An Idea for Burning: Shaken by Fire

[Carson6412]

In Pathfinder, fire does 1d6 of damage per round. This translates pretty well into real life. People who get caught on fire run around for a good half-minute before collapsing. The tougher person in the town, like a town guard, would last around 5 rounds which falls inline with the real life example. But, in real life, catching fire is horrifying. People run around in a panic and make very poor decisions. The game does not reflect this at all.

What I propose, is to add a fear effect onto catching fire. Fire would cause the target to automatically become shaken and then the target would have to make a Will Save (DC=10+double the fire damage taken) to avoid being panicked.

This would keep fire a bit more realistic and dangerous, keep it reverent at higher levels, and prevent people from being tempted to leave themselves on fire.

Thoughts or ideas on this?

[Cr500cricket]

This however, depends on the race. Goblins for example, wouldn't be scared of fire. Have them be sickened by it because of their fascination, and orcs are just enraged, etc.

[Ascalaphus]

A while back the tielfing alchemist got set on fire. Due to his fire resistance 5, he actually burned for about ten rounds before someone got around to dousing him. He wasn't much worse for wear.

[Pheoran Armiez]

I have always been a fan of trying to shape at least NPC reactions as if they were real people who valued their lives and weren't "mentally equipped" to be adventureres (at least the lower level common folk). In this instances, I would probably GM an NPC as reacting however best fit the situation. Shaken or even panicked while on fire seems about right, especially if it provides more of a challenge for the player characters to put them out.

"Fight, flight, or freeze," as my behavioral modification teacher once said, "is the inborn survival mechanism by which all living creatures cope with adverse stimulus." NPCs I have no problem using the above mechanic with (but I would probably choose their level of fear to fit with the current situation).

For PCs on the other hand, requiring them to make a save or suffer a non-magical fear effect doesn't seem out of line... for some characters. It is generally established a player character is cut from a different cloth than your average NPC. Certain classes, especially those that deal with physical pain as a part of their role (a normal person might freak out when they get stabbed, a fighter should not), might not have to make a save against fear while a squishy class (say wizard) might have to.

I think it could provide a good opportunity for character depth if the condition does not overly complicate or penalize what should be a normal encounter (some encounters are hard enough without also worrying about being shaken/panicked). The save DC you presented seemed fine, especially to reflect low-level verses high-level character. I would just use it judiciously.

PAz

[Kimera757]

Carson6412 wrote:

In Pathfinder, fire does 1d6 of damage per round. This translates pretty well into real life. People who get caught on fire run around for a good half-minute before collapsing. The tougher person in the town, like a town guard, would last around 5 rounds which falls inline with the real life example. But, in real life, catching fire is horrifying. People run around in a panic and make very poor decisions. The game does not reflect this at all.

What I propose, is to add a fear effect onto catching fire. Fire would cause the target to automatically become shaken and then the target would have to make a Will Save (DC=10+double the fire damage taken) to avoid being panicked.

This would keep fire a bit more realistic and dangerous, keep it reverent at higher levels, and prevent people from being tempted to leave themselves on fire.

Thoughts or ideas on this?

I don't think that's reasonable for PCs or the NPCs they might fight. Ordinary civilians? Sure. PCs taking proportionately low damage from the fire? No.

PCs also don't suffer from penalties such as being ambushed in the bath (already have no armor, probably caught by surprise, in water or one a slippery surface, realistically they'd probably take penalties to hide their shame but in the game that just means they're ticked off).

In the rules, PCs (and NPCs) can suicidally charge through a Wall of Fire or Blade Barrier or attack someone protected by Flame Shield. There's no need to add these rules.

[Carson6412]

Pheoran Armiez wrote:

I have always been a fan of trying to shape at least NPC reactions as if they were real people who valued their lives ...(but I would probably choose their level of fear to fit with the current situation).

PAz

I've tried to do this as well, but it is always hard to when the choice is: suffer 1d6 of damage or loose a turn. IRL, a person would put out the fire. In game, a character would never try and do that.

Pheoran Armiez wrote:

For PCs on the other hand, requiring them to make a save or suffer a non-magical fear effect doesn't seem out of line... Certain classes, especially those that deal with physical pain as a part of their role (a normal person might freak out when they get stabbed, a fighter should not), might not have to make a save against fear while a squishy class (say wizard) might have to.

PAz

Now, I did take this into consideration when I was making the save. One one hand, a will save made sense. It would take a lot of mental effort to stop from freaking out. Plus, melee (like the fighters) have bravery to help, barbarians have their rage bonus to will, and Paladins have their immunity to fear. But on the other hand, the characters with the best will saves are the casters and having them be the most resilient to fire doesn't make much sense. So I went back and forth on keeping it a will save or trying to justify it as a Fort save. I think, with the bonuses that melee's get, the will save is better, but still not perfect.

Kimera757 wrote:

I don't think that's reasonable for PCs or the NPCs they might fight. Ordinary civilians? Sure. PCs taking proportionately low damage from the fire? No.

PCs also don't suffer from penalties such as being ambushed in the bath (already have no armor, probably caught by surprise, in water or one a slippery surface, realistically they'd probably take penalties to hide their shame but in the game that just means they're ticked off).

In the rules, PCs (and NPCs) can suicidally charge through a Wall of Fire or Blade Barrier or attack someone protected by Flame Shield. There's no need to add these rules.

See, that is what I was trying to add to the fire, Danger. There are not extra penalties from getting attacked in a bath, because it is already incredibly dangerous. A fighter in the bath is without his armor, without his weapon, flat-footed, and prone. The situation is dire and the rules reflect that. The rules do not reflect fire very well though. Fire is very dangerous, but the rules for it are not.

You can make an argument for the Wall of Flames or Blade Barrier or Flame Shield. It makes sense that you would avoid running into a wall of fire and the game mechanics reinforce that that is a bad idea. But, most characters have no mechanical reason to worry about fire. This is why I wanted to add something to it. The two ideas I could come up with were a fear effect or a way of scaling damage based on the targets HD. The HD thing seemed the wrong way to go, so I just put in what made sense. People freak out when they are on fire, now the rules can reflect that.