Likewise, I would totally allow a Huge water elemental to break someone's fall.
That's the whole point of this discussion. Your side gives some abilities what the rules give them plus every thing you think it should logically do. While the other side just gives abilities what the rules give them and stay away from bringing logic into a fantasy world.
Likewise, I would totally allow a Huge water elemental to break someone's fall.That's the whole point of this discussion. Your side gives some abilities what the rules give them plus every thing you think it should logically do. While the other side just gives abilities what the rules give them and stay away from bringing logic into a fantasy world.
It's not "common sense" logic. The creature rules for elementals clearly say they are made out of certain materials. And those materials do certain things in the rules.
Since no rules say water stops acting like water when it is making up a creature, then I treat it like water.
I'm not giving anything abilities. The substance that makes up the creature has properties that can be found in various sections of the rules.
That's the whole point of this discussion. Your side gives some abilities what the rules give them plus every thing you think it should logically do. While the other side just gives abilities what the rules give them and stay away from bringing logic into a fantasy world.
We're not even talking about real-world logic here (fir elementals don't exist in reality, so it's a moot point). Simply using the RAW in a logically consistent way. Elementals are "composed" of their element, so all rules pertaining to mundane fire, water or whatever also apply to elementals (or wildshaped druids in elemental form). Touching in any way a fire elemental burns you like fire. Being inside a water elemental in some way could expose you to drowning, while touching it will make you wet.
Yes, it's fantasy, but it also needs to be logically consistent, otherwise it's "bang, bang you're dead" - "no I'm not".
Being inside a water elemental in some way could expose you to drowning
Can someone enter a water elemental?
Hmmm, I'm going to say no. Doesn't seem to be enough rules to support the various interactions that would cause.
That's the whole point of this discussion. Your side gives some abilities what the rules give them plus every thing you think it should logically do. While the other side just gives abilities what the rules give them and stay away from bringing logic into a fantasy world.
Likewise, I would totally allow a Huge water elemental to break someone's fall.
And I find both approaches equally distasteful personally. They are made of water or fire and if you or an object directly interact with them long enough, that interaction will result in dealing with the effects of fire or water. A quick hug won't do much, unless the elemental is actively trying to burn you, nor will you get much if you expect a water elemental to be a water source, but a piece of gear that is worn all day or a torch deliberately held up to the elemental will definitely feel the effects of the burning, and forceful extraction of water is technically possible, if very ill advised. I suspect that in reality, most people from both sides would reach a decision somewhere in the middle as well in a home campaign just to keep things moving along with the least amounts of arguments, though their precise position will vary. PFS, it's probably best to assume the rules and nothing more, due it's setup; it's inevitable focus on the rules and just the rules are a big reason I don't play it. The rules shouldn't be ignored, but always looking for the strictest interpretation is equally problematic.
I believe the mythic variety of water elemental can swallow whole. IIRC, in 3.5 there was a drown ability, but that appears to have disappeared in PF. It seems like it *could* happen if a water elemental moved into your space, and something prevented you from moving away (grappling?) but that would be houseruling or homebrewing additional attack options. Not that far-fetched, but not RAW.
A fire elmental grappling yuou would certainly expose you to risk of being burnt - would it prevent you from making a reflex save? But what about a water elemental grappling you? Sounds like we're pretty dang far from the original thread title.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The argument that the rules specify everything and no effects not in the rules can ever apply is fundamentally broken and wrong. The books are written in conversational English and one can NOT apply that level of rigour to them. In fact, that level of rigour is NOT applied to legal contracts.
The game absolutely REQUIRES people to make reasonable interpretations. It is totally unplayable otherwise.
The classic example is, of course, the "dead" condition. But there are countless others.
Exactly how this applies to a Fire Elemental is unclear. Expect table variation as reasonable people differ on the details.
But, to me, stating that a Fire Elemental can't choose to set a piece of paper on fire is totally absurd and passes what I think a reasonable GM could reasonably disallow.
|
Being inside a water elemental in some way could expose you to drowningCan someone enter a water elemental?
Hmmm, I'm going to say no. Doesn't seem to be enough rules to support the various interactions that would cause.
Some elemental creature from the plane of water had the shallow whole ability and you risked drowning when shallowed, but I think they are all from older editions and none has been ported over in Pathfinder. Maybe there is some of them in the Tome of Horrors.
druids being "overpowered" is a left over from 3.0 and 3.5, they are way down on the power curve in pathfinder.
1.Master Summoner
a sizeable gap
2. Witch
3. everyone else but monks and rogues, variences exist but not importnant in the overall scope
4. monk
way way way way way way way way down
5. rogues, the game mechanics really conspire against them.
I think both side agree that it can do that, if it attack the paper.
But, to me, stating that a Fire Elemental can't choose to set a piece of paper on fire is totally absurd and passes what I think a reasonable GM could reasonably disallow.
Well the ability doesn't explicit-ally say you can set objects on fire. It CLEARLY talks about "those" struck by the ability which implies personification, therefore the ability CAN'T burn oil and fire elementals can't burn things only creatures.
Some people may assume that the elemental can treat the paper as a target and attack it, thus making it fit into the "Those affected" clause, but these people are dangerous house-rulers trying to apply "common sense" logic to a fantasy game (Just completely ignore that their reasoning was based on the rules, remember these people are bad).
5. rogues, the game mechanics really conspire against them.
Rogues make me sad. I'm thinking of ways I can bend the rules and GM tactics I can do to hide the rogues problems from a rogue player.
"Why yes you did just happen to stumble across a headband of ninjutsu and sniper goggles at level 3! You can totally use the concealment blur provides to stealth!" (hides vision and lighting rules from player)
[Well the ability doesn't explicit-ally say you can set objects on fire. It CLEARLY talks about "those" struck by the ability which implies personification, therefore the ability CAN'T burn oil and fire elementals can't burn things only creatures.
And here I thought I'd finally put that limited notion to bed. See my previous 3 messages. To summarize: a fire elemental is "composed" of fire, so all rules pertaining to normal fire apply. Not only do those hit by the fire elemental risk catching fire, but also all those that hit it. And since it is "composed" of fire, touching oil or paper or any potentially inflammable material will also expose it to the risk of catching fire.
However, given the extensive arguments in this thread, expect extreme table variance.
Flavor text is not rules text. As "being composed of fire" is simply the description entry it has no effect mechanically on anything.
Where is the rule that states that?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Elemental Subtype: An elemental is a being composed entirely from one of the four classical elements: air, earth, fire, or water. An elemental has the following features.
Immunity to bleed, paralysis, poison, sleep effects, and stunning.
Not subject to critical hits or flanking. Does not take additional damage from precision-based attacks, such as sneak attack.
Proficient with natural weapons only, unless generally humanoid in form, in which case proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.
Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Elementals not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Elementals are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.
Elementals do not breathe, eat, or sleep.
It say it right into the rules. But, as usual, someone claim that what he don't like is "flavor text".
And that text is not listed under the following features.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flavor text is not rules text. As "being composed of fire" is simply the description entry it has no effect mechanically on anything.
This is the classic divide between gamist and simulationist. Gamists say if it's not printed exactly in the rules, it's irrelevant.
Simulationists say if the rules fail to cover something, adjust them to fit or make new ones as needed.
Each game group has to decide if they are playing something more like a board game or more like a fantasy world simulation.
Thing is, from a RAW standpoint, if the text is in a rulebook, it would be considered rules unless notified otherwise.
Other games that incorporate flavor into the game - for example Magic the Gathering - has a rule that defines what is rules and what is not. Pathfinder doesn't have such a rule, so everything should - from a pure rules perspective - be seen as rules if it is in a rulebook.
Granted it might make more sense to read certain things as flavor and certain things as crunch, but if we start looking at what makes sense rather than what's written in the rules, then well fire is fire.
Certain rules-benders tend to apply the text in the rulebook very arbitrarily, acting as if they're the ultimate experts of what text is the ultimate RAW that is the sole definer of the game system and what text that is disposable, irrelevant fluff.
EDIT: For (an extremely explicit) example, in the corresponding section of the humanoid subtype (in the plain text right before the features list), the text says this:
"Humanoids with 1 Hit Die exchange the features of their humanoid Hit Die for the class features of a PC or NPC class. Humanoids of this sort are typically presented as 1st-level warriors, which means they have average combat ability and poor saving throws. Humanoids with more than 1 Hit Die are the only humanoids who make use of the features of the humanoid type. A humanoid has the following features (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry)."
So are these parts of the text also fluff? If they aren't, why not? Because the contain game terms? Well, fire is also a game term. And who gets to decide from some ultimate authority what is and isn't fluff, apart from the Dev's?
Some people treat their own personal guesses and assumptions as if they were some clear-cut rule in the game.
The main reason fire elementals very obviously don't follow the fire rules is because they don't spread.
Check out the burning building rules some time. I can never find them when I need them (besides the limited rules in Carrion Crown book 1), but they exist.
An unconstrained fire spreads pretty rapidly, to one adjacent square a round. A fire elemental that ever stops moving on anything flammable should do this (if they worked like fire)...and I think there would be some mention of how "Fire elementals cause untold destruction to forests and cities by their very presence".
There are just too many inconsistencies with the "They totally follow all the rules for fire" thing. Oh here's another one: you can't extinguish them (or even harm them) with spells like Hydraulic Push.
It makes more sense, both rules-wise (because nothing is mentioned) and flavor-wise (because it makes no sense that a fire elemental can't control how it's element works or what it burns) that they are not actual fires.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fire spreads, the elemental part does not.
They can't be extinguished because that is what the rules say. You can extinguish fire. You can extinguish the fires a fire elemental starts, you can't extinguish or dry out an elemental.
At least that is how I see it.
*Also a fire elemental can't be in water, nor can they cross it without the surface being a flammable liquid.
The fire spreads
Then why isn't it mentioned anywhere.
Flavor text is not rules text. As "being composed of fire" is simply the description entry it has no effect mechanically on anything.Each game group has to decide if they are playing something more like a board game or more like a fantasy world simulation.
Which is just fine except there is absolutely no reason to believe a fire elemental affects the world the same way as mundane fire as it is a fantastical creature.
Basically what I see here is some attempt to make a personal opinion law as some kind of limiter on the druid's power and that doesnt exactly have any place in a balance discussion.
Wait, so is your point something like this: "If they follow the rules for fire then they spread fire because the rules say that, but since the rules don't say they spread fire they don't follow the rules for fire"?
I mean, that's like a reverse circular argument. If that's not your point, then what's your point?
There are just too many inconsistencies with the "They totally follow all the rules for fire" thing. Oh here's another one: you can't extinguish them (or even harm them) with spells like Hydraulic Push.
You can't extinguish it because it says you can't. It makes an exception to the general rule. If a fire elemental did _not_ follow the rules for fire, there would be no need for such a thing. If it's name could be just "Monster #353" there would be no need for such a thing.
Which is just fine except there is absolutely no reason to believe a fire elemental affects the world the same way as mundane fire as it is a fantastical creature.
For the same reason, there is no reason to believe it is affected by, say, gravity. But the game assumes that unless it states an exception, things work kinda like in the real world. Hence it doesn't need to state that most creatures follow gravity kinda like in the real world.
At this point you seem to just be throwing bad arguments on the wall hoping something sticks.
Basically what I see here is some attempt to make a personal opinion law
I see that too. I see some attempt to try to make fire not fire by claiming it's "fluff" when it's in the corresponding sections together with other rules.
Wait, so is your point something like this: "If they follow the rules for fire then they spread fire because the rules say that, but since the rules don't say they spread fire they don't follow the rules for fire"?
I mean, that's like a reverse circular argument. If that's not your point, then what's your point?
It's only a circular argument to counter a circular argument.
Fact is: They do not follow the rules for fire. Period.
Why? Because the rules do not say they follow the rules for fire.
If they did, various things would happen around fire elementals which do not happen. No depiction of a fire elemental in published products suggests this. They have no listed ability that says they spread.
In fact, if they worked like fire, they would not need the Burn ability, because a fire hitting you would ALREADY BURN YOU.
There is exactly ZERO evidence for the side that says fire elementals follow the fire rules.
I have repeatedly asked for it, and it has repeatedly failed to be produced.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they did, various things would happen around fire elementals which do not happen. No depiction of a fire elemental in published products suggests this.
I see both smoke and an object on fire in the background. Not to mention it being night out and the elemental providing light.
And that is from an image from this very site
Another question: If elementals follow all the rules for their component materials, how does stabbing them with a non-magical sword work?
If they did, various things would happen around fire elementals which do not happen. No depiction of a fire elemental in published products suggests this.I see both smoke and an object on fire in the background. Not to mention it being night out and the elemental providing light.
And that is from an image from this very site
The problem with this image is that it's an image (which means there's no context here). We don't know whether the area was on fire to begin with, it got that way by hitting a tree and thus activating its Burn ability, or whether it is in fact setting the area ablaze by its very presence.
Since I have the module in question, I decided to look through it to see if I could find the context.
Fire Elementals show up in a few places.
The page immediately before the image is in a room with this description:
The entire room is ablaze with fiery light as five large smelting furnaces spew sparks into the chamber from 20 feet above the floor. Steel stairways connect to walkways that provide easy access to the forges. On the far end of the room, two enormous smelting pots hang from chains. Extending into the chamber’s middle, a long waist-high stone dais with several indentations served in the production of thousands of ingots.
Meaning the fire in the background doesn't have anything to do with the elementals at all.
The elementals do take up residence in the smelting pots though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Still looks like to me that the elemental is a light source, which if they weren't made out of fire (and said fire was acting like fire in the rules) then the elemental would not be a light source in that picture.
Now if fire elementals aren't made out of fire then they would not produce light, but all the artwork seems to contradict that idea.
Elementals ARE made out of fire.
They just don't follow the general rules for fire.
They are magical creatures composed of fire stuff that they control as easily as breathing (that is, if they had to breathe).
If they want to set a fire, they may do it with a touch (an attack).
If they do not wish to set a fire, they do not.
This is both flavor consistent and does not require the addition of any rules that are not already present.
And using art drawn by by people who generally don't even work for Paizo on a regular basis (most of Paizo's art is done on commission as I recall, barring Wayne Reynold's artwork, and that's not one of his. This is even more likely since that module is from an RPG Superstar winner), and certainly aren't rules guys to make your point is a bit disingenuous even if you were correct about the context.
Continual Flame...
Just saying.. its a spell... creates a fire.. that gives off light.. but does not burn...
Just throwing it out there... cuz awwwwwkkkwwwaaaarrddd...
|
|
Continual Flame...
Just saying.. its a spell... creates a fire.. that gives off light.. but does not burn...
Just throwing it out there... cuz awwwwwkkkwwwaaaarrddd...
A flame, equivalent in brightness to a torch, springs forth from an object that you touch. The effect looks like a regular flame, but it creates no heat and doesn't use oxygen. A continual flame can be covered and hidden but not smothered or quenched.
It simply a permanent version of the spell light.
Elementals do not breathe, eat, or sleep.
Immune elemental traits, fire
If it was really fire, wouldn't it need oxygen to burn?
So are you saying that a fire elemental can die from lack of oxygen despite it not having to breathe? RAW it needs neither oxygen nor something it can burn (no food). Both things not true for fire. Fire needs to "eat" and to "breathe".
Elementals do not breathe, eat, or sleep.Immune elemental traits, fireIf it was really fire, wouldn't it need oxygen to burn?
So are you saying that a fire elemental can die from lack of oxygen despite it not having to breathe? RAW it needs neither oxygen nor something it can burn (no food). Both things not true for fire. Fire needs to "eat" and to "breathe".
I have an intricate explanation: MAGIC!
If fire elementals are not made out of fire, then could you please explain why they give off light in Paizo artwork? Giving off light is not an elemental ability and is not written anywhere, yet that is how they draw the monster.
I have an intricate explanation: MAGIC!
Ah, I see, the MAGIC! explanation only works when it suits your side and not mine. Good to know.
If fire elementals are not made out of fire, then could you please explain why they give off light in Paizo artwork? Giving off light is not an elemental ability and is not written anywhere, yet that is how they draw the monster.
Because that's how the artist f!&!ing drew it. It's hard to draw fire without a glow.
Artists =/= Writers =/= Designers.
As you move down the line, you get further and further from people who know the slightest thing (or care the slightest bit about them in doing their job) about how the rules work.
Artists are hired to make something that looks cool. That's it. That's why you get things like cool looking pictures of fire elementals among flames, or a shark leaping out of the water like it's a dolphin (see Skull and Shackles artwork).
Writers are hired to make something SOUND cool. That's it. That's why you get stuff like Ghoul Barbarians being able to gain the Str/Con/Will saves benefits of Rage in a certain scenario, despite Undead being immune to mind affecting abilities (which Rage, as a morale bonus, is). The main semi-exception to this is James Jacobs, who has a more solid grasp of the rules being the guy who tries to make everything fit in-setting.
Designers make the rules, and there's nothing from a designer, either in the rules, or from their mouths (that I know of) that says elementals follow the fire rules.
Ah, I see, the MAGIC! explanation only works when it suits your side and not mine. Good to know.
I have an intricate explanation: MAGIC!
This, sadly.
Here, I'll ask one for you.
This is probably the best place to take the conversation.
This, sadly.I have an intricate explanation: MAGIC!Ah, I see, the MAGIC! explanation only works when it suits your side and not mine. Good to know.
It's because I am looking at the rules. To me saying "it's magic!" doesn't mean a fire elemental is not made of fire.
Elementals don't need to breathe, fire does need to breathe. The elemental part of fire elementals doesn't need to breathe but the fire part does. So the fire making up the fire elemental sticks around, but it will have trouble burning things, because magic(and a lack of oxygen needed to burn things).