Do spellcasters use Burning Hands in your game?

[Elder-Basilisk]

With others, I agree that Sculpt Spell and Enlarge Spell must have been made with Burning Hands in mind. Using either of those feats, IMHO, burning hands is one of the best available 2nd level attack spell (probably the best if used with sculpt spell) between caster levels 3 and 7.

My fighter/wizard in Living Greyhawk also uses burning hands with reasonable regularity. (Less so now (Ftr 2/Wiz 6) than when he was a Ftr 2/Wiz 4 and Ftr 2/Wiz 5). When you're up close and personal with your enemies anyway, Burning hands is a great spell. (And if you're hasted, it can help make groups of weak enemies into cleave bait).

 

[Spatzimaus]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Do spellcasters use Burning Hands in your game?

I thought Shield prevented AoO by providing 3/4 cover.

It was errata'd. It only provides a Cover AC boost now. No Reflex save boost, and you still take AoOs.

 

[Number47]

DMG 69 has a diagram for burning hands using a grid. It does cover a total of 6 squares, 3 of which are threatened

 

[Bonedagger]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Do spellcasters use Burning Hands in your game?

It was errata'd. It only provides a Cover AC boost now. No Reflex save boost, and you still take AoOs.

Ohh... ok.

 

[AuraSeer]

XXXXXXX
XEEEEEX
XEEEEEX
XXXCXXX

In theory it is a semicircle, but in practice, any square that is within two squares of the caster's square (and in front of the caster, in the case of this spell) would be affected.

The area you drew is 5 squares across, or 25'. That means you're working with a radius of 12.5', which is too large. In order to correctly model the spell's 10' radius, the area should be 20' across, or 4 squares.

Your rule about being "within two squares" is also not quite correct. You should be measuring what's within 10 feet of the origin. The difference is important when considering diagonals; two squares of diagonal movement represents 14' of real distance. Most of each corner square is actually outside the spell's area, so a character in that square is not affected.

HTH.

[Edited to add: Number47 is right about the diagram. The book may explain the geometry better than I do.]

 

[Mistwell]

Third Eye of Contration will help with Defensive Casting

Just a quick note: The magic item Third Eye - Concentration (Psionics Handbook) provides a +10 bonus to Concentration checks, and costs 2000gp (or 1000 gp if you make it yourself I believe). This makes casting defensively an easy option fairly early. Burn those baddies with Burning Hands all you want, they won't touch you.

 

[Rel]

Well after looking at the diagram that Number 47 pointed out, I can see that we've been giving the area of effect of Burning Hands short shrift. It is irritating however that they do that business of showing the Caster standing on the line instead of in one of the squares though.

Regardless, our solution seems simple: We'll just make the mylar template and use it the same way we've been using the other ones.

Thanks for all the insights.

 

[candidus_cogitens]

Your rule about being "within two squares" is also not quite correct. You should be measuring what's within 10 feet of the origin. The difference is important when considering diagonals; two squares of diagonal movement represents 14' of real distance. Most of each corner square is actually outside the spell's area, so a character in that square is not affected.

HTH.

[Edited to add: Number47 is right about the diagram. The book may explain the geometry better than I do.]

I stand corrected. I did not realize that the DMG specifically said that an intersection on the grid should be chosen as the point of origin.

The principle I was working by was that in D&D, diagonal movement of two squares is treated as the same distance as lateral movement of two squares. This would result in the layout I gave above. However, apparently this applies only to movement and non-magical attacks, not to spell areas.

 

[Jasperak]

I don't have my books with me to verify, so correct me if I am wrong. I was under the impression that when moving diagonally the first square was considered 5' and the second square was 10' for a total of 15' travelled for the two squares.


(Edit to clarify)

 

[Number47]

I don't have my books with me to verify, so correct me if I am wrong. I was under the impression that when moving diagonally the first square was considered 5' and the second square was 10' for a total of 15' travelled for the two squares.

You are correct, that is the commonly used rule for movement. The rule for spells is that if the spell affects at least half the square, it affects the whole square. So, with burning hands, moving away from the intersection of origin yields the first diagonal square. The area does not go far enough to reach the next diagonal. Although it crosses into the next diagonal, it does not bisect it corner to corner, just under. Although they don't show a 10' radius burst, it would be exactly doubled the burning hands area.

For most spells, the 5/10 rule works really good. Burning hands has that really oddball area of effect. Just take a look at DMG 68-69 to get a feel for how they intended it.