Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Can you cast flame blade and then make an improvised weapon attack with the flame blade?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 9203924" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p>Because many of us, and I'd argue rightly, believe the fluff is as crucial as the mechanics and there to give you the intent of the mechanics and the guideline for how to adjudicate the mechanics. For example if the fluff says something glows blue and the mechanics don't mention a radius of light, I as the DM am being told to make a judgement call on how much it glows because it does in fact glow despite them leaving out a radius of light. The game is full of those judgement calls and that doesn't disappear just because it's a spell text.</p><p></p><p>Here a DM is asked to adjudicate how the Improvised Weapon rules interact with an "evoked fiery blade" that is "similar" in size and shape, but not necessarily similar in weight or speed, to a scimitar. And you must hold this thing (unclear what it is you're holding really) in a free hand and if you let go of it with that hand it disappears. </p><p></p><p>Now to you think that's enough data to be "clear" on how the Improvised Weapon rules would work with it. I don't. Improvised Weapon rules ask three questions: 1) is it an object, and 2) is similar enough to an actual weapon and can be treated as such for proficiency issues, and 3) what damage and damage type does such an improvised weapon deal (default 1d4 if there is no further indication.) </p><p></p><p>My answers to #1 is yes, since you're holding something. And the something you're holding doesn't seem to be fire since you don't take damage yourself so I assume it's an object like a pommel or similar-enough to an object to qualify as one. But I can see a DM arguing no, since it's an "evoked fiery blade" and already some in this thread have argued it's energy and not an object. So already to me that's "not clear."</p><p></p><p>My answer to #2 is lacking guidance on weight and speed, and the blade being described as "fiery" which disappears easily, and the rule of cool being what it is, I am going with the "lightsaber" sort of description and therefore I don't think it's "similar enough" to an actual scimitar to get proficiency bonus unless you have a feat that gives you proficiency with improvised objects. Others disagree in this thread and thing it is, so again I'd say that's "not super clear" and reasonable minds can differ on that question.</p><p></p><p>Finally my answer on #3 is the spell tells you the damage done by being hit with such a thing, and you're being hit with such a thing, so that's the damage I'd use. It might not be "similar enough" to a scimitar for proficiency, but it's sure "similar enough" to a fiery blade to determine that's its damage. But again, others in this thread disagree and would go with either the default of 1d4 (fire damage), or with the scimitar damage. Which again I think is all reasonable, and the rule isn't clear requiring these judgement calls.</p><p></p><p>My rulings are influenced by the overall DMing rules of "is it balanced" and "is it cool and fun for the players." It's balanced to allow extra attack with this otherwise very sucky spell. And it's cool to find a way for people to want to use this lightsaber-like spell where otherwise they simply wouldn't choose it. </p><p></p><p>What part of this did you think was clear or did you think I was not comprehending well, and why do you feel separating fluff from mechanics is more helpful than reading them together in this instance?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 9203924, member: 2525"] Because many of us, and I'd argue rightly, believe the fluff is as crucial as the mechanics and there to give you the intent of the mechanics and the guideline for how to adjudicate the mechanics. For example if the fluff says something glows blue and the mechanics don't mention a radius of light, I as the DM am being told to make a judgement call on how much it glows because it does in fact glow despite them leaving out a radius of light. The game is full of those judgement calls and that doesn't disappear just because it's a spell text. Here a DM is asked to adjudicate how the Improvised Weapon rules interact with an "evoked fiery blade" that is "similar" in size and shape, but not necessarily similar in weight or speed, to a scimitar. And you must hold this thing (unclear what it is you're holding really) in a free hand and if you let go of it with that hand it disappears. Now to you think that's enough data to be "clear" on how the Improvised Weapon rules would work with it. I don't. Improvised Weapon rules ask three questions: 1) is it an object, and 2) is similar enough to an actual weapon and can be treated as such for proficiency issues, and 3) what damage and damage type does such an improvised weapon deal (default 1d4 if there is no further indication.) My answers to #1 is yes, since you're holding something. And the something you're holding doesn't seem to be fire since you don't take damage yourself so I assume it's an object like a pommel or similar-enough to an object to qualify as one. But I can see a DM arguing no, since it's an "evoked fiery blade" and already some in this thread have argued it's energy and not an object. So already to me that's "not clear." My answer to #2 is lacking guidance on weight and speed, and the blade being described as "fiery" which disappears easily, and the rule of cool being what it is, I am going with the "lightsaber" sort of description and therefore I don't think it's "similar enough" to an actual scimitar to get proficiency bonus unless you have a feat that gives you proficiency with improvised objects. Others disagree in this thread and thing it is, so again I'd say that's "not super clear" and reasonable minds can differ on that question. Finally my answer on #3 is the spell tells you the damage done by being hit with such a thing, and you're being hit with such a thing, so that's the damage I'd use. It might not be "similar enough" to a scimitar for proficiency, but it's sure "similar enough" to a fiery blade to determine that's its damage. But again, others in this thread disagree and would go with either the default of 1d4 (fire damage), or with the scimitar damage. Which again I think is all reasonable, and the rule isn't clear requiring these judgement calls. My rulings are influenced by the overall DMing rules of "is it balanced" and "is it cool and fun for the players." It's balanced to allow extra attack with this otherwise very sucky spell. And it's cool to find a way for people to want to use this lightsaber-like spell where otherwise they simply wouldn't choose it. What part of this did you think was clear or did you think I was not comprehending well, and why do you feel separating fluff from mechanics is more helpful than reading them together in this instance? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Can you cast flame blade and then make an improvised weapon attack with the flame blade?
Top