Horrid Wilting

[Nail]

.....Unless the player prepared the HW spell with the specific idea in mind of using it against fire elementals, ......

Exactly my point.

How do you (the DM) know? You might not.

 

[ThirdWizard]

A wizard who picked it randomly for the day not knowing what he was going to run into is one story; a sorcerer who picked the spell as their only known one thinking it worked on elementals, outsiders, and other various creatures is another.

Obviously, the importance of the ruling is going to vary greatly from situation to situation.

 

[Trainz]

Exactly my point.

How do you (the DM) know? You might not.

Well, they didn't prepare the spell with an elemental encounter in mind, they had no way of knowing it was coming. They prepared it as a generic attack spell.

When they cast it, it just felt wrong that a fire elem could be harmed by it. I made a ruling, giving the option to the player to change his mind, but he went ahead and did it anyways (they were facing 4 elems, one of each type, elemental monoliths actually). They did reg dmg on the earth and air one, and REALLY hurt the water one.

Isn't the fact that the spell does more damage on water elems a good indicator that it shouldn't harm the fire elem ?

 

[Nail]

You're calling common sense "nonsense"?

Common sense is based on real world experience.

Where in your real world expereince have you encountered a fire elemental?



Moreover, in the real world, fire does have "moisture" within it. Combustion (of hydrocarbons) always produces carbon dioxide and water (given excess reactants). Just ask my Intro. Chem. students.

I have given you substantial facts as to why Horrid Wilting wouldn't work on a Fire Elemental. You've given nothing to back up your ruling except assumptions that a Fire Elemental "might" have another element to it that consists of moisture.

Bud: there are no "facts" in this case beyond the RAW. All else is subject to DM whim and fiat. Since you've avoided RAW, you have given NO facts. Sorry.

Scion is putting forth a possible interpretation. It is no less correct than yours....except that his is based off of RAW, and yours isn't.

Who's "given nothing to back up your ruling except assumptions", again?

 

[Nail]

Obviously, the importance of the ruling is going to vary greatly from situation to situation.

Obviously.

 

[Nail]

Isn't the fact that the spell does more damage on water elems a good indicator that it shouldn't harm the fire elem ?

<shrug> Not really. Energy Drain doesn't give UD extra HD either. There are lots of issues like these...and the key is: There are satisfactory ways of explaining these apparent inconsistancies.

House rules are (practically always) simply a matter of taste, not necessity. As such, they shouldn't be introduced mid-game-session. (As always, YMMV.)

 

[Voadam]

for reference

Horrid Wilting
Necromancy
Level: Sor/Wiz 8, Water 8
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Targets: Living creatures, no two of which can be more than 60 ft. apart
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude half
Spell Resistance: Yes
This spell evaporates moisture from the body of each subject living creature, dealing 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 20d6). This spell is especially devastating to water elementals and plant creatures, which instead take 1d8 points of damage per caster level (maximum 20d8).
Arcane Material Component: A bit of sponge.

 

[Voadam]

Moreover, in the real world, fire does have "moisture" within it. Combustion (of hydrocarbons) always produces carbon dioxide and water (given excess reactants). Just ask my Intro. Chem. students.

So if the fire source is impure there will be moisture from excess reactants. But if there are no excess reactants such as from pure elemental fire?

 

[Trainz]

Thanks for the quote Voadam.

This spell evaporates moisture from the body of each subject living creature

Hah. See ? Evaporates moisture from the body of living creatures. If there's no moisture in the living creature's body, there is nothing to evaporate.

That's not house ruling, that's reading the text and applying it.

 

[Oryan77]

Where in your real world expereince have you encountered a fire elemental?

Yeah, I've never encountered a fire elemental...but I've encountered plenty of Fat Elementals. I've fought plenty of them within the last year and I'm finally down 10 lbs.

Moreover, in the real world, fire does have "moisture" within it. Combustion (of hydrocarbons) always produces carbon dioxide and water (given excess reactants). Just ask my Intro. Chem. students.

So you're saying that fire produces moisture within itself which you could then actually dehydrate the flame and it would extinguish itself? That's news to me. I always learned that the dehydration of moisture causes fire to burn even more.