CA Spell: "Blast of Flame" - What the heck?

[Doug McCrae]

Can someone please explain to me how this isn't broken?

Sure can, by comparing it to fireball. One level higher, worse area of effect but has the advantage that it doesn't allow spell resistance. If anything it looks slightly underpowered to me, but it has its uses.

 

[Felon]

I don't think it's that bad, really. Cone of Cold is not the best spell for it's level, try comparing with spells like Firebrand.

Right. It's not that BoF is broken, it's that CoC is kind of a dud.

Mesthil's Acid Breath from Magic of Faerûn (Player's Guide to Faerûn). It has close range only and does allow SR, tho, which seems kinda odd for a Conjuration (could be an oversight during the revision, tho, as the original is from 3.0, OTOH it would be a bit too good as a 3rd level spell without SR ).

In general, MoF kind of drops the ball on SR. Basically anything offensive was allowed SR, even Conjuration effects.

 

[drnuncheon]

Two things:

1. Cone of Cold has always struck me as being rather anemic for a 5th level spell. 2 spell levels higher than fireball/lightning bolt ought to get you something, and cone is just not that much better than burst or line.
2. Aren't fire spells in 3.5 pretty much universally Evocation? Is there a reason for this one not to be?

 

[Nifft]

IMC, Cone of Cold deals 1d8/level (max 15d8). So, I think Blast of Flame will fit in just fine as-written.

-- N

 

[Sammael]

Cone of cold ought to freeze those who fail the save for 1 round.

 

[Zappo]

Aren't fire spells in 3.5 pretty much universally Evocation? Is there a reason for this one not to be?

I agree. Conjuration's blast spells ought to always be less powerful than Evocations IMO. A Conjuration specialist already gets lots of good stuff; if he can take Evocation as a forbidden school and still blast rather well, it makes him quite more powerful. I think this spell is slightly weaker than what I'd expect of a 4th level Evocation (the cone shape sucks), but not quite weak enough for a Conjuration blast. Maybe if it dealt d4 damage.

Oh, and CoC is horrible. The cone shape makes it difficult to use, requiring additional maneuvering on everyone's part and putting the caster close to melee, and cold damage is rather commonly resisted even if not as much as fire. The damage itself is OK, but the rest is just subpar for a 5th level.

 

[Liquidsabre]

IMC, Cone of Cold deals 1d8/level (max 15d8). So, I think Blast of Flame will fit in just fine as-written.

-- N

Snagtastic!

 

[Tessarael]

Err no. Cone of Cold does only d6/level. However, I agree with the above posters. Cone of Cold was always weak whether we be talking in AD&D or 3E.

 

[shilsen]

Err no. Cone of Cold does only d6/level. However, I agree with the above posters. Cone of Cold was always weak whether we be talking in AD&D or 3E.

Nifft was referring to how he has house-ruled it, hence the IMC (in my campaign). He wasn't claiming that's the way it's supposed to work by the rules.

 

[Al'Kelhar]

IMC, cone of cold still only does 1d6 cold damage per level, but also slows creatures in the area of effect for 1 round/level. A successful Fortitude save halves the cold damage and reduces the slow effect to 1 round. (The Fort save also means that you can use the spell successfully against creatures with evasion). The spell still allows SR (as it's an Evocation).

If blast of flame is a Conjuration spell (and therefore doesn't allow SR), it really should be called acid gout or similar, and conjure a cone of acid. Or change it to mirror the spell flaming corrosion from Monte Cook's Book of Eldritch Might I, with is a Sor/Wiz 4 short range cone-shaped Evocation doing half acid, half fire damage, with a Reflex save and allowing SR.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar