Starting fires.... (Stormwrack question)

[Bagpuss]

Stormwrack has a list of notes on spells for ship to ship combat, mentioning all sorts of things like how clouds effects get left behind by ships movement, etc. Part of the list is what spells start fires and which don't.

Considering how difficult it is to set clothes and hair on fire (see SRD quote below) I couldn't follow the logic in the list (some examples from memory below).

Can start fires
Flaming Sphere
Fireball
Lightning Bolt


Can't start fires
Wall of Fire
Incendiary Cloud
Fire Storm
Flame Strike

Could anyone tell me why some instantaneous magic can start fires, but other noninstantaneous magic can't?

Catching On Fire

Characters exposed to burning oil, bonfires, and noninstantaneous magic fires might find their clothes, hair, or equipment on fire. Spells with an instantaneous duration don’t normally set a character on fire, since the heat and flame from these come and go in a flash.

 

[bestone]

While i agree it doesnt make sense, i could only presume its written that way as some sort of game balancing mechanic. If you have an instant spell go off, and something catches fire, you can put it out. If you have a magical fire going, and no-one can dispel it, it would be rather hard to put out.

 

[phindar]

I can't. I would think that Fireballs would be less likely to start a fire than a Wall of Fire, which is radiating fire damage for 10' for Concentration+1 number of rounds. That means a caster could put a Wall of Fire on a ship (say, an unattended one to make this easy), and eventually sink the ship from Fire damage without ever actually setting any fires. (Granted, it would take some doing to surpass the Hardness of the ship, like putting the wall in place, sailing the ship halfway through it and leaving it there. My point isn't that its practical, only possible.)

Fire Storm states that grass, growth and underbrush are not affected if the caster doesn't wish them to be, which seems to imply that everything else would be, and that if the caster doesn't like the underbrush he can willingly fry that as well. So I'm not sure what the rationale is there. It seems odd to me that Clr/Drd spells are less likely on the whole to start fires.

Here's what I'd do: Ignore the list. Anytime there is a circumstance with a long list of spells with individual effects listed, I ignore it, because I know I'm not going to be able to grind play to halt everytime someone casts a spell that may or may not even be on it. "Are you casting Fire Seeds or Fire Storm? It matters!" Why would I even look to see if Lightning Bolt is on it, LB isn't a Fire spell...

The only thing I would use is the Fire Check table on pg 31. Rules have to be simple enough that I can remember them. Something like, No Instananeous spells start fires, other spells are DC 10+spell lvl+1 per round spent burning.

 

[Sound of Azure]

Why would I even look to see if Lightning Bolt is on it, LB isn't a Fire spell...

Lightning is one of the biggest causes of forest fires in the real world, so it makes sense that lightning spells would have a chance to start fires.

 

[Bagpuss]

I agree, but I'm of the opinion that the rules should be kept simple.

I was happy with the original SRD that you needed a non-instantaneous fire in order to set fires, that was simple, easy to remember and apply (even if it didn't always make a huge amount of sense).

Just this list changed things allowing some instantaneous fires to start fires, but others not and stop some non-instantaneous fires starting fire but allow others too. So now you need to check a list with each spell. Not easy to remember and apply, and unfortunately still not making a huge amount of sense. If it made more sense then I might be inclined to have a little bit of extra work.

 

[phindar]

You have a good point re: Lightning Bolts but reality is only so much help in a discussion of game mechanics. If there are Instantaneous Fire spells on the list that don't start fires, how does an Instant Elec spell make it? (And what about Call Lightning, which isn't mentioned?) My larger point is that any time a book tries to outline a long list of specific effects, its a bad sign. One because we're never going to be able to remember it, and two, because its inelegant. (Just reading over the list I can hear play grinding to a halt.)

The rule should be simple and easy to remember, (even if its just something like DC Damage for Fire, DC half Damage for Elec), and it should apply across the board. If Shocking Grasp does 5d6 Elec, and a Lightning Bolt does 5d6 Elec, they shouldn't have two radically different effects that require seperate adjudication. Other spells exisit and are going to be cast at ships. Unless they are going to be a line of description in every spell from now on "When cast at a boat:", they would be better off making the magic vs ship rules as concise as possible.

Further, boats are made of wood, as are many other stuctures. Now Fireballs start fires on boats, but not inside hay-filled barns (if you go by the SRD). No book will ever be able to outline what will happen in every situation, why not just give the GM some tools to deal with the unexpected, and not bog us down with unnecessary exposition.

Starting fires should be one table, one roll, and not a headache.

 

[Delta]

I'd almost suggest that they just accidentally swapped the category titles. My DMG 3.0 (p. 86) specifically mentions "wall of fire" as fire-startable, and "fireball" or "flame strike" as non-fire-startable.

 

[szilard]

Incendiary Cloud doesn't start fires?

Do they even know what "incendiary" means?

-Stuart