Troubles with Fire Shield

[uzagi_akimbo]

This came up IMC last night - what melee attacks by an opponent count when determining if fireshield kicks in and does damage to the attacker ?

A) Any attack that misses or hits the PC ?

B) Any attack that hits the PC or at least would have hit his touch AC - and thus been stopped by natural armour, armour,s hield or other bonus ?

C) Only attacks that actually hit the PC by an attack-roll (including all modifiers) of his AC or more ?

GM stuck with option C), but in a way it makes sense that anyone even touching the protected target should take damage from the flames. The PHB states "any creature striking you with its body or a handheld weapon ...., but at the same time the attacker takes 1d6 points of damge +1 per caster level."
Several of the players argued that way - so, any actual ruling on this ?

 

[Shin Okada]

I am using option (C), though there is no clear evidence for it.

The word "strike" does not have definition in the core rules. The only similar word in the glossary is "unarmed strike" which is defined as "A successful blow, typically dealing non-lethal damage, from a character attacking without weapons." There also be "unarmed attack" entry and it says "A melee attack made with no weapon in hand." So I guess "strike" may mean successful attack in many cases. But it is also true that this word is also used in many other ways in the core rulebooks.

 

[shilsen]

I use (C), just because it's easier.

 

[Iku Rex]

Another vote for (C) here. Think of it as flames bursting out from the shield in the direction of the attack when the caster takes damage.

 

[Planesdragon]

GM stuck with option C), but in a way it makes sense that anyone even touching the protected target should take damage from the flames. The PHB states "any creature striking you with its body or a handheld weapon ...., but at the same time the attacker takes 1d6 points of damge +1 per caster level."

The problem with B) is that, in D&D, you don't care about touches save for touch attacks. Unless you have a reason to check it, there's no point.

IMC I have touch-attacks that don't damage the character damage their armor; this is done partly to add in more flavor, and partly to balance out class defense bonuses.

 

[Gort]

Yeah, I've never seen this used any way except C. It's still really powerful under that ruling.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Especially if joined up with Stoneskin so you don't mind being hit quite as much

 

[Plane Sailing]

You could also include in your question

D) What happens when wizard is being grappled? Does the fire shield damage them every turn or what?

Cheers

 

[Egres]

This came up IMC last night - what melee attacks by an opponent count when determining if fireshield kicks in and does damage to the attacker ?

A) Any attack that misses or hits the PC ?

B) Any attack that hits the PC or at least would have hit his touch AC - and thus been stopped by natural armour, armour,s hield or other bonus ?

C) Only attacks that actually hit the PC by an attack-roll (including all modifiers) of his AC or more ?

GM stuck with option C), but in a way it makes sense that anyone even touching the protected target should take damage from the flames. The PHB states "any creature striking you with its body or a handheld weapon ...., but at the same time the attacker takes 1d6 points of damge +1 per caster level."
Several of the players argued that way - so, any actual ruling on this ?

IMHO the right answer is obviously "C".

The reason is simple.

From the SRD:

Fire Shield
Evocation [Fire or Cold]
Level: Fire 5, Sor/Wiz 4, Sun 4
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 round/level (D)
This spell wreathes you in flame and causes damage to each creature that attacks you in melee. The flames also protect you from either cold-based or fire-based attacks (your choice).
Any creature striking you with its body or a handheld weapon deals normal damage

 

[uzagi_akimbo]

You could also include in your question

D) What happens when wizard is being grappled? Does the fire shield damage them every turn or what?

Cheers

Well actually, it was the cleric who had it up (Retribution domain spell ) and that was the next thing that was going to happen, hehe. The PC got attacked three times but struck only once, and was feeling discontent that he was only doing 1D6+8 damage... especially as the spell has a rather short duration. But given the fact that their main tank has some nice DR (DR 3/- from adamantine heavy armour, with a further 5 points vs piercing weapons make him pretty much "arrow proof") which proves DR can be acquired and employed by the PCs in this campaign, the tactic of "hit me if you dare" seems/ed pretty feasible to me.
I for one would rule C) with continuous damage (1/round per grappler) in a grappling match....