Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 3029700" data-attributes="member: 2011">You misunderstood my question. By the word "this", I meant "catching on fire if you fail a DC 15 Reflex save", not "ignites flammable objects".If Flaming Sphere and Flame Blade can set characters on fire virtually every time in combat because their hair if flammable and their clothes are flammable, why do these spells not explicitly state something like: "A creature has to make a DC 15 Reflex save to not catch on fire if he is wearing or carrying clothing or other flammable materials."?Why do these spells rely on a relatively obscure and debatable (as to when it is applicable) rule in the DMG to indicate what their effect may be?The flammable sentences in these spells, on the other hand, make sense as allowing the caster to catch objects on fire. You put the Flaming Sphere on papers, they catch fire. You touch your Flame Blade to your ally's torch, it catches fire.But, there is a major difference between setting flammable objects on fire (automatically as per the various spells) and forcing a creature to make a DC 15 Reflex save due to a combat attack when the spell does not state that you need to do this. These spells already have game mechanic fire damage effects listed within them for creatures. If they were supposed to also have the Catching on Fire damage effect in combat, they should have listed it as an additional effect. Allowing them to also use the Catching on Fire rules does not appear to be designer intent.I could see a DM ruling that a flammable object (like Oil or a Web spell or dry straw) auto-ignites with a single attack as well because these types of spells indicate that they cause flammable object to ignite, but this should not occur for a creature because the spell already states what happens to creatures, regardless of them wearing clothing.</blockquote>

Verification