This is great stuff, looking forward to volume 3! Your missing some spells from God's and Magic, ie Ill Oman, Liberating Command etc. Any plans on adding those?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We interrupt your regularly schedule discussion on the merits of ad blockers to bring you volume 3!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We interrupt your regularly schedule discussion on the merits of ad blockers to bring you volume 3!
Something appears to have gone wrong with the link. Unlike the first two volumes, I was asked for a log in, and then it brought me to what appears be to the website's blank/new document.
I can access the new one through the link in volume 1 though.
Whoops, accidentally copied the edit link. Here's the real link.
I will disagree with the Fireball, while Fire is the most resisted it's the energy type that hit more vulnerabilities as well in the first Bestiary and Fireball is way easier to aim than Lighting Bolt (a 20ft burst at any point of 120ft of you against a line that the point of origin have origin the caster).
I will disagree with the Fireball, while Fire is the most resisted it's the energy type that hit more vulnerabilities as well in the first Bestiary and Fireball is way easier to aim than Lighting Bolt (a 20ft burst at any point of 120ft of you against a line that the point of origin have origin the caster).
Lines also seem like they are much more dependent on the caster using strides to get into position in order to angle things. And that position might be optimal for hitting enemies... but sub-optimal for being a squishy that has to stay in the back line.
And going to the value of the fire element, and bringing up searing light- I took a quick look at the bestiary, and I think I only found a single nondevil fiend that had any fire defense. And that is because Balors are specifically fire type demons.
Fire faces a lot less blanket defense than before. As long as you aren't facing Cheliax or going to a volcano, I feel like it doesn't present QUITE the same problem as before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Blindness. Is overrated at ***** because it has the incapacitation trait.
I'd argue Enthrall is overrated at ** because the fascinated condition doesn't really do anything. It doesn't for example stop you from attacking what has fascinated you. I don't see that this spell does anything more than what a musician does by just getting up and playing good music.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Volume 4 has arrived (significantly late, I've been traveling a lot and I'm tired and forgetful so my apologies).
In response to some stuff:
This is great stuff, looking forward to volume 3! Your missing some spells from God's and Magic, ie Ill Oman, Liberating Command etc. Any plans on adding those?
All of my guides will get content updates for new books after they're added to Archives of Nethys, so they can be properly hyperlinked as I'm adding them. When that happens I'll also do a big "patch notes" post that will include any major changes that have been made in response to feedback or new experiences on my part.
Re: Fireball, while fire resistance and immunity aren't the worst things they are still things, and by extension fire is still the worst damage type, it's just no longer a mostly bad one. Even though there are also a lot of creatures with fire weakness, I find that a more neutral damage type, like electric, is still going to be more reliable. That being said, there's a reason why despite my commentary, fireball and lightning bolt have the same rating. They're very equivalent spells in terms of their potential damage output and viability; the former has a better area type, the latter has a more reliable damage type. The wizard in my live Age of Ashes game prepares both, and bit more of fireball because there's a certain satisfaction from a well placed fireball that you can't get from any other spell, but he's gotten good mileage out of both.
Re: Blindness, I'll admit I missed the incapacitation trait before and it should probably be a 3* rating, but I stand by that even the success condition is pretty dang good.
Re: Fascinated, I'm going to disagree with y'all because Fascinate does actually do one very important thing: Creatures you Fascinate cannot use concentrate actions that don't include you. For enthrall specifically, that mostly applies to Seek and Sense Motive because it breaks so easily in combat, but in general (Fascinating Performance being imo the simplest way) it actually makes a fantastic tanking strategy because Cast a Spell has the concentrate tag, as do many offensive abilities. It doesn't stop enemies from attacking you, but it does stop them from casting spells at your friends (assuming you don't stand with them in Fireball Formation). That's why enthrall has a 2* rating, because it does have potential uses and those uses are viable and valid. 1*, the only rating below that, is reserved for things that have no actually viable use.
Re: Fascinated, I'm going to disagree with y'all because Fascinate does actually do one very important thing: Creatures you Fascinate cannot use concentrate actions that don't include you. For enthrall...
Cool. You have a lot more flexibility in your rating system which is good. It just seemed important to point out how bad the Fascinate condition is.
I appreciate your commentary.
Acid splash only does splash damage on a hit. The spell does not have the splash trait, so the only thing that the splash damage does, other than give 1 extra point of damage to the main target, is trigger weaknesses to splash damage.
Now I want Acid splash to gain the splash trait and work more like an alchemist bomb, but there is a fair bit of Errata required to make that work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to point out one extra note on Hypercognition. While failing a knowledge check on one topic prevents you from making further recall attempts, hypercognition design not require you to be making all your knowledge checks about the same thing, and encounters with multiple types of monsters are not uncommon. So your spell slot does not get wasted that easily.
Rope Trick: I'm not saying it's a great spell. (In fact, I like that it isn't)
But thanks to how Treat Wounds works sometimes you need 20 minutes or three hours or some other breather that isn't 9 hours.
I'm still not saying it's great, just maybe not an automatic one-star rating?
Rope Trick seems to be for high-level parties (who can afford a spare 4th level slot) in high-level places (where one might need an 8 hour escape from the environment).
I can understand keeping the rope there, having seen Rope Tricks spammed by a Sorcerer to great effect in one campaign. So now it's not very good against active, intelligent agents. Yet if you need to get out of endless water, the Worldwound, the ambient heat of the Forges of Forsakenness, a jungle of predators, or whatever, Rope Trick makes an excellent rest spot for a respite.I could even imagine having it on a wand for normal camping use (once that investment didn't interfere with my core purchases). It's a solid spell, solid enough Paizo bumped it up two levels...to where it struggles to compete.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sort of by accident, I realized that stinking cloud, when paired with the air bubble spell is a phenomenal combo that lets a caster get two spells off in a round to great effect. Using the reaction on air bubble to allow a trip-focused martial to enter the cloud and knock an enemy prone is brutally effective, especially if that martial has an attack of opportunity.
Edit: Used correctly, stinking cloud becomes a far more effective spell against boss enemies than slow.
Sort of by accident, I realized that stinking cloud, when paired with the air bubble spell is a phenomenal combo that lets a caster get two spells off in a round to great effect. Using the reaction on air bubble to allow a trip-focused martial to enter the cloud and knock an enemy prone is brutally effective, especially if that martial has an attack of opportunity.
Edit: Used correctly, stinking cloud becomes a far more effective spell against boss enemies than slow.
Air Bubble only triggers if the target's in an environment where they can't breathe. Everybody can breathe in a Stinking Cloud, they just don't like doing so. I wish there were more options with the spell, but it seems only for relief from water (and airless voids, I suppose).
And I'd rather have my boss Slowed 1 for 1 round on a fail than Sickened 1 while protected by concealment with an effect that might slow my melee allies. Stinking Cloud doesn't seem a wise choice unless you're pinning down enemies who can't leave it.
when can you actually not breathe though? The Air bubble spell does specify "breathe normally." Language it uses twice. Certainly it is intended to work against effects that would poison or otherwise impair a person's breathing, and not just people underwater or in the void of space.
I mean a person can breathe underwater, that is what leads to them drowning. The trigger seems dependent upon the idea that they cannot breath normally/safely.
So air bubble isn't supposed to work against cloud kill either? That seems to defeat the point of the spell to me. "Breathe normally" feels like the functional phrase in the spell, and how I rule it in my games.
I have to agree with Castilliano. I believe Air Bubble is basically meant to be Feather Fall for drowning. Having a Level 1 Spell completely negate the drawbacks of a Level 5 spell seems too good to be true.
Though I am sad about that. I was quite entertained reading your initial post.
Nobody ever used Air Bubble in PF1 to do this exact thing?
I still think the wording "A bubble of pure air appears around the target's head, allowing it to breathe normally. The effect ends as soon as the target returns to an environment where it can breathe normally" makes it clear the spell is about allowing the character to breathe normally in conditions where that is not normally possible. Breathing that causes the person harm should absolutely be counted in that situation.
Feather fall negates the damaging abilities of reverse gravity, a 7th level spell.
Stinking cloud is still functioning as a fog spell, and the caster can only cast air bubble on one character a turn because it uses a reaction, so it is still incredibly limited. You can't cast the stinking cloud over a group of your allies and protect them.
Zapp: Please keep responses to one post, I am, in fact, capable of reading the entirety of the post and understanding that they are separate elements.
Indiscriminate control spells: I was actually a caster in the situation that made me think critically about these kinds of spells, although I wasn't the one who cast it. Regardless, I've seen firsthand repeatedly that spells like obscuring mist, stinking cloud and PF1's web are absolutely awful to place effectively in melee, especially compared to, say, fireball, which is one and done and which frankly most martials will accept to the chin if absolutely needed.
Illusions: That was a comment on a personal experience that I had in which the GM refused to acknowledge my spell or its use in its entirety, negating the entire principle idea of my character, and which I am incredibly salty about. It sounds like I would not like your game, as someone who enjoys illusions, because you render illusions worthless if you're willing to metagame against creative applications of them (where literally the entire point of the illusion school is creative applications). This is not a criticism of you as an individual, because there are no wrong ways to play, so please don't think I'm trying to attack you as a person. It is, however, a statement that you and I have very different views on this. If you disagree with my views, that's fine, but as my guides are written from my perspective, I'm uninterested in your opinions on this subject.
Bind Undead: I feel I covered the minion option with "won't be a threat to your enemies." It might soak an attack, maybe, if you had an undead of the appropriate level available to you while having the spell prepared and the attacker isn't intelligent enough to recognize that a ghoul is going to do jack all to a glabrezu. Summons at least scale up a bit faster than that and give you a wide variety of options, options which you control.
Glyph of Warding: You're absolutely right that it's ridiculous, and in fact I should probably put a disclaimer that some GMs might not go for it, but see above re: different playstyles and points of view.
Magic Missile: That's such an incredibly niche thing that no GM is going to waste an NPC's power budget on or else hand the party 30 gp when it turns out that the wizard doesn't end up casting MM on them at all because that's just my luck, isn't it, that I'm going to call it "so much of an edge case that it might as well not exist."
Rope Trick: This one I'll actually concede the point on, that's a fair use of the spell that should upgrade it to 2*.
Stinking Cloud and Air Bubble: I actually agree with Unicore's interpretation here. The intention of air bubble is clearly to allow breathing where you would normally want/need to hold your breath, and stinking cloud or cloudkill is one such place. Consider this: if a 5th level spell does something powerful but with a drawback, and there's a 6th level version that does the same thing with less of a drawback, that seems reasonable, right? If you pair stinking cloud with air bubble, that's using 6 levels of spells (although admittedly a 1st level spell is worth less than the jump from 5th to 6th) to mitigate the drawbacks. It's much like combo'ing obscuring mist with faerie fire. That being said, as pointed out it only works on one target and you'll usually have two or three allies in melee at a time, not to mention the possibility of missing the spell (it would have to be cast after the stinking cloud came down, meaning the target has concealment from you), and overall I don't think the combo warrants a change in rating.
Bind Undead: It doesn't just give you a minion, it takes away a minion, so it's better than summoning the same creature. It is perhaps too situational, but using a Ghoul vs. a Glabrezu is strawmanning.
I can think of three APs where I'd take it often until it needed to be heightened (when I'd stop) because it's an auto-success I'd be guaranteed to use. Plus undead are often pretty good against undead and friends of undead. I'd never take in the other APs.
(R.I.P. Mr. McPlaguey. And thank you for setting off that fiery sandstorm trap for us. *sniff, sniff* And we hadn't even known it was there.)
Note that was a scroll usage. Spell also improves if you haven't pumped your casting stat, like maybe if a Warpriest or Dwarf Battle-Bard.
And speaking of not needing one's casting stat high...
Magic Missile: I'm a big proponent of Magic Missiles as boss killers, or vs. anything w/ exceptional defenses. But against Trolls, zombies, oozes, and other soft targets w/ lower defenses and disproportional h.p., Magic Missiles go mostly to waste. So there's a big swing on effectiveness, though I'd have it as a Signature Spell on (nearly) any caster I could. It contrasts well w/ a Reflex-based AoE or spell attack that can crit.
Air Bubble: I don't think it's "clearly", hence the disagreement. It's been tweaked hard since it's now a Reaction and has a minimal duration so I couldn't tell you what Paizo intended (especially since we lack the higher level spells that had been similar), and hope they'll inform us.
And apologies, FF, as you're going to see the disagreements, right? Who comments to say "You really nailed Color Spray!"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Illusion spells: Of course they get five stars when you bully your GM ("unless he's a dick") in allowing just about anything with them...
In my game you don't get a free license to turn a low-level spell into something that takes entire enemies off the board. If a spell has the power to negate X attacks, it needs to say so.
Basically, using Illusion spells in this way is abusing a subcategory of spell that remains unregulated in every edition. I'm having none of it and I recommend y'all should too. :)
I couldn't disagree more. Spells have to be able to have their effect. A well placed, well thought out illusion spell, can definitely cause a side to withdraw, or hesitate for a few rounds. Thats what it does. That is the design. In many respects it can have a play impact like a wall spell. It can turn a combat - but isn't that what casters do.
Just because its can have large non specific effects doesn't mean it needs to be nerfed into oblivion. If you don't want it on your game just tell the players up front.
Glyph of Warding: You're absolutely right that it's ridiculous, and in fact I should probably put a disclaimer that some GMs might not go for it, but see above re: different playstyles and points of view.
I agree some GMs are just going to see it as a rort and ban it. Especially if you try to put a Heal in a glyph they may object. But there are limits on the number of glyphs you can have. Some casters like the Undead Sorcerer can use it really easily. It is like having 4 extra scolls of your spell level -1, that you can recharge in a day or two.
I don't see that it something that the designers didn't intend. So I'm Ok with it.
Bind Undead: It doesn't just give you a minion, it takes away a minion, so it's better than summoning the same creature. It is perhaps too situational, but using a Ghoul vs. a Glabrezu is strawmanning.
I can think of three APs where I'd take it often until it needed to be heightened (when I'd stop) because it's an auto-success I'd be guaranteed to use. Plus undead are often pretty good against undead and friends of undead. I'd never take in the other APs.
(R.I.P. Mr. McPlaguey. And thank you for setting off that fiery sandstorm trap for us. *sniff, sniff* And we hadn't even known it was there.)
Note that was a scroll usage. Spell also improves if you haven't pumped your casting stat, like maybe if a Warpriest or Dwarf Battle-Bard.
Ghoul vs. glabrezu was merely the first example I thought of, but that is fairly extreme. I disagree that it's better than summoning a creature, because a) it's a lot less control over what you get and b) the things you're taking off the board just... aren't worth it. You get access to bind undead at level 5, and the highest level creature it can bind is level 3. Sure, that's not terrible if you know you're facing undead at that exact level. But by level 6, 7, 8, that level 3 creature stops being relevant, and even if you're heightening it, the higher level you as a character are the less relevant a creature of half your level is. It's theoretically relevant for about the level you get it at and pretty much no other time, because there's much better uses for a 4th level spell as a level 7 character than taking a level 4 enemy off the board, and better uses for a 3rd level than taking a level 3 enemy off for absolutely sure.
And speaking of not needing one's casting stat high...
Magic Missile: I'm a big proponent of Magic Missiles as boss killers, or vs. anything w/ exceptional defenses. But against Trolls, zombies, oozes, and other soft targets w/ lower defenses and disproportional h.p., Magic Missiles go mostly to waste. So there's a big swing on effectiveness, though I'd have it as a Signature Spell on (nearly) any caster I could. It contrasts well w/ a Reflex-based AoE or spell attack that can crit.
I'll concede that, but I think my main point was that even in those situations, magic missile is still good, even if it's not necessarily the best option. You can spend your turn using MM and guarantee you've contributed something to the fight. Which, as you say, is why it makes a great signature spell and a good option for prepared casters to stick in spare slots at various levels.
Air Bubble: I don't think it's "clearly", hence the disagreement. It's been tweaked hard since it's now a Reaction and has a minimal duration so I couldn't tell you what Paizo intended (especially since we lack the higher level spells that had been similar), and hope they'll inform us.
You know what that's fair. I felt it was clear but you're right, if others disagree then there's something I'm connecting that y'all aren't and there's no reason to assume I'm right.
And apologies, FF, as you're going to see the disagreements, right? Who comments to say "You really nailed Color Spray!"?
No worries, I wouldn't be paying attention to or responding to feedback if I didn't want it. I can get a little short about it but that's usually if I don't feel like the feedback is given in good faith or they're being disrespectful, rude or smug about it. You did make some fair points and honestly I am reconsidering bind undead because in responding to you I actually inserted the numbers into my head and remembered that hey, there are points of the game where it can do something effective and maybe that's worth an extra star.
Glyph of Warding: You're absolutely right that it's ridiculous, and in fact I should probably put a disclaimer that some GMs might not go for it, but see above re: different playstyles and points of view.
You should instead put a disclaimer that some DM might go for it. I don't see any sane DM allowing one action fireballs that don't use a spell slot.
You would actually not even go for it yourself.
I actually think the PF1 use of air bubble as a pre-buff to protect against stinking cloud/cloudkill was part of the reason the spell got its weird shift to reaction that requires the harmful condition to exist before it can be used. If you ever fought a lot of dretches at once, even at higher levels, it was pretty essential because you were going to roll bad eventually.
A note about ghost sound from a die-hard illusion fan:
Its range is 30ft. Without the conceal spell feat, or better the silent spell feat, ghost sound is nearly unusable for 90% of the things players think they can get away with using it for. In my opinion, this is a feature of the system because illusions are and should be incredibly powerful when a player builds to use them secretly, and having this limitation clearly defined makes it clear the GM that a player is building to use illusions effectively rather than thinking they can just drop a single spell slot into illusions and get all the utility.
But I am glad that you point out how important ventriloquism is as a spell for the illusionist build, and how much it has been boosted, especially as a second level spell.
Edit:
Comparing ray of frost and produce flame: Mostly solid, but you left off that produce flame can benefit from flanking since it can be used as a melee attack, and that ray of frost has a massive range advantage over most other cantrips. I think the end result is still a wash, but produce flame is very good for rogue casters looking to do sneak attack on spells.
I actually think the PF1 use of air bubble as a pre-buff to protect against stinking cloud/cloudkill was part of the reason the spell got its weird shift to reaction that requires the harmful condition to exist before it can be used. If you ever fought a lot of dretches at once, even at higher levels, it was pretty essential because you were going to roll bad eventually.
A note about ghost sound from a die-hard illusion fan:
Its range is 30ft. Without the conceal spell feat, or better the silent spell feat, ghost sound is nearly unusable for 90% of the things players think they can get away with using it for. In my opinion, this is a feature of the system because illusions are and should be incredibly powerful when a player builds to use them secretly, and having this limitation clearly defined makes it clear the GM that a player is building to use illusions effectively rather than thinking they can just drop a single spell slot into illusions and get all the utility.
But I am glad that you point out how important ventriloquism is as a spell for the illusionist build, and how much it has been boosted, especially as a second level spell.
Edit:
Comparing ray of frost and produce flame: Mostly solid, but you left off that produce flame can benefit from flanking since it can be used as a melee attack, and that ray of frost has a massive range advantage over most other cantrips. I think the end result is still a wash, but produce flame is very good for rogue casters looking to do sneak attack on spells.
You don't need conceal spell or silent spell if you have Ventriloquism in effect before casting Ghost Sound, as it would allow you to reposition the sound of the Verbal component.
You don't need conceal spell or silent spell if you have Ventriloquism in effect before casting Ghost Sound, as it would allow you to reposition the sound of the Verbal component.I actually think the PF1 use of air bubble as a pre-buff to protect against stinking cloud/cloudkill was part of the reason the spell got its weird shift to reaction that requires the harmful condition to exist before it can be used. If you ever fought a lot of dretches at once, even at higher levels, it was pretty essential because you were going to roll bad eventually.
A note about ghost sound from a die-hard illusion fan:
Its range is 30ft. Without the conceal spell feat, or better the silent spell feat, ghost sound is nearly unusable for 90% of the things players think they can get away with using it for. In my opinion, this is a feature of the system because illusions are and should be incredibly powerful when a player builds to use them secretly, and having this limitation clearly defined makes it clear the GM that a player is building to use illusions effectively rather than thinking they can just drop a single spell slot into illusions and get all the utility.
But I am glad that you point out how important ventriloquism is as a spell for the illusionist build, and how much it has been boosted, especially as a second level spell.
Edit:
Comparing ray of frost and produce flame: Mostly solid, but you left off that produce flame can benefit from flanking since it can be used as a melee attack, and that ray of frost has a massive range advantage over most other cantrips. I think the end result is still a wash, but produce flame is very good for rogue casters looking to do sneak attack on spells.
That is true, but I think a lot of players think they can get away with just having ghost sound memorized and use it to cause a distraction without using any feat or spell support, but its range is only 30ft so anyone that is going to potentially want to look at where you have cast the sound is also going to hear you casting.
Comparing ray of frost and produce flame: Mostly solid, but you left off that produce flame can benefit from flanking since it can be used as a melee attack, and that ray of frost has a massive range advantage over most other cantrips. I think the end result is still a wash, but produce flame is very good for rogue casters looking to do sneak attack on spells.
You can benefit from flanking with range attacks. The fact that Produce Flame can be delivered as a melee attack has no use besides some very weird reactions.
You can benefit from flanking with range attacks. The fact that Produce Flame can be delivered as a melee attack has no use besides some very weird reactions.Comparing ray of frost and produce flame: Mostly solid, but you left off that produce flame can benefit from flanking since it can be used as a melee attack, and that ray of frost has a massive range advantage over most other cantrips. I think the end result is still a wash, but produce flame is very good for rogue casters looking to do sneak attack on spells.
how can you benefit from flanking at range? I don't see that supported in the rules.
Ghost sound don't keep being 30ft of range forever, it goes automatically to 60ft when you hit lvl 5 and goes to 120ft at lvl 9.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ghost Sound: Reasonable point, although as Kyrone says the range does go up and Reach Spell also helps with that.
Flanking at range: This is actually kind of a weird thing, but flanking is a status that applies to a target as a result of your positioning, rather than a status that applies to your attack. If you are, say, in flanking position with an enemy and cast ray of frost in melee range (or even if you're not in melee range, courtesy of a reach weapon), then the target is flatfooted to the attack, because you have a flank on them. That the attack you're using isn't melee has no bearing.
Zapp: You didn't even use quotes, you just made 6 separate posts. Mobile keyboards have an enter key.
Illusions: That's just it, though, it's not trying to accomplish more than other spells of the same level. The instance I'm referring to was in PF1 using major image, a third level spell, to create the appearance that a creature that our opponent specifically hated had entered the battlefield. If the GM had had the enemy react in the way he should have, logically, reacted, it would've burned a single turn for that monster. That's entirely on par for the combat usage of a third level spell, and while it doesn't require a save it does require foreknowledge of the enemy. Now, in this case, we're talking about PF2's illusory creature, which is, for all intents and purposes, a minion. A minion that is actually a threat, unlike one grabbed with bind undead, and that you can shape into something your opponent hates and actively wants to die.
SuperBidi: The glyph trick still requires two actions, unless you've already got it in your hand walking into combat, and it only targets one creature. I don't personally have a problem with being able to use a spell to make single-target spell grenades with a cap of your casting modifier during downtime.
I think you are on shaky ground attempting to interpret flanking at range. Reach specifies that "Melee Strikes rely on reach."
It is possible to interpret it that you could be standing adjacent to a foe and make a ranged attack with flanking, but that seems pretty contentious and is not how a lot of tables are going to run it. It is not worded well, but it is pretty clearly stretching the flanking rules to think that ranged attacks generally are supposed to be able to benefit from flanking. The weird part is that if you are also armed with a melee weapon and within its reach, then you get the bonus.
I guess that is from making the enemy feel threatened? So I guess I'd allow that.
SuperBidi: The glyph trick still requires two actions, unless you've already got it in your hand walking into combat, and it only targets one creature. I don't personally have a problem with being able to use a spell to make single-target spell grenades with a cap of your casting modifier during downtime.
Single target spell grenade? You lack imagination :)
Let's take a Sorcerer with Glyph of Warding as his signature spell. Everyday, before resting, he creates the maximum amount of Glyphs that he puts on weapons with hollow hilts (or whatever system making them "containers").He then hands the weapons to the Quick Draw Flurry Ranger with a Doubling Ring who will have lots of fun generating Cones of Cold 5 times per day when he hits (which can happen up to 5 times per round if he's hasted), humiliating the Dragon Barbarian in the process and making the Spell Storing Rune completely irrelevant.
And then you consider that most parties have 2 casters...
I'm pretty sure that after trivializing a few "Severe" encounters you will forbid such combos. And the only way is to put back the Glyph of Warding where it should be: On static objects.
I think you are on shaky ground attempting to interpret flanking at range. Reach specifies that "Melee Strikes rely on reach."
I've never said that you could flank at range. I said you gain the benefit from flanking with ranged attacks.
"When you and an ally are flanking a foe, it has a harder time defending against you. A creature is flat-footed (taking a –2 circumstance penalty to AC) to creatures that are flanking it."No need of Produce Flame to gain the flanking benefit. Ray of Frost works as much.