Question on Flame Blade...

[Hypersmurf]

Their seems to be little reason for the spell to mention that it is wielded like a scimitar unless you need proficiency. Since a wizard is not proficient in scimitar, that means using a feat, in which case the scimitar critical seems fine.

Given that it's a Druid-only spell, and all Druids are proficient in scimitar, it's not something that'll come up that often.

UMD and a Wand of Flame Blade, maybe?

-Hyp.

 

[James McMurray]

Yeah, you'd need proficency, but since its a druid spell and all druids are proficient in scimitars, that normally won't be an issue.

Calibn: it doesn't say its shaped like a sciitar, but if it isn't shaped like a scimitar, how could you wield it like a scimitar, and gain all of your scimitar feats?

 

[Caliban]

Yeah, you'd need proficency, but since its a druid spell and all druids are proficient in scimitars, that normally won't be an issue.

Calibn: it doesn't say its shaped like a sciitar, but if it isn't shaped like a scimitar, how could you wield it like a scimitar, and gain all of your scimitar feats?

Because the spell says you wield it like a scimitar. I think that's probably a flavor thing held over from the original spell, but I don't know for sure.

I'm just saying that the base crit range is determined by the weapon, not from how you use it, and the crit range for a spell is 20.

If the spell said that it created a scimitar made of flame there would be no doubt, but it doesn't say that. It says that you wield it like a scimitar. It then gives the flame blade a series of traits that are nothing like a scimitar.

Compare it to the Produce Flame spell. That specifically says that you throw the flame, which means that the halfling racial bonus with thrown weapons would come into effect.

 

[Sejs]

Aww man, you got your rules all over my logic!

Yeah, well you got my logic all covered in your rules!


Gentlemen, look - it doesn't expressly state how it's handled either way. Arguing back and forth on the same point is fruitless. The spell states that the beam is wielded as a scimitar, and at the same time a 3 foot beam of fire that does 1d8 base damage and requires a touch attack isn't exactly scimitar-like in its mode of operation.

Either ask for an official ruling, see if there already is one, or realize that there's enough wiggle room for either of you to be right.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The spell states that the beam is wielded as a scimitar, and at the same time a 3 foot beam of fire that does 1d8 base damage and requires a touch attack isn't exactly scimitar-like in its mode of operation.

My half-ogre Psychic Warrior doesn't understand. His scimitar does 1d8 base damage and requires a touch attack...?

-Hyp.

 

[Wippit Guud]

I wonder if you can parry or sunder with it... it makes no mention if it's solid or not...

 

[Hypersmurf]

I wonder if you can parry or sunder with it... it makes no mention if it's solid or not...

You can only Sunder with a Slashing or Bludgeoning weapon; a Flame Blade deals fire damage, not slashing damage, so I'd be inclined to say no Sundering.

-Hyp.

 

[James McMurray]

realize that there's enough wiggle room for either of you to be right.

Already done, and stated several times. People keep asking questions and I keep answering them, but I've already said several times that in the absence of any clear rule, either interpretation is equally correct.

 

[heliopolix]

I think that the "wield as a scimitar" is just a flavor hold over from 3.0. Remember, that if the 3.0 druid weilded any other weapons than druid weapons (ie a longsword instead of a scimitar), then they lost thier spells & ablities for 24 hours. Since the spell made a "weapon-like" effect (a blade of fire), I imagine druids would want to make it scimitar-shaped so as to avoid violating their oaths. As far as the crit range, I think that it can be agrued sufficiently either way, but my point of view is based on what the crits are supposed to represent: How effective the weapon was at actually dealing a wound. Curved blades tended to "bite" into flesh during a swing easier than strait blades did, and the extended crit range illustrates this. I would allow the spell to retain the 18-20 crit range, because its easy for me to imagine the druid knowing how to slice with the blade of fire the same as he does with his metal sword. By extension, same goes for the Weapon focus & improved crit feats. If the spell does retain the crit, etc., compare what the spell is doing vs. what Magic Weapon does. It increases die type (1d6 to 1d8), changes to a melee touch, and does bonus damage (but doesnt allow str to damage). It also has a much shorter duration than Magic Weapon. It bypasses DR/magic just as effectively as Mag.Wpn. Is it more powerful than Magic weapon? Yes. Its also a second lvl spell. Just my thoughts on the matter. Y(flame blade)MV

Jeff

 

[Darklone]

IIRC we already had this discussion one year ago... right? And the spell didn't really change since then.

I don't have balance issues with wielding two Flame Blades, after all you need a feat (perhaps more than one) and two spell slots and two standard actions.

And yes, I would treat it as a scimitar according to feats, crit range and fun.

Anyone having balance issues with it? In the old thread, there were a lot of calculations about this... it didn't look too bad.

Edit: One more thing: The old discussion was about a cleric with IIRC the fire domain who had the spell... so at least one dude without scimitar proficiency but the spell.