Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Suskeyhose" data-source="post: 9146369" data-attributes="member: 6840540">Yes, this is most certainly possible, but it's likely disadvantageous.If you use an evoke spell to add damage to your attacks, that will be using the charge object rules, which allow the weapon to trigger the spell when it touches something.Say for example you used an evoke fire 8 for 4d6 fire damage over 1 minute, distributed as 1d6 fire damage per hit (personally I'd argue that this is &quot;spread evenly&quot; to allow eeking out more damage with duration, spread but that's up to your GM).The way I would rule this is that now each weapon hit does +1d6 damage and the damage is of two types: the weapon damage type and fire. This continues till you've &quot;used up&quot; all the damage dice from the evocation spell.This means that a creature would have to be resistant to both damage types to be resistant to the damage, and being vulnerable to one of the types is sufficient to be vulnerable to the attack.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Suskeyhose, post: 9146369, member: 6840540"] Yes, this is most certainly possible, but it's likely disadvantageous. If you use an evoke spell to add damage to your attacks, that will be using the charge object rules, which allow the weapon to trigger the spell when it touches something. Say for example you used an [I]evoke fire 8[/I] for 4d6 fire damage over 1 minute, distributed as 1d6 fire damage per hit (personally I'd argue that this is "spread evenly" to allow eeking out more damage with [I]duration, spread[/I] but that's up to your GM). The way I would rule this is that now each weapon hit does +1d6 damage and the damage is of two types: the weapon damage type and fire. This continues till you've "used up" all the damage dice from the evocation spell. This means that a creature would have to be resistant to both damage types to be resistant to the damage, and being vulnerable to one of the types is sufficient to be vulnerable to the attack. [/QUOTE]

Verification