Does the Fireball spell expand in a narrow corridor?
- Thread starter Hannibal King
- Start date
Ballard_Alvar
First Post
Feat
If you wanted to Bounce, ect., I considered writing a House Feat that would be something like this:
Reflect Spell[Metamagic]
Prerequisites: Any Metamagic Feat
Area of effect spells with the "burst" or "line" descriptors can be doubled back off of vertical surfaces, not exceeding their own area of affect(albeit doubled over). all spells prepared using this feat take up a spell slot of a spell 2 levels higher.
e.g. fireball is cast with point of oragin 10' from a wall 12 squares with the remaining area (the 10' to 20' range are doubled over to the point of oragin. in these 12 squares the spell is effectively twined. lightning bolt could be refected off the survace at the same angle from the normal and not exceeding its range.
If you wanted to Bounce, ect., I considered writing a House Feat that would be something like this:
Reflect Spell[Metamagic]
Prerequisites: Any Metamagic Feat
Area of effect spells with the "burst" or "line" descriptors can be doubled back off of vertical surfaces, not exceeding their own area of affect(albeit doubled over). all spells prepared using this feat take up a spell slot of a spell 2 levels higher.
e.g. fireball is cast with point of oragin 10' from a wall 12 squares with the remaining area (the 10' to 20' range are doubled over to the point of oragin. in these 12 squares the spell is effectively twined. lightning bolt could be refected off the survace at the same angle from the normal and not exceeding its range.
TheAuldGrump
First Post
I always hated the bouncing lightning bolt, and house ruled it out of my games in 1st ed. Chain ligtning could 'bounce' in a sense, hitting the wall just being another target in the chain.
I kind of miss the old version of fireball, but not very much, the new one is simpler to ajudicate, and given the lack of force more believable. But I also saw the old version being abused way too much to want it back.
I have a strange feeling that Mr. King is a recent convert from older editions. But I do believe that his response was somewhat less polite than it could have been, the new rules are neither crap nor idiotic, just different.
Now bouncing lightning bolts are silly... (Lightning grounds, it does not bounce.)
The Auld Grump
I kind of miss the old version of fireball, but not very much, the new one is simpler to ajudicate, and given the lack of force more believable. But I also saw the old version being abused way too much to want it back.
I have a strange feeling that Mr. King is a recent convert from older editions. But I do believe that his response was somewhat less polite than it could have been, the new rules are neither crap nor idiotic, just different.
Now bouncing lightning bolts are silly... (Lightning grounds, it does not bounce.)
The Auld Grump
Ballard_Alvar
First Post
Silly? perhaps (I know about Tesla), but It could add a something else. . . different.TheAuldGrump said:
Would anyone else say that the feat idea would be overpowered?
Hannibal King
First Post
Over the idiot discussion already.
Anyhoo, TheAuldGrump I find the new system too precise and video game-like which is a strange thing to say I know considering one of the best D&D video games IMHO "Baldur Gate" had hard to place fireballs that hit your own party and crazy bouncing lightning bolts and everyone was happy. But now no one likes that version of the spells in a new system where protecting yourself from spells is far easier than in previous editions. Just doesn't make sense. Seems all the players have gone soft.
I guess we (meaning those that played 1st edition) were made of sturdier stuff back then ;-)
HK
P.S. Been playing 3.Whatever since it came out, just never bothered to really read those two spells.
Anyhoo, TheAuldGrump I find the new system too precise and video game-like which is a strange thing to say I know considering one of the best D&D video games IMHO "Baldur Gate" had hard to place fireballs that hit your own party and crazy bouncing lightning bolts and everyone was happy. But now no one likes that version of the spells in a new system where protecting yourself from spells is far easier than in previous editions. Just doesn't make sense. Seems all the players have gone soft.
I guess we (meaning those that played 1st edition) were made of sturdier stuff back then ;-)
HK
P.S. Been playing 3.Whatever since it came out, just never bothered to really read those two spells.
Majoru Oakheart
Adventurer
It isn't a matter of being made of sturdier stuff. It's about some silliness and stupidity that used to happen in 1st/2nd edition. Don't get me wrong, there was more "personality" in the old versions of the spells.
However, it was pretty much a ritual to watch the first time someone played a wizard, they'd have no idea that fireball expanded to fill the space and end up killing themselves and likely most of the party with their first fireball. Then, after starting the campaign over again, they'd likely kill themselves with the second fireball they cast as they wouldn't understand the rules on HOW fireball expanded or get the math wrong and still end up killing themselves and the rest of the party.
Pretty much the same with lightning bolt. I can still remember the look on whichever one of our DMs was running the game's face when the newbie wizard says "I cast a lightning bolt, I hit all the enemies in the 20x20 room." when the lightning bolt then bounced off the wall, hit all the party members, bounced off the wall again, hit all the party members a second time and then stopped before it hit the enemies again.
There was a really large learning curve to play a wizard in the old editions because of this. Memorizing and remembering the quirks of each spell took a lot of effort that a lot of people weren't willing to do after their first experience like this. It also took its toll on the DM who ALSO had to remember these things AND do the math each time they were cast.
I, personally, prefer "oh, it's a 20 ft spread, it works the same way as all other spreads, it effects these people right here" instead of having to say "wait, it's a FIREBALL, so it fills the area" or "I'm going to rule that THIS spell doesn't go around the cover unlike other spells."
All the rules are the same instead of them being different for each spell.
However, it was pretty much a ritual to watch the first time someone played a wizard, they'd have no idea that fireball expanded to fill the space and end up killing themselves and likely most of the party with their first fireball. Then, after starting the campaign over again, they'd likely kill themselves with the second fireball they cast as they wouldn't understand the rules on HOW fireball expanded or get the math wrong and still end up killing themselves and the rest of the party.
Pretty much the same with lightning bolt. I can still remember the look on whichever one of our DMs was running the game's face when the newbie wizard says "I cast a lightning bolt, I hit all the enemies in the 20x20 room." when the lightning bolt then bounced off the wall, hit all the party members, bounced off the wall again, hit all the party members a second time and then stopped before it hit the enemies again.
There was a really large learning curve to play a wizard in the old editions because of this. Memorizing and remembering the quirks of each spell took a lot of effort that a lot of people weren't willing to do after their first experience like this. It also took its toll on the DM who ALSO had to remember these things AND do the math each time they were cast.
I, personally, prefer "oh, it's a 20 ft spread, it works the same way as all other spreads, it effects these people right here" instead of having to say "wait, it's a FIREBALL, so it fills the area" or "I'm going to rule that THIS spell doesn't go around the cover unlike other spells."
All the rules are the same instead of them being different for each spell.
Kae'Yoss
First Post
Darkness said:
OK, I take the troll back, as it doesn't dit entirely. Next time, I use the RBP at once.
Hannibal King said:
IIRC, BG didn't use the expanding fireball rules.
Placing fireballs shouldn't be hard. The whole pseudo-physics is out of place. First, other characters don't have problems like that, second, other spells don't have that problem, and third, it makes the whole think needlessly complicated, and at the same time inconsistant, since other things don't have such pseudo-physics, either.
Note that it still isn't the easiest thing on the world to place a fireball, as it can still hit friends. So the spellcaster will have to place the fireball correctly to exclude party members.
Wrong. I never liked bouncing ligntning bolts and firballs with pseudo-physics.
Wrong again. A lot of people like the change.
It rather seems they have gone smart, seeing that realistic firball spreading doesn't fit into a system where hits with a sword aren't realistic at all.
JacktheRabbit
Explorer
Hannibal King said:
Fireball is a burst of fire. It is not water. So when it hits any sort of barrier that barrier absorbs the fireball energy.
Now if the spell was called liquid flame and acted like a massive explosion fiery water then I would agree with you. The water would have to go somewhere.
Think if it this way. Take a light bulb. Look at how bright a light it shines on a wall. Now stick that bulb in a black tube 10" in diameter and open at both ends. Does the spot on the wall get brighter cause the light is in a tube? Nope.
Similar Threads
