This mentality needs to die
- Thread starter WarlockLord
- Start date
Vorput
First Post
I sort of got the feeling they were supposed to do that. After all, it is a big rotating fire-shooting trap in the middle of a room with an ice-sealed door.
weem
First Post
Yea, that's what it was there for - he even mentioned something like using a source they had not considered (not the exact quote).
---edit---
"You're of a mind, based on the abilities that you have, it would probably just take somebody strong using a strength check to power the doors open, umm, or finding a way to melt them that is not readily apparent."
---/edit---
Darkfire
A flickering halo of purple light surrounds the target, making it easier to hit.
Encounter
Hit: Until the end of your next turn, all attacks against the target have combat advantage, and the target cannot benefit from invisibility or concealment.
Last edited:
Glade Riven
Adventurer
I don't think that it is as bad as it seems at first. If I remember right (I don't have the book handy), darkfire is a racial ability in 4e that outlines a creature or person, making them easier to hit. It isn't actual fire, so there is no heat, and the ability is written in a way that heavily suggests that it works only on people.
ffanxii4ever
First Post
Unless I am mistaken, the Drow's Darkfire ability is the equivalent of their Faerie Fire Spell-Like Ability from 3.5
It doesn't actually create fire
But yes, I am of the mentality that you can go ahead and try it, hell 1 creature simply equals 1 target, I mean if the door was animated and turned around and started to smack the PCs around, would he still not allow him to use the ability? Hell no, he would have said "go right ahead, use it".
So what is the difference if it isn't animated?
But all the effect that the Darkfire would have done is outline the door in flickering purplish flames; they do not actually generate heat (which is why they do not do damage to the target that they outline)
It doesn't actually create fire
But yes, I am of the mentality that you can go ahead and try it, hell 1 creature simply equals 1 target, I mean if the door was animated and turned around and started to smack the PCs around, would he still not allow him to use the ability? Hell no, he would have said "go right ahead, use it".
So what is the difference if it isn't animated?
But all the effect that the Darkfire would have done is outline the door in flickering purplish flames; they do not actually generate heat (which is why they do not do damage to the target that they outline)
Somebody asked for it, so here it is:
Darkfire
A flickering halo of purple light surrounds the target, making it easier to hit.
Encounter
Minor Action Ranged 10
Target: One creature
Attack: Intelligence +4 vs. Reflex, Wisdom +4 vs. Reflex, or Charisma +4 vs. Reflex
Increase to +6 bonus at 11th level and +8 bonus at 21st level.
Hit: Until the end of your next turn, all attacks against the target have combat advantage, and the target cannot benefit from invisibility or concealment.
Special: When you create your character, choose Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma as the ability score you use when making attack rolls with this power. This choice remains throughout your character’s life and does not change the power’s other effects.
It's important, I think, to note the flavor text in particular. This is a power that makes purplish light... not necessarily fire. So, as a DM, I might balk at this too.
Of course, his 'it only targets creatures' justification is an incredibly lame one, because all powers ever target only creatures. If he were to stand by that ruling, then you could never use any power on anything that wasn't a 'creature', an 'enemy' or an 'ally', the three terms that define targets in 95% of all the game's powers (very rarely, some specifically target objects). That obviously doesn't make any sense... I imagine hilarious scenes in which players try depserately to convince the DM that, no, that sealed chest really is an enemy! It's getting in our way, therefore it's an antagonist, therefore it's an enemy!
What I think is really going on here: the DM sees that the power can't do what the player wants it do. He needs to convince the player of that. Maybe he knows the player is a very literal-minded person. To him, a power that says "Darkfire" should make fire, period. So he needs an overly-literal argument to counter-act that.
Still, I don't think this was a good call, and I don't think this is the way most 4e games are played. What I would've done is say: "Sure, but Darkfire doesn't usually make actual flame. You'd need a successful Arcana check to modify your spell."
The player then rolls Arcana. Since I know he's playing a Drow Ranger, he's very likely to have crappy Arcana, so this is pretty darn likely to fall. Therefore, the DM has the benefit of saying "Yes" and letting his players get creative with their abilities, even when he is for all intents and purposes really saying "No." That's how I'd of handled it, personally. Not saying that's the best solution.
Darkfire
A flickering halo of purple light surrounds the target, making it easier to hit.
Encounter
Minor Action Ranged 10
Target: One creature
Attack: Intelligence +4 vs. Reflex, Wisdom +4 vs. Reflex, or Charisma +4 vs. Reflex
Increase to +6 bonus at 11th level and +8 bonus at 21st level.
Hit: Until the end of your next turn, all attacks against the target have combat advantage, and the target cannot benefit from invisibility or concealment.
Special: When you create your character, choose Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma as the ability score you use when making attack rolls with this power. This choice remains throughout your character’s life and does not change the power’s other effects.
It's important, I think, to note the flavor text in particular. This is a power that makes purplish light... not necessarily fire. So, as a DM, I might balk at this too.
Of course, his 'it only targets creatures' justification is an incredibly lame one, because all powers ever target only creatures. If he were to stand by that ruling, then you could never use any power on anything that wasn't a 'creature', an 'enemy' or an 'ally', the three terms that define targets in 95% of all the game's powers (very rarely, some specifically target objects). That obviously doesn't make any sense... I imagine hilarious scenes in which players try depserately to convince the DM that, no, that sealed chest really is an enemy! It's getting in our way, therefore it's an antagonist, therefore it's an enemy!
What I think is really going on here: the DM sees that the power can't do what the player wants it do. He needs to convince the player of that. Maybe he knows the player is a very literal-minded person. To him, a power that says "Darkfire" should make fire, period. So he needs an overly-literal argument to counter-act that.
Still, I don't think this was a good call, and I don't think this is the way most 4e games are played. What I would've done is say: "Sure, but Darkfire doesn't usually make actual flame. You'd need a successful Arcana check to modify your spell."
The player then rolls Arcana. Since I know he's playing a Drow Ranger, he's very likely to have crappy Arcana, so this is pretty darn likely to fall. Therefore, the DM has the benefit of saying "Yes" and letting his players get creative with their abilities, even when he is for all intents and purposes really saying "No." That's how I'd of handled it, personally. Not saying that's the best solution.
Last edited:
nedjer
Adventurer
WTF? Did I just watch someone spend about a month not opening a door. Wasn't even an interesting door. I assume the guy who left the table popped out to hang himself.
Was playing rules light with a kid last night. In almost the same amount of time as that video she knocked out a couple of goblins, then wounded, healed and befriended a timber wolf, duelled with a goblin shaman, interrogated another goblin who told her to drink from a fountain. Didn't drink from the poisoned fountain but evaporated some of the water to form a blade venom and . . .
Was playing rules light with a kid last night. In almost the same amount of time as that video she knocked out a couple of goblins, then wounded, healed and befriended a timber wolf, duelled with a goblin shaman, interrogated another goblin who told her to drink from a fountain. Didn't drink from the poisoned fountain but evaporated some of the water to form a blade venom and . . .
Piratecat
Sesquipedalian
That sounds GREAT!
