D&D 5E Rulings, Not Rules vs Cool spell usage

[transtemporal]

Nah, flaming sphere isn't an obstacle. Its just formless, incandescent ball of flame. In our last session, the DM ruled the sphere provided 1/2 cover due to basically blinding you trying to shoot at something on the other side.

Technically, you could have enemies move through it without taking damage as long as they didn't end their movement within 5. But I would call BS on that for most enemies, since it looks like a giant magical bonfire and logic would dictate you'd burn yourself moving through it, so they wouldn't risk it just to test the theory (unless they specifically knew the spell). What I might have them do is dash and jump over it though. That seems like a legit move.

 

[raleel]

So, from a historical perspective, Flaming Sphere has been a spongy ball that is on fire since 2nd edition. It hasn't been able to push anyone because of this, and specifically says so.

That is somewhat supported by the notion of it "ramming into" the foe and stopping moving, and by it going over 5' tall barriers. if it was a ball of flame with no substance, why would it stop moving? if it was insubstantial, why wouldn't it just go through a barrier?

I realize it does not say it's a spongy ball, but it is somewhat supported by the flavor of the text.

 

[Celtavian]

When I read this reply :

I thought about all the ways this could be called. For me, I prefer functional (as in one input = one output) systems - I'm limited that way. This situation is a pretty classic one and one likely to come up in play.

For my piece of mind, I'm missing some rules element/decision points here :
- is flaming sphere an obstacle?

No more so than a ball of flame. If someone wants to run through it, I'd have them take damage and run through it. If they wanted to stand in the space, I'd have them take the damage every round. If they wanted to jump over it to avoid, I'd have them make an athletics check to clear a 5x5 foot sphere of fire. It's not solid. It's a ball of fire. You can run through fire. You can stand in fire. If the player is willing to take the damage, they can do all that you can do in a ball of fire.

- can flaming sphere be used by others by pushing things and creatures in it?

Yep. It's a ball of fire. You can push people into fire. None of the legalistic nonsense rules you might find in 3E/Pathfinder. You adjudicate it as you would a ball of fire with all the possibilities and limitations.

- if it is an obstacle, what kind of power is required to push through ?

Locomotion of any kind.

- when you ram it into something - does it engulf it, or does it "stop" when it hits?

Stop where it hits. Target has to move out of the fire or burn every round. It's no more solid than fire. It occupies no more space than a ball of fire.

Anyone else have these issues? Anyone have an easy solution - because I'm apprehending a good deal of note taking required to keep all my calls coherent...

I did at first because I was in Pathfinder/3E thinking mode. Once I thought like 5E, I understood how to adjudicate it. 5E mode is acknowledging this is a ball of fire and deciding how a ball of fire should react to various things. Ask yourself, is the fire solid? No. Is there anything solid about the fire such as a fuel source? No. Can you walk through fire? Yes. Will you burn for doing so? Yes.

One of the many elements I like about 5E is things are what they are to use a tautology. A ball of fire is a ball of fire. You need only think in terms of what is possible with a magically controlled ball of fire to judge how it would react to what the players or enemies do.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So, from a historical perspective, Flaming Sphere has been a spongy ball that is on fire since 2nd edition. It hasn't been able to push anyone because of this, and specifically says so.

That is somewhat supported by the notion of it "ramming into" the foe and stopping moving, and by it going over 5' tall barriers. if it was a ball of flame with no substance, why would it stop moving? if it was insubstantial, why wouldn't it just go through a barrier?

I realize it does not say it's a spongy ball, but it is somewhat supported by the flavor of the text.

We also always talked about the "flaming nerf ball" and what one could and could not do with it.

As I has a Conjurer in my game currently, it's probably going to be a spell that enters my game soon... and I will be discussing with that player the reintroduction of that particular older piece of flavor description that does not seem to be present in the 5E version. Specifically so that the sphere *does* "ram into things" and "roll over low obstacles" like the spell details say. Thus, no "engulfing", and the sphere itself is solid and thus can be an obstacle itself and unable to be run through like a wall of fire can.

 

[Uchawi]

Each spell is a separate sub-system and is magic. Therefore, in application it does not touch bases with implied world physics covered by other rules. But if you decide to make ad hoc rulings, then I would try to extend it to all classes. Things like a fireball should have extended affects if flaming sphere is considered to be solid.

 

[77IM]

This is why I think "flavor text is part of RAW." It's used to adjudiciate edge cases. If the spell were called lava flow it might have the exact same rules but we wouldn't be having this same discussion.

 

[KarinsDad]

We also always talked about the "flaming nerf ball" and what one could and could not do with it.

As I has a Conjurer in my game currently, it's probably going to be a spell that enters my game soon... and I will be discussing with that player the reintroduction of that particular older piece of flavor description that does not seem to be present in the 5E version. Specifically so that the sphere *does* "ram into things" and "roll over low obstacles" like the spell details say. Thus, no "engulfing", and the sphere itself is solid and thus can be an obstacle itself and unable to be run through like a wall of fire can.

Interesting. Would you rule this way if you hadn't played the earlier version?

Or would you just rule it as fire as per the first sentence of the spell "A 5-foot-diameter sphere of fire appears in unoccupied square..."?

 

[Rod Staffwand]

Flaming sphere is another case of lame 5E spell text. It completely ignores what happens if someone moves into or through the flaming sphere's space--a very common situation given the function of the spell.

If one goes by a strict reading of the spell, you don't take damage unless you end your turn within 5 feet of it (including right on top of it). Common sense would indicate some damage, though. So I'd just have anyone moving through the flaming sphere take 2d6 damage, half on a save as if they had been rammed by it or ended their turn near it. I would only do this for moving through the sphere. If it's in the center of a 10 foot wide corridor, Medium sized creatures would be able to skirt the sides for no damage as long as they didn't end their turn next to it.

I'd also allow a Dex check instead to avoid damage completely (or 2d6 on a fail) if there was enough room to vault over it since I'd do this for any sort of hazard.

The ramming opponents text indicates that the sphere has some "weight" to it, but there's nothing to say that it forms a physical barrier that cannot be moved through. Making the flaming sphere physical opens up a huge can of worms that's best left closed: What happens if you roll it over a prone opponent? Couldn't you create it 60 feet in the air and drop it on someone for extra "falling fire!" damage? Can you use it to stand on to get that book off a top shelf?

Of course, all of this analysis would be avoided with a couple of extra lines explaining how the flaming sphere actually works.

 

[Celtavian]

Flaming sphere is another case of lame 5E spell text. It completely ignores what happens if someone moves into or through the flaming sphere's space--a very common situation given the function of the spell.

If one goes by a strict reading of the spell, you don't take damage unless you end your turn within 5 feet of it (including right on top of it). Common sense would indicate some damage, though. So I'd just have anyone moving through the flaming sphere take 2d6 damage, half on a save as if they had been rammed by it or ended their turn near it. I would only do this for moving through the sphere. If it's in the center of a 10 foot wide corridor, Medium sized creatures would be able to skirt the sides for no damage as long as they didn't end their turn next to it.

I'd also allow a Dex check instead to avoid damage completely (or 2d6 on a fail) if there was enough room to vault over it since I'd do this for any sort of hazard.

The ramming opponents text indicates that the sphere has some "weight" to it, but there's nothing to say that it forms a physical barrier that cannot be moved through. Making the flaming sphere physical opens up a huge can of worms that's best left closed: What happens if you roll it over a prone opponent? Couldn't you create it 60 feet in the air and drop it on someone for extra "falling fire!" damage? Can you use it to stand on to get that book off a top shelf?

Of course, all of this analysis would be avoided with a couple of extra lines explaining how the flaming sphere actually works.

Or a DM that is open to creative player interactions. Dms and players don't need to be told everything. I still remember the old school of D&D. We didn't need to be told everything a spell can do to decide what it was capable of doing.

 

[KarinsDad]

Or a DM that is open to creative player interactions. Dms and players don't need to be told everything. I still remember the old school of D&D. We didn't need to be told everything a spell can do to decide what it was capable of doing.

I think people pull the "I still remember the old school of D&D" way too often here on the boards to justify subpar wording in 5E.

In 2E (i.e. old school), Flaming Sphere stated "Flammable substances are set afire by contact with the sphere. Creatures in contact with the globe must successfully save vs. spell or suffer 2d4 points of fire damage.".

I suspect that "old school" was not quite as dumbed down and required DM adjudication as many people claim. Spells said what they did. 5E Flaming Sphere, not so much.

We should quit justifying poorly worded or designed 5E spells with the generic "the DM can adjudicate that" types of explanations. How hard was it to put a phrase "anything in contact with the sphere" into the spell? Sorry, this is a 5E designer minor fail. We should stop justifying it when 5E designers put vague or incomplete rules or spells into the game system.

Old school was not always as open ended and up to DM interpretation as people here claim either.