I am just curious if I missed something.
|
|
What would you want the rule to be if used against you.
Probably the most favorable ruling towards this act because I am giving up the ability to flat out kill targets on my initial cast to instead deal somewhat similar or dramatically less damage over a period of time (better team play and more style points, too).
Lets look at the three spell enhancements:
Burning Magic: deals an additional 1 damage per spell level for d4 rounds, can be put out.
Burning Spell: Round after being effected by a spell the creature takes 2xs the spells level in fire damage.
Power Component: Save or Catch on fireUsing burning hands and all three of the above abilities together I would think that:
1) Since the spell targets one creature they catch on fire (no save).
-- This is because Burning magic catches them on fire and Burning spell deals fire damage. I would say this automatically makes them fail the power component save.
Except no where in the rules does it say anything like this. There is no wording anywhere stating that they automatically fail the save, as far as I know. The power components trigger off of the failing of the spells save. So it looks like an all or nothing condition to me. Make your save and eat half damage like normal or fail it and take full damage plus you are set on fire (because you failed the save). Furthermore burning hands does not target anything and even if it did, targeting has nothing to do with (nor does it automatically apply a condition) being set on fire.
2) In the round after the spell is cast the target takes d4 fire damage, +2 additional fire damage per level of the spell (+2 in the case of burning hands)and you cannot be put out this round.
-- Since both Burning Magic and Burning Spell deal set fire damage I wouldn't let them stack, they would overlap. Being on fire deals d6 damage per round, I guess you could also have it deal d6 with a specific minimum damage of 2 or 3. But I like d4 +2/lv. I wouldn't let the target put themselves out because of the Burning spell effect.
Actually this is all incorrect. In the round after the spell was cast nothing happens at all unless they failed their save. If they did fail it, Burning Magic deals the spells level in damage for 1d4 rounds. Burning hands being a first level spell deals 1 damage a round for 1d4 rounds. An alchemical power component (alchemist fire) would also set the target on fire for 1d6 damage at the start of the round. Burning spell (the metamagic feat) uses no verbage of setting on fire and says it must only deal damage. If the spell it applies to deals damage then that creature takes 2x the spells level in damage at the start of their turn. The stacking therefor looks like this on a failed save from a first level spell:
1+1d6+2. Essentially, they take 6.5 damage at the start of the next round.
You also mention that being set on fire overlaps. I disagree. Being set on fire via alchemist fire deals 1d6 DMG and with a full round action and a DC 15 ref save, can be put out. If you roll on the ground (go prone) you get +2 to the save. The alchemist fire burn lasts for one round.
Being set on fire via burning magic causes the target to take 1 DMG per level of the spell, lasts for 1d4 rounds and can be put out with a move action and a reflex save with a DC = to the DC of the spell that set them on fire. Rolling on the ground and going prone does nothing to stop this fire but being doused with water as a standard action grants a +2 bonus to the ref save.
So here we have a supernatural and a spell-like (actually I think it is environmental) burning effect. They are different.
Here we have two innately different dc's to remove the effects. They are different.
Here we have radically different amounts of damage dealt (1d6 vs a static number). They are different.
We also have a difference in duration (1d4 rounds vs 1). They are different.
3) For a additional d4-1 rounds the target is on fire and takes d6 fire damage per round. They can take a full round action to attempt to extinguish the flames by making a successful Reflex save DC 17.
--The d4-1 in rounds is because of the Burning Magic power. I would view this time while it is affected the target as unfavorable conditions, thus the increased DC to put yourself out (15 to 17), but it only lasts for the Burning Magic power duration....
See my responses above. Either what you are saying is not in the rules or the information you are using is incorrect.
I do appreciate the thoughts, though.
A 3rd level spell like fireball could conceivably deal, at the start of the enemies round: 3+1d6+6 DMG. And continue to deal 3 for up to 3 more rounds. The average damage dealt on the first turn Burning is 12.5.
I am wondering if bloodline powers can somehow figure into this? One of the GM's tonight argued that the alchemical power component aspect receives no benefits from any sources and is not part of the spell. I was attempting to argue that burning spell metamagic would trigger from the alchemical burning giving me an additional round of 2x spell level in damage.
Ok, I have a flame oracle focused on damage over time instead of flat out destroying everything in one hit.
He has Burning Magic (su), Burning Spell (metamagic feat), uses alchemical power components (alchemist fire), and spells that deal fire damage.
After really reading through the rules, it seems like I am unable to stack Burning Magic from different spells because it is the ability and not the spell doing the burning. So if I were to hit with burning hands, the enemies fail their saves and take 1 damage a turn at the start of their turn for 1d4 rounds. If, during that time I cast fireball and they fail their saves (and are still alive), the first burning spell stays active but irrelevant and the new one from fireball deals 3 damage a turn for 1d4 rounds. If the second trigger of burning magic (from fireball) runs out of duration before the first trigger from burning hands, the burning hands trigger continues to deal its damage.
Am I right?
Yes.
With this in mind, if someone manages to extinguish the fire by using a move action and making a save equal to the spells DC, they still have to do the same thing for each application of the burning magic since the previous versions have different durations, deal different amounts of damage and can very easily have different dc's. This would be very much like dispel magic in a sense.
So far so good?
Yep.
With that in mind, if I use a metamagic rod/feat of burning spells, the spell is now modified to deal 2x Spell level in damage on the start of the next turn. By RAW, burning spell appears to infinitely trigger (and no gm would allow that, pfs or no). I say this because metamagic is an alteration or modification of a spell and the damage from burning spell would count as the spells damage and then trigger itself every round with no save or anything.
Here your logic gets a little off base. But, you move on past it, so… that is good.
So for arguments sake, it triggers, does 2x spell level in damage and is done. It also does not interact with Burning magic (though gods of Golarion I wish it did) so there is no opportunity to deal the metamagic damage off of the supernatural ability triggers. Right?
(And yeah, that would totally be awesome and cool to do that).
Correct, they do not interact with each other.
Penultimately, alchemical power components are modifications to a spell. The use of a power component only changes/adds/modifies an effect on a given spell. When using alchemist fire, several spells now cause burning on the subsequent round (as if struck by an alchemist fire) and the burning can be undone like normal alchemist fire. But this effect is now part of the spell. Does this now mean that if I say, cast an alchemically powered, burning spelled flaming sphere, move it to a foe and they fail their save and take 3d6, that on their next round burning magic (su) triggers causing them to take 2 damage for 1d4 rounds, burning spell triggers causing them to take 4 damage at the start of their next turn and the alchemical modification to the spell causes them to take 1d6 damage at the start of their next turn as well?
Does this then not also mean that because the alchemical modification to the spell made the spell deal damage at the start of the next turn, that it triggers the burning spell metamagic that was still attacked to it for another 4 points of damage on the start of the turn following that?
“One target that fails its Reflex saving throw (your choice) catches on fire as if it has been struck by alchemist's fire.”
The burning from the alchemical component is treated as if struck by alchemist fire, not the burning hands spell. So you do not treat it as if it were part of the spell effect, you treat it as though you chucked that alchemist fire at the guy and hit him with it.
Each of these spell changes you have do not interact with one another.
Finally, burning magic and alchemical power components (alchemist fire) set their targets on fire. However, each form of being set on fire has its own rules for extinguishing the flame and come from markedly different sources. Each attempt at flame extinguishing also requires radically different actions or dc's to be met. So despite the effect being similar, am I right that they are not the same and actually stack?
You are engulfed by a supernatural flame that burns with an uncanny resilence, furthermore, you are coated in mystical fires wich burn with a life all their own, fueled by an eldritch source of arcane power. Take a lot of damage. That's my take. I am just curious if I missed something.
They stack with one another, but would not stack with themselves if you were to apply them again, either with another casting of burning hands, or some other fire spell. Durations might overlap, but during overlapping durations, you simply apply the greater effect of the same type.
And, while they do stack with one another and each effect is applied, the extra effects do not interact with one another in any way.
Similarly, if the target has fire resistance, the resistance is applied to each of these effects separately. So… even fire resist 5 is going to drop your offensive output significantly with your tactic.