|
Quick question, the phoenix bloodline lets you burn people to life.
Bloodline Arcana: When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage, and living creatures affected by the spell instead regain a number of hit points equal to half the fire damage the spell would normally deal.
Which raises two questions I want confirm if I'm right.
1) The spell normally has a chance to set someone on fire doing extra damage each round. I'm inclined to think this would still be the case i.e. Fire spell for half healing, person on fire takes fire damage each round. Is this right or would they (a) not catch on fire, (b) be healed each round as its magic healing flames or (c) something I'm missing.
2) For spells like hellfire ray this would only apply to the FIRE damage correct e.g. they get 4d6 fire healing per ray (1/2 8d6) but also TAKE 8d6 unholy damage as the spell's half fire and half unholy per ray.
1: for catching fire - my thinking is that this would follow the logic of damage reduction rules about negating all the weapon damage and thus also negating effects riding on it, like poison.
so since the spell dealt no damage i'd say the target never got the extra effect of catching on fire (same as if the target in immune to fire. you don't go around and check if it's on fire or not).
2:from first reading i thought that if half is fire and half is not, the fire is negated and half the fire amount is healed. the not fire is damage an it deal damage. since both are rolled separately it might heal more or less (or the same) amount as the damage. kinda waste if you think about it, unless your trying to torture the target and keep it alive.
BUT on close inspection it never say it is the fire damage that is what is healed. it say "When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage.."
so you check - does this spell deal any fire damage? - yes? ok so now using the arcane it deal no damage (what so ever. not limited to the fire part) but instead heal up 1/2 the total amount of damage that was supposed to happen .
|
|
1: for catching fire - my thinking is that this would follow the logic of damage reduction rules about negating all the weapon damage and thus also negating effects riding on it, like poison.
** spoiler omitted **
so since the spell dealt no damage i'd say the target never got the extra effect of catching on fire (same as if the target in immune to fire. you don't go around and check if it's on fire or not).2:from first reading i thought that if half is fire and half is not, the fire is negated and half the fire amount is healed. the not fire is damage an it deal damage. since both are rolled separately it might heal more or less (or the same) amount as the damage. kinda waste if you think about it, unless your trying to torture the target and keep it alive.
BUT on close inspection it never say it is the fire damage that is what is healed. it say "When casting any spell that deals fire damage, you can instead heal your targets. The spell deals no damage.."
so you check - does this spell deal any fire damage? - yes? ok so now using the arcane it deal no damage (what so ever. not limited to the fire part) but instead heal up 1/2 the total amount of damage that was supposed to happen .
Ah I completely missed that in my reading good thing I asked, intereseting. Also thanks for the answer regarding damage reduction the ability just got a lot more useful to suppliment party healing.
I think zza ni is correct, the "catching fire" portion would be a secondary effect that is contingent upon the spell causing fire damage first. So, if it causes no damage, they do not catch on fire.
Catching on FireCharacters exposed to burning oil, bonfires, and non-instantaneous magic fires might find their clothes, hair, or equipment on fire. Spells with an instantaneous duration don’t normally set a character on fire, since the heat and flame from these come and go in a flash.
Characters at risk of catching fire are allowed a DC 15 Reflex save to avoid this fate. If a character’s clothes or hair catch fire, he takes 1d6 points of damage immediately. In each subsequent round, the burning character must make another Reflex saving throw. Failure means he takes another 1d6 points of damage that round. Success means that the fire has gone out—that is, once he succeeds on his saving throw, he’s no longer on fire.
A character on fire may automatically extinguish the flames by jumping into enough water to douse himself. If no body of water is at hand, rolling on the ground or smothering the fire with cloaks or the like permits the character another save with a +4 bonus.
Those whose clothes or equipment catch fire must make DC 15 Reflex saves for each item. Flammable items that fail take the same amount of damage as the character.
As far as the Hellfire Ray, zza ni is correct again. The spell causes no damage, unholy nor fire, and would instead heal for 1/2 of what damage the fire would cause.
This might start yet another argument about alignment and spell descriptors, but I'm gonna say it anyway; I would be careful about casting Hellfire Ray on a regular basis, even to use it for healing. For one, you have to carry an Unholy symbol/tome around, and two, it is inherently evil because its purpose is to damn someone to hell, and your GM may change your alignment if you make a habit of using it, and depending on how strict your GM is, might even change your alignment if you start purposefully carrying around unholy symbols/tomes.
Casting an evil spell is an evil act, but for most characters simply casting such a spell once isn’t enough to change her alignment; this only occurs if the spell is used for a truly abhorrent act, or if the caster established a pattern of casting evil spells over a long period. A wizard who uses animate dead to create guardians for defenseless people won’t turn evil, but he will if he does it over and over again. The GM decides whether the character’s alignment changes, but typically casting two evil spells is enough to turn a good creature nongood, and three or more evils spells move the caster from nongood to evil. The greater the amount of time between castings, the less likely alignment will change. Some spells require sacrificing a sentient creature, a major evil act that makes the caster evil in almost every circumstance.
Those who are forbidden from casting spells with an opposed alignment might lose their divine abilities if they circumvent that restriction (via Use Magic Device, for example), depending on how strict their deities are.
Though this advice talks about evil spells, it also applies to spells with other alignment descriptors.
Tbh, I'd use Empowered or Maximized Scorching Rays in 4th/5th slots rather than Hellfire Ray in a 6th slot.
|
|
I think zza ni is correct, the "catching fire" portion would be a secondary effect that is contingent upon the spell causing fire damage first. So, if it causes no damage, they do not catch on fire.
Catching on FireCharacters exposed to burning oil, bonfires, and non-instantaneous magic fires might find their clothes, hair, or equipment on fire. Spells with an instantaneous duration don’t normally set a character on fire, since the heat and flame from these come and go in a flash.
Characters at risk of catching fire are allowed a DC 15 Reflex save to avoid this fate. If a character’s clothes or hair catch fire, he takes 1d6 points of damage immediately. In each subsequent round, the burning character must make another Reflex saving throw. Failure means he takes another 1d6 points of damage that round. Success means that the fire has gone out—that is, once he succeeds on his saving throw, he’s no longer on fire.
A character on fire may automatically extinguish the flames by jumping into enough water to douse himself. If no body of water is at hand, rolling on the ground or smothering the fire with cloaks or the like permits the character another save with a +4 bonus.
Those whose clothes or equipment catch fire must make DC 15 Reflex saves for each item. Flammable items that fail take the same amount of damage as the character.
As far as the Hellfire Ray, zza ni is correct again. The spell causes no damage, unholy nor fire, and would instead heal for 1/2 of what damage the fire would cause.
This might start yet another argument about alignment and spell descriptors, but I'm gonna say it anyway; I would be careful about casting Hellfire Ray on a regular basis, even to use it for healing. For one, you have to carry an Unholy symbol/tome around, and two, it is inherently evil because its purpose is to damn someone...
I would as well I just used hellfire ray because its the only fire/other and high level single target fire spell that sprang to mind.
welp, if you can take your time healing, having Magical Lineage trait for ether acid splash or jolt along with taking the elemental spell metamagic (to change the spell damage into fire) would allow you at will to heal 1d3/2 hp per round.
and unlike my favorite go to of unicorn bloodline + at will sla. this one doesn't get debated into the whole 'is sla considered casting a spell', since you are casting a normal spell.