D&D 4E How should 4E deal with the power of fire?

[Kaodi]

I do not see the big problem here. In real life, even a child can use fire to devestating effect. If you are not prepared to handle that fact that fire burns, just like in real life, D&D (or any RPG) is probably not the game for you.

If there is a problem, it is that there is not a very good understanding of what other elements do. Fire burns and melts, ice freezes and makes brittle, lightning electrifies and maybe even magnetizes, acid eats through things, thunder makes things shake (apart) and shatter.

 

[Raduin711]

As far as I'm concerned this is exactly how it *should* work. If you're going to carry around lots of magic, the price you pay is being at risk of meltdown every time you fail an area-damage save...not just against fire. (and magic should sometimes go *boom* when items break and the magic is released) This is one where 3e dropped the ball.
Lanefan

I disagree.

I think considering the way the game is set up, we shouldn't seek out to punish players for doing what the game has always expected and encouraged them to do... which is, buying and carrying magic items. It is also just as unrealistic as the "dude" factor that unrealistically protects the character's items. Imagine the above scenario when the character is carrying a rucksack of a dozen healing potions. A healing potion is going to catch fire? Crack or explode, maybe, but a flaming chain reaction? I don't want to tell you how to play your game, but that is a little much for your average D&D game.

And judging from a lot of replies, it should be clear that adjudicating how live fire works both simply, fairly and realistically is really hard. Fire is difficult to control or predict, even by experts. And one issue a lot of people had in 2nd edition is that they were tired of trying to be physics majors when playing the game.

So anyway, I'm fine with a more abstract system for fire. As long as it is simple and fair, I think I will manage.

 

[monboesen]

Given that 4ed seems to go the way of cinematic fantasy I'd say Hell No, we don't need realistic rules for fire. It should be treated the same as the other possible energy damage types.

 

[Lanefan]

I disagree.

I think considering the way the game is set up, we shouldn't seek out to punish players for doing what the game has always expected and encouraged them to do... which is, buying and carrying magic items. It is also just as unrealistic as the "dude" factor that unrealistically protects the character's items. Imagine the above scenario when the character is carrying a rucksack of a dozen healing potions. A healing potion is going to catch fire? Crack or explode, maybe, but a flaming chain reaction? I don't want to tell you how to play your game, but that is a little much for your average D&D game.

No, the potions won't catch fire (though that makes me think I should sit down one day and figure out if any potions *would* be inherently flammable...for example, if any contain lots of alcohol as an ingredient) but the vials holding them could easily crack, etc. In my game, potions are the least likely things to cause wild magic surges etc. when they get destroyed; nearly all of them just dissipate. Any explosion would be caused by the potion boiling inside its container and the container being unable to handle the pressure; even that's not going to cause *too* much damage, but shrapnel could easily crack the next potion vial in the backpack.....

So anyway, I'm fine with a more abstract system for fire. As long as it is simple and fair, I think I will manage.

Me too, for the most part; other than keeping in mind that things do burn, and that includes magic things.

Lanefan

 

[FadedC]

It's also important to note that pretty much all forms of damage in D&D are abstract, so it would be a little wierd to single out fire as being something to suddenly try to make "realistic". We don't worry about internal bleeding and fractured bones when somebody takes a direct hit from a hill giant's club, why should we worry about side effects from being hit with a magical blast of fire?

 

[Tewligan]

Why couldn't they?

Later
silver

A better question is why WOULD they? "Oh no, a ball of ice - it'll burn the house down!" Really, that's the most nonsensical question I've read all day.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

We all have different - and equally valid - opinions on how to handle fire in the game.
I just hope 4E has some good rules regarding fire, encouraging creative use of it without encouraging all out pyromania.

If someone has greek fire and a torch ready, that's fine in my book. And when they throw it and incinerate a monster or two, that's fine IMO.
But when someone marches up with 50 vials of greek fire and starts autofiring them (with the help of someone else throwing torches) and incinerating hordes of monsters and powerful monsters and all without them getting any chance to fight back, then there's a problem.
Just my two cents.

 

[Tewligan]

But when someone marches up with 50 vials of greek fire and starts autofiring them (with the help of someone else throwing torches) and incinerating hordes of monsters and powerful monsters and all without them getting any chance to fight back, then there's a problem.

So...I guess it would be pointless to point out again that this never HAS been a problem, right?

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

So...I guess it would be pointless to point out again that this never HAS been a problem, right?

Now, I thought I had covered this already.
Back in the old days, it was a serious problem. And it was a serious problem, whether it was using Houserules or the Canon rules.
I have already told you how a 1st level thief took out 6 giant spiders with oil. How a 3rd level party took out a hydra. Both of those, under the standard rules (according to the DMs of those scenarios!)

I saw characters win initiative, and hurl multiple oil flasks before the monsters could act.
I saw Hasted characters autofire large numbers of oil flasks like machine guns, before the monsters could act.

I saw a character lose +4 plate armor, a +4 shield, a +3 sword, his Bag of Holding, his Girdle of Giant Strength, and Gauntlets of Ogre Power, all in one fell swoop from a Fireball.

And best of all, I once saw a Helm of Brilliance detonate. That resulted in a TPK.

If this is how you *think* fire should be handled, how it should go, then that's fine.
But I think some players might have a problem with this approach. And so I wonder how WOTC is going to handle the matter.

When you lose a Bag of Holding that was carrying the contents of everything the entire party gained in the entire adventure, even though it was hidden under your plate armor - because your plate armor melted from the Fireball and then the Bag of Holding was destroyed and everything in it spilled into the Ethereal Plane, THAT is one specific way of addressing fire attacks ... a way that some players will agree is the proper way to address fire, and which other players will agree is not the proper way to address fire.

 

[Gloombunny]

Your GMs made up some stupid house rules. Stop trying to pretend that this has any relevance to anyone else's game of D&D.