D&D 5E Control Flame in Combat?

jaelis · May 25, 2019

The only reasonable answer is, ask your DM. If you are in a burning building, presumably the DM has already decided how much damage the flames would do if you entered a burning space. That seems like the value to go with. In the torch example, I could see basing it on the torch damage or on what you think the burning fuel would otherwise do. There doesn't have to be a universal answer.

77IM · May 26, 2019

I have trouble imagining that setting an opponent's clothes on fire is going to somehow deal more damage than alchemist's fire, which is basically napalm. Also, 1d4 damage per round, until you use an action to extinguish it (I'd skip the Dex check and just make it automatic), AND not requiring concentration, is pretty excellent damage for a cantrip that's not designed to deal damage. OTOH the target needs to be within 5 feet of a flame, so it's basically a melee cantrip, and those are allowed to be a little bit good.

So, the way I would rule is: spell attack roll to hit the target creature within 5 feet, and deal them 1 point of fire damage. This puts some fire on them -- not enough to deal damage, but enough that on your next round you can use control flames again, this time to set the target on fire, after which they take 1d4 per round like alchemist's fire. In other words, getting the really good effect requires two castings of control flames: one to get a person's clothes on fire (but it's a weak fire that goes out really fast) and another to turn brief flame into a damage-dealing conflagration.

5ekyu · May 26, 2019

tglassy said:
It’s not that I WANT to do more than intended, it’s why I asked the question here to get a consensus. The description says you can spread the fire to fill a five foot cube adjacent to it. Fire is naturally painful, and it doesn’t say, like Shape Water does, that the space cannot have a creature in it.

So if I’m in a burning building made of wood, and I’m fighting a goblin for some reason, and we’re standing next to fire, and I use the Control Fire cantrips to spread that fire into his space, you’re saying that would only do 1 point, like hitting him with a torch? Alchemist Fire s not Magical Fire and it does 1d4 of fire damage at the beginning of every turn unless it is put out.

But then the DMG says “burned by coals” would be 1d10 and “stumbling into a fire pit” is 2d10. Having the ground underneath you erupt into flames should be comparable to “stumbling in a fire pit”, but I’d agree that 2d10 seems like a bit much for a cantrips that isn’t meant for combat.

The main thing is that fire is naturally damaging, and the cantrips lets you control it and spread it to different spaces. Having a torch means you can easily spread the fire to any space around you as long as there’s something flammable in that space.

Obviously there are cantrips that can cause fire damage more efficiently, but I’ve got a character with no damage cantrips and I took Control Flame because it goes with his background. He’s an Entertainer and his thing is he’s a Fire Dancer, so he uses Control Flame as a means to make his performances more dazzling and spectacular. It was as I was thinking of the cool things he could do with that that it occurred to me that if he has what is essentially a staff or club with a flaming torch on the end, he could do some interesting things in combat with Control Flame, since it’s not Magical Flame. He’s a Sorcerer, so he could grab Firebolt or Create Bonfire later, but he’s only lvl 3 right now, and I’ve got other means of dealing with combat for the time being. This was just something interesting I’d thought of during creation and I wanted to get some thoughts.

" The description says you can spread the fire to fill a five foot cube adjacent to it. "

No, it does not.
Unless I read itbincorrectlybthe word "fill" is not there and you are making that up whole cloth.

Good try.

But nah.

The 5' part says you can expand the flame 5' in one direction provided there is wood or other fuel there.

So, if you have a torch sized flame and you have fuel in a square 5' to its side you can expand the flame into that square - but nothing says that torch somehow grows to fill that square.

The 1 pt torch references are to expanding a torch sized flame, not to expanding a blazing room 5'.

In essence it boils down to this - mostly that feature adds or expands the reach of whatever natural flame it was applied **if** there is the fuel it needs there in the new reached square.

In that natural fire was torch *and* there is "torch stuff there in that next square, you can extend it into there. If the natural fire is a burning wood floor and there is fuel enough to match that, it can be expanded to another square.

But the damage potential does not increase or decrease.

So, no, really, the house fire doesnt get snuffed down to a torch by the expand feature. But, then, nobody said it did.

Charlaquin · May 26, 2019

I think a lot of DMs worry too much about allowing things that don’t explicitly say they can be used to do damage to do damage, especially when it comes to cantrips. Personally, I try to err on the side of allowing a result that reinforces the players’ sense of a consistent world. It makes sense that filling a creature’s 5-foot space with fire would hurt them, so it should do some fire damage. Probably with a chance to avoid the damage with a successful save. So, I’d say the target should make a Dex save and take 1d6 fire damage on a fail.

Mistwell · May 26, 2019

It should not scale damage like a fire cantrip. But it should be doable. My instincts say 1d6 damage.

D&D 5E Control Flame in Combat?

jaelis

Oh this is where the title goes?

77IM

Explorer!!!

5ekyu

Hero

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

Similar Threads