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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 2406938" data-attributes="member: 19675">Here's a question I've asked a variety of ways and not gotten a satisfactory answer to:If the damage from a flaming weapon is done by the weapon and not the enchantment- the basis for denying the fire damage for a whip striking an armored opponent- what happens when the flaming weapon is flaming but not being used as a weapon?That is:#1)  What happens when the weilder of a Flaming sword gently lays the flat of the flaming sword's blade on the palms of a human (call him Vic Timm) and says the command word?  Does Vic get burned and take 1d6 flame damage?I'm thinking the answer is yes.  The weapon is on fire, and fire burns.  Vic takes 1d6 fire damage.#2)  Considering your answer to question #1, would the same happen to Vic if the weapon was a Flaming whip?  (or a Flaming net?  A Flaming Man-Catcher?)I'm thinking the answer is yes in each case. The weapon is on fire, and fire burns.  Vic takes 1d6 fire damage.#3) Would you change your answer to #1 or #2 if the same happened to a creature with natural armor or if Vic was wearing gauntlets?In case you can't guess, my answer is no.  The whip's non-damaging characteristic doesn't come into play-it is utterly immaterial.  Vic and the naturally armored creature would still take damage in both situations.It doesn't matter that the weapon isn't doing damage because its the enchantment- the weapon's magical enhancement-doing the damage.</blockquote>

Verification