Is Quench really all that?

[LokiDR]

I think the simplest solution is that quence would work on anything with the [fire] subtype.

Besides a fire giant and a red dragon, are there any more "cold" fire sub-type creatures? Would it be so bad if the spell did damage them? Personally, I think it needs SR, but that is just me.

Sub-type fire is the easiest test for wether a creature is "fire based". Unless I hear something very compelling, I think I will rule it that way in the future.

 

[Nail]

As far as water damaging fire based creatures, you could have each gallon deliver 1d8 subdual damage versus 'fire-based' creatures if you wanted, but 'create water' and similar spells would then acquire pretty hefty side effects.

Taking this thread off on a tangent:.......

This is only one way to think of it, given the water/fire dichotomy. But given the core rules, there ain't no such thing. Moreover, it doesn't have to be that way.

Let's try another route of logic:

• Fire element touches something, that something gets hot.
• Things "get hot" in different ways.
• Fire elemental touches wood, it burns.
• Fire elemental touches metal, it melts.
• Fire elemental touches water, it turns into steam.

Water need not "put out" a fire (and thus damage a fire elemental), any more than a bucket of gold coins would.

Gold coins don't quench fires on your world, do they?

 

[Wippit Guud]

Which of these 3 statements is true:

Water puts out fire.
Fire melts sand.
Sand blocks water.

Or

Fire vapoprizes water.
Sand extingushes fire.
Water erosed sand.


Since both are true, judging a fire-type shouldn't be as simple as decided if water 'puts it out', since sand can affect water just as easily. (and fire can put out water, as it were)

 

[Hypersmurf]

Which of these 3 statements is true:

A Xanth fan?

-Hyp.

 

[Wippit Guud]

Wow... someone actually remembers the except from a Xanth novel. Scary.


(on a related note, we need d20 Xanth. That would be equally scary)

 

[Hypersmurf]

(on a related note, we need d20 Xanth. That would be equally scary)

I once made a start on Xanth for 1E. Didn't get very far.

It didn't lend itself very well to the AD&D mechanic. d20 might work better.

-Hyp.

 

[Steverooo]

Quench

The problem with Quench is that it is an updated relic of 1e...

In 1e, Quench was the reversed form of Produce Fire, a fourth level Druid spell that didn't make it to 3e (no, not Produce Flame, Produce Fire). Apparently, it was replaced by lowering the fifth level Cleric spell Flame Strike to fourth level, and making it Druidic, as well.

In its original version, Quench did no damage to Fire Elementals, and didn't allow "Magic Resistance" (the 1e version of SR). Since Flame Strike, the current reversal-replacement of Quench allows SR, however, I would allow it for Quench, when usede against a creature or object, as well. YMMV.

 

[bret]

How would this work: any creature whose natural weapon attacks cause fire damage is subject to the spell's damaging aspects? This would catch fire elementals, thoqquas, magmin, fire mephits, etc., but not red dragons, fire giants, and so on. Would this be a good rule of thumb for who's affected by it?

Daniel

Remoraz cause fire damage but are not fire creatures.

Under the swallow whole attack, you find that:
"Once inside, the opponent takes 2d8+12 points of crushing damage plus 10d10 points of fire damage per round from the creature?s blazing gut."

Their Heat special quality is an Ex ability that also causes fire damage.

Best to go with Fire subtype. Otherwise you risk including other creatures that probably should not be affected by the spell.

 

[Celebrim]

"Gold coins don't quench fires on your world, do they?"

No, they don't, because gold is formed from ball like clusters of energized and illumined earth element. Fire element introduced to gold lubricates it and causes it to soften, restores its energy (fire is the most likely of the four elements to resist the downward pull of the cascade), and drives off earth elemental structures that are more opposed to fire. It is the precence of this trapped fire within gold which makes gold so resistant to earth elements natural opposing element (water), and which causes it to be so malable.

Gold is an effacious element in overcoming water, or in allying with fire, but certainly couldn't drive away fire elemental particles.
This is basic alchemy that any third year student ought to know.

Water on the other hand drives away fire elemental particles (fire atoms if you would), and is itself driven back into the cascade by fire in a mutual destructive fashion with steam being a temporary byproduct. Note that an Alchemist measuring water in a closed chamber putting out a torch would find, unlike in this world, that the product was not necessarily of equal weight. Unlike this world, the exchange of particles between universes is a phenomon measureable on a macro scale. In this universe, matter and energy are not conserved. Also note that an alchemist conducting a phylgiston expertment by grinding a cannon in a tub of water would - unlike this world - find that the ammount of fire elemental particles released into the water _did_ drop over time.

The point of this being that the ability to make gunpowder and nitroglycerin in this world and otherwise do chemistry does not guarantee that you can do alchemy in my world, despite some superficial resemblances between the two. Also don't assume that experiments are going to work exactly the same.

 

[Destil]

Maze

Still, for an area based attack...I'd be tempted to allow SR. No save; just SR. Depends how you interprete the "flavor" of the spell.

As written, the spall does include Fire Giants and Red Dragons, etc. Bizarre.

From my understanding, the logic of maze is that you can build an extradimentional maze around a creature and not worry about SR, like a force cage. The minotuar immunity is the only thing that messes this up, but if you consider that it's a hold over from eariler editions then changing it so that minotuars can find their way out of a maze automaticaly in 1 round as a move-equivelent action would make it work in line with 3E.

Quench, however, just dosn't make sesne. If it were conjuration and produced water to create the effect I could see it as not allowing SR. But for a transmutation spell I don't really see how it can't. Though there's no need to add a save.