Elemental Spell Feat question

[Runicblade]

This is actually a two part question, the first part just occurred to me as a consequence of the second part. So, certain spells (such as burning hands and fireball) say they ignite flammable materials, does that mean I can set my enemies on fire, and that would deal continuous damage until they extinguish the flame?

Part two, and what I was originally posting about, if I use elemental spell to change a spell like burning hands in to an acid spray, would that acid then have any continuous effect similar to the previously mentioned catching on fire? What if I made it a cold effect and had freezing hands, would that be able to coat my foes in ice, doing any additional effects?

I didn't find anything to really address the second part from a cursory google search and looking at the APG FAQ, since the first part just occurred to me, i've yet to actually look. Thanks for your assistance.

[Runicblade]

I cannot seem to see any text from my original post, so apologiees if this is a double post.

My question is multiple parts: Does the setting of fire to burnable materials caused by spells like fireball and burning hands cause continuous damage?

Two, does using elemental spell to make burning hands or fireball into acid, cold, or electricity then have an effect along the lines of fire setting things on fire?

Three, if I change a spell element to fire, would that set things on fire?

[Bob Bob Bob]

Step the first! No, it doesn't set people on fire. People are not flammable. No matter how much fire you apply to them, their clothes will always catch first. And before you ask, clothes probably also aren't on the list. They may be made of cloth but they tend to be filthy, and dirt is a natural fire-retardant. Plus what person would wear clothes that easily catch fire in a world with all of the things that catch stuff on fire? Nobles in some silk number, maybe, commoners and adventurers, doubt it. In the end it's probably a GM call (fireball specifies combustible, not just "can catch on fire").

Part the second and third! Changing the elemental type DOES NOTHING. Cannot emphasize that enough. A elemental shifted fireball (to cold, say) still sets stuff on FIRE. A lightning substituted acid arrow still, somehow, coats them in lightning that can be neutralized.

If you would like to play around with a true elemental master type then I recommend Dreamscarred Press' Psionics, specifically the Kineticist. They get powers like Energy Ray which has a different effect depending on what energy type you use. The fireball equivalent is Energy Ball. Default pathfinder spells don't do those kind of elemental changes, though the Words of Power system might include something.

[Runicblade]

Okay, thank you.

Kind of funny to imagine an elemental fireball exploding, dealing cold damage, and then catching combustible materials on fire. Thank you also for that visual.

[Elaserdar]

It may not be RAW, but as a GM I handle both situations on a case by case basis.

I wouldn't normally have burning hands catch folk on fire, but if the party threw lamp oil on the poor soul? Sure. If they rolled a 1 on their save? Maybe, if it adds to the scene. Etc.

As for secondary effects I try to adjust them in ways that make sense. For example, Shocking Grasp normally gives a +3 bonus to hit against those wearing metal armor. Change it to flaming grasp? +3 to hit vs people wearing cloth only or monsters with a lot of hair.

[Ecaterina Ducaird]

I've personally been fond of Polar Midnight with Fire substitution on it for breaking my brain. Your in the middle of a raging firestorm so take fire damage, if you don't move, your... encased in a wall of ice? Soooo.... does that wall of ice take fire damage from being in the ongoing fire AoE, or....? And when the corpses transmute to ice, do they then melt?

At any rate.... Don't quote me on this as I don't have the books handy (and would need to be hunting for it), but I have an odd memory of there actually being a 'Subject to GM discretion' clause in one breed of elemental substitution or another (whether it was elemental spell or something else, not sure). The example they cited was putting fire substitution on an ice storm. I think that they suggested that in a case like that you might not have the difficult terrain involed (as there's no large chunks of ice on the ground), but instead might have a blind or a concealment in the AoE from the smoke and ash.

I don't know if it was directly on Elemental Spell or some other kind of substitution, but .... Anyone else have that memory, or am I hallucinating?

[hgsolo]

Ecaterina you are thinking of the admixture subschool of evocation.

Versatile Evocation (Su): When you cast an evocation spell that does acid, cold, electricity, or fire damage, you may change the damage dealt to one of the other four energy types. This changes the descriptor of the spell to match the new energy type. Any non-damaging effects remain unchanged unless the new energy type invalidates them (an ice storm that deals fire damage might still provide a penalty on Perception checks due to smoke, but it would not create difficult terrain). Such effects are subject to GM discretion. You can use this ability a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Intelligence modifier.

[Runicblade]

I ask, since burning hands says: "Flammable materials burn if the flames touch them", so if I catch, say a goblin's tunic on fire, and they somehow didn't die from the initial casting, would they then take residual fire damage.

And then, what, if anything, that I might encounter would be catchable? Is leather armor flamable? Fur?

I suppose the easiest answer would be leaving it up the DM. My main concern was, if residual effects (such as being on fire) do bad things, if the other elements would then have effects that cause bad stuff to happen.

[Chess Pwn]

I think the flammable part is referring to untended items. Not items the person has.