I've seen some GMs in PFS rule that if a target has Spellcraft and itentifies the spell, he knows what's going on and can decide to keep the item in hand even after making a successful Reflex save, thus automatically accepting the damage and keeping the item in hand.
I have two issues with this: first of all, can you really decide to hold onto it if you know it's temporary? If I have a bet with a friend to see if I can hold my hand on a hot stove for 5 seconds, my first instinct is still to pull away. It's a reflex, after all. Can you override your instincts?
Second, does this affect people with fire resistance? I can make a case for both sides, but I'd like to see someone else's interpretation. It seems weird to me that a big Red Dragon who is immune to fire drops a thing he's holding because it gets kind of hot, but maybe that overrides the resistance somehow.
|
I think the spell is really clear:
(Edit: But yes, a magic ignorant creature should try a save. And a magic knowledge being maybe takes damage and hold item even not rolling save.)
A creature holding the item MAY attempt a Reflex save to drop it and take no damage
otherwise the hot metal deals 1d4 points of FIRE damage per caster level (maximum 5d4).
The item cools to its previous temperature almost INSTANTLY.
Duration: Instantaneous, "The item cools to its previous temperature almost instantly." So it's not for 5 seconds, it's an instant superheat and then back to normal temperature.
The most important words are "may make a save" to Reflexively drop it. The Savvy Fire Immune/Resistant creature can go pah, I don't have to roll, I hold on and take no damage...
EDIT: goshdarnit I took too long to write that :)
I've seen some GMs in PFS rule that if a target has Spellcraft and itentifies the spell, he knows what's going on and can decide to keep the item in hand even after making a successful Reflex save, thus automatically accepting the damage and keeping the item in hand.
I have two issues with this: first of all, can you really decide to hold onto it if you know it's temporary? If I have a bet with a friend to see if I can hold my hand on a hot stove for 5 seconds, my first instinct is still to pull away. It's a reflex, after all. Can you override your instincts?
Second, does this affect people with fire resistance? I can make a case for both sides, but I'd like to see someone else's interpretation. It seems weird to me that a big Red Dragon who is immune to fire drops a thing he's holding because it gets kind of hot, but maybe that overrides the resistance somehow.
one thing about the reflexes is that you can ignore them sometimes. For example, i spilled a bit of hot water on my hand when I was holding a pot of water that was boiling a few seconds before that.
If i could not repress the reflex I would have spilt a lot more water on my self from the reflexive action.
Maybe a Will save instead of a reflex save to hang on to it. Same DC. You CAN make yourself ignore the sudden (and most times) unexpected pain, but not everyone can ignore their initial impulse to pull away.
Duration: Instantaneous, "The item cools to its previous temperature almost instantly." So it's not for 5 seconds, it's an instant superheat and then back to normal temperature.
The most important words are "may make a save" to Reflexively drop it. The Savvy Fire Immune/Resistant creature can go pah, I don't have to roll, I hold on and take no damage...
EDIT: goshdarnit I took too long to write that :)
The 5 seconds was an example of me willing through a bad experience, but maybe it's a bad example.
I do agree though, I overlooked the "may" part. But there's still confusion, as I interpreted it as part of the check you always get for saves, but the saves part doesn't use "may," so I guess you're correct. But still, can anyone decide to hold on, or just people who have identified the spell?
Sure, give all the martial characters a will save to not be disarmed by a first level spell. Excellent balance call.
Okay. Then a Fort save. That was just a quick post after I woke up. No need to be passive aggressive. Besides, I've seen plenty of big guys cringe and pull away from pain. When I was in the air Force, we had to get penicillin shots because there was a case of strep going around. It hurt like hell, but when me and a couple of other guys were talking about how bad it hurt, we have to laugh because a guy (that we wondered why he wasn't in the Marines due to how muscular and aggressive he was) was almost passed out and was being carried by two other guys from where we got the shots.
If you like an element of realism in your game, make a judgement call as to whether the character reflexively lets go. If you want to simply go by game mechanics, let them hang on if they want. I won't criticize you for your own judgement call.
I've seen some GMs in PFS rule that if a target has Spellcraft and itentifies the spell, he knows what's going on and can decide to keep the item in hand even after making a successful Reflex save, thus automatically accepting the damage and keeping the item in hand.
I have two issues with this: first of all, can you really decide to hold onto it if you know it's temporary? If I have a bet with a friend to see if I can hold my hand on a hot stove for 5 seconds, my first instinct is still to pull away. It's a reflex, after all. Can you override your instincts?
Second, does this affect people with fire resistance? I can make a case for both sides, but I'd like to see someone else's interpretation. It seems weird to me that a big Red Dragon who is immune to fire drops a thing he's holding because it gets kind of hot, but maybe that overrides the resistance somehow.
When a creature succeeds at a Spellcraft check to identify a spell, they know how the spell works, even before the spell is actually cast (AKA before resolving the spell). This means they have the knowledge and concept to either let go of the weapon before they take the damage, or if they came with Resist Energy (Fire) prior to the fight, they could just shrug it off and continue as normal, realizing your spell is ineffective.
As for whether they can decide that or not, the spell says the reflex save is optional based on the spell giving the creature an option to make the saving throw or not. This means you either choose to do it (and drop your weapon or other metal object to avoid the damage), or you don't (and thereby suffer the full effects of the spell). It even gives examples of where making a save isn't possible under certain circumstances (such as targeting a locked gauntlet which cannot be removed unless you spend a provoking full round action to do so).
If you want to be real technical, the targeted creature wouldn't even get a reflex save at all, since dropping a weapon is a free action being taken outside their turn (which isn't normally permissible by the rules), but the spell is written to override those generic rules, so the intent of being able to drop your weapon or not (or not having the ability to in the case of a locked gauntlet, or maybe even gauntlets in general against a two-handed weapon wielder) is supposed to be baked into the spell effect.
Sure, give all the martial characters a will save to not be disarmed by a first level spell. Excellent balance call.Okay. Then a Fort save. That was just a quick post after I woke up. No need to be passive aggressive. Besides, I've seen plenty of big guys cringe and pull away from pain. When I was in the air Force, we had to get penicillin shots because there was a case of strep going around. It hurt like hell, but when me and a couple of other guys were talking about how bad it hurt, we have to laugh because a guy (that we wondered why he wasn't in the Marines due to how muscular and aggressive he was) was almost passed out and was being carried by two other guys from where we got the shots.
If you like an element of realism in your game, make a judgement call as to whether the character reflexively lets go. If you want to simply go by game mechanics, let them hang on if they want. I won't criticize you for your own judgement call.
I don't think he's calling you out because you're applying a Will Save, more like you're requiring an additional save just to do something that the spell doesn't say you have to do in an attempt to convey something that the rules don't require you to convey, and as such creates an arbitrary rule that purposefully screws people over and makes the spell more powerful than it already is. (Even as it stands, it's a strong 1st level spell accessible to all kinds of classes.)
I'm fairly certain a creature who doesn't succeed at a Spellcraft check noticing his hands or weapon getting extremely heated (even if for not very long) will have the instinct to determine whether he can take the heat (such as if he knows he's protected from such dangers) or if he believes that heat is extremely detrimental to his health (and as such would try to throw it away before it does any permanent damage).
Of course, a truly smart caster would target something that can't be so easily removed (such as a locked gauntlet or gauntlet wielded by a two-handed weapon user), thereby denying them that choice. But forcing them to drop their weapon if they don't want to take that immense damage, is an equally smart choice against an enemy with a lot of health.
No. He was saying that a will save was a bad call, which I agree with, because fighters are supposed to be tough and ignore pain. I wasn't calling for an additional save. Just changing the kind of save to give the player a choice of avoiding pain and dropping or taking pain and hanging on. Again, that's just an option that the original poster can use if he wants to go more "real life" and say that not everyone can override their instincts all the time.
Now, if the target of the spell has spellcraft and makes the roll to know what's cast, then sure, they can brace for it and take the damage if they choose.