Flaming whip

[Artoomis]

...If you set the whip on fire with oil and a torch, I'd still read it the same way - if the whip can't get past the armor, the fact that it's on fire doesn't help.

-Hyp.

Ah, but....

Throw a flask of oil at someone and it's no damage. Throw it with a flaming rag in it and they get hurt by the resulting fire.

Hmm... another example of how something does not do damage until it is flaming.

To make this really ludicrous, what if I wrap the flaming whip around the neck of a person in, say, leather armor? He is somehow immune to the fire of the flaming whip? How silly.

Of course this all starts with the silly rule about a whip doing no damage to someone in armor. That rule can be then blindly applied to prevent any sort of special weapon damage, but it stretches credibility way too far for me.

 

[Storyteller01]

Well, the standard whip isn't really a bullwhip, just a whip. And you can deal lethal damage with it, by taking a -4 on the attack. Of course, this still doesn't help against an armored opponent.

There used to be a whip design that had a length of metal attached to the end. Wasn't a whip dagger (metal wasn't a blade) but it was designed to penetrate armor. Was rather difficult to use though.

 

[Storyteller01]

You don't; the flaming weapon does. "A flaming weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit."

And the flaming weapon is a whip, which "deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher".



-Hyp.

but a whip can successfully hit, regardless of the its lack of damage. Criting with a flaming burst whip would be the same a setting off a small firebomb in someone's face.

Hit someone in the chest with a burning torch, the face gets burnt by virtue of proximity.

Aren't there examples, both for WotC and OGL, of whips that do shocking damage, or have the equivalnet of Shocking Grasp cast on them...

 

[Hypersmurf]

Aren't there examples, both for WotC and OGL, of whips that do shocking damage, or have the equivalnet of Shocking Grasp cast on them...

Quite probably. But do they have any notes that this property overrides the normal rule for the whip?

I have no problem with a Shocking Whip. I have a problem with a Shocking Whip that deals damage to an armored opponent, unless there's a specific note that allows it to do so.

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

Quite probably. But do they have any notes that this property overrides the normal rule for the whip?

I have no problem with a Shocking Whip. I have a problem with a Shocking Whip that deals damage to an armored opponent, unless there's a specific note that allows it to do so.

-Hyp.

Usually has the statement 'on a successful strike'. And WotC is pretty good at differenciating between striking and doing damage.

 

[Sil]

The flaming ability doesn't deal fire damage. The flaming ability causes the flaming weapon to deal fire damage... but a whip can only deal damage against an unarmored opponent.

If the creature attacked is immune to the weapon base damage, but a hit is scored, does the magical flaming enhancement have an effect?

The problem is you are calling it a flaming whip, when it, like every other weapon is a weapon, with a flaming enhancement. The damage nullification of a whip is the same as every other case of weapon damage nullification, and most all energy enhancements do not care about weapon base damage, or its nullification.


The case is not about the whip. It is about “what rule allows the nullification of weapon energy enhancement.”

That it is a whip is a red herring.

 

[Storyteller01]

And let's not forget touch attacks. No damage done, but the spell energy still effects the target.

 

[Felnar]

hooray, that halfling is wearing padded armor, so he's immune to a giantsized whip.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If the creature attacked is immune to the weapon base damage, but a hit is scored, does the magical flaming enhancement have an effect?

It depends why they're immune.

If they're immune to slashing damage, that has no effect on fire damage, so the fire damage applies.

That's not the case here. They're not immune to slashing damage; they're effectively immune to damage dealt by a whip. And the fire damage is damage dealt by a whip.

The problem is you are calling it a flaming whip, when it, like every other weapon is a weapon, with a flaming enhancement.

That's right. And when a weapon has a flaming enhancement, 'a flaming weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage'. It is the weapon that deals the fire damage, according to the text of the flaming ability. And since it is the weapon dealing the damage, if the weapon cannot deal damage, no damage is dealt.

There's a world of difference between a shocking grasp spell, which discharges on a touch attack, and a flaming whip, which cannot deal damage to an armored opponent.

-Hyp.

 

[Storyteller01]

That's right. And when a weapon has a flaming enhancement, 'a flaming weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage'. It is the weapon that deals the fire damage, according to the text of the flaming ability. And since it is the weapon dealing the damage, if the weapon cannot deal damage, no damage is dealt.

There's a world of difference between a shocking grasp spell, which discharges on a touch attack, and a flaming whip, which cannot deal damage to an armored opponent.

-Hyp.

But that's the same as saying 'If I touch (as opposed to striking) someone with a red or white hot poker, they won't get burnt since the the poker itself did no damage.' For clarity, I say touch because, even with damage limitations, as successful attack roll with the whip means you touched something. Trips and disarming attacks wouldn't work otherwise.

If we compare this with the whips limitations, said poker won't go through Full Plate. However, that's not the case with leather or softer materials. It will definitely go through padded armor. Folks in Full Plate will feel it as well, and if that poker (or whip) rakes across the visor...

Another question: Setting fire to combustibles requires that fire damage be taken. You can do this with a torch, without actually hitting something (just touching; goes back to the attack roll). Since a torch is nothing more than a flaming club, does this mean that you can't set fire to a wooden door or wall with a touch? Your clubs damage (with a touch) didn't exceed the objects hardness (ie the 'attack' didn't do damage)...