What happens when you Extend Spell on Heat Metal?

[Shadowdweller]

Ok, ok. This sentence I take back:

In truth, the spell really is NOT even particularly potent all things considered

Also, the percentage of opponents who wear metal armor is also a minor limitation (in which case, you just do not cast the spell and cast something else) compared to the limitations of Flaming Sphere. Flaming Sphere has limitations that are greater than this:

This, however, is untrue. I urge you, next time you play D&D as a PC, to count the number of opponents who wear metal armor (or otherwise come into contact with large amounts of metal). While this is, of course, very campaign-specific, I suspect you will find that a relatively small number do (then again, for a DM challenging the players the percentage of affected people will be very high). One of the main strengths of Flaming Sphere is, obviously, that it remains viable against a good many more opponents than does Heat Metal. And if you want to make a valid comparison, you've got to take this into account.

Meh. In any event, a specific-by-specific comparison is not really relevant to the main topic of this thread. Yes, Heat Metal is more difficult to deal with ONCE it goes off. What effect will it have in most combats? Likely not very much.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I was responding to the other interpretation in your post, not that one. (Hence the line I quoted.)

It was all part of the same interpretation. "4 warm, 4 hot, and 6 searing" didn't mean in that order; just doubling the durations of each phase would lead to a pattern of 2w, 2h, 6s, 2h, 2w. I just meant the total number of rounds in each phase. The pattern I proposed was 1w, 1h, 6s, 3h, 3w... which, you'll see, adds up to totals of 4 warm, 4 hot, and 6 searing - the line you quoted.

-Hyp.

 

[Li Shenron]

I would probably just keep the heating/cooling speed the same and double the duration.

Which means the 7 "extra" rounds in the middle all do seering damage, for a total of 22d4. That's more the double, so what? Odds are that most of the time a good portion of the damage would never apply.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

It was all part of the same interpretation.

Okay. Sorry for misinterpreting.

 

[apesamongus]

I was responding to the other interpretation in your post, not that one. (Hence the line I quoted.)

There was only one interpretation in his post.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

There was only one interpretation in his post.

Actually there were three, though two were implicitly discarded.

 

[KarinsDad]

This, however, is untrue. I urge you, next time you play D&D as a PC, to count the number of opponents who wear metal armor (or otherwise come into contact with large amounts of metal). While this is, of course, very campaign-specific, I suspect you will find that a relatively small number do (then again, for a DM challenging the players the percentage of affected people will be very high). One of the main strengths of Flaming Sphere is, obviously, that it remains viable against a good many more opponents than does Heat Metal. And if you want to make a valid comparison, you've got to take this into account.

If you expect to be fighting monsters, you typically would not take Heat Metal.

If you expect to be fighting humanoids in armor, you might.

So while Flaming Sphere can indeed be cast against more opponents, I would hope that Druids (typically) would not take Heat Metal when they do not perceive that they will use it.

Plus, Heat Metal can still be switched out by a Druid for a Summon Nature's Ally, so it's not exactly wasted, even if you do not run into armored foes. In fact, the Heat Metal / Summon Nature's Ally combination has MORE utility against more foes than Flaming Sphere.

Heat Metal is one of those spells that does have limited utility. But, that does not make my statement any less true.

"Also, the percentage of opponents who wear metal armor is also a minor limitation (in which case, you just do not cast the spell and cast something else) compared to the limitations of Flaming Sphere."

One limitation (which means you would not cast the spell or would not take the spell in the first place and hence do not lose anything) versus more than a half dozen ways to avoid or neutralize the spell. Doesn't sound like a contest to me.

Meh. In any event, a specific-by-specific comparison is not really relevant to the main topic of this thread. Yes, Heat Metal is more difficult to deal with ONCE it goes off. What effect will it have in most combats? Likely not very much.

Well, the 22D4 version would have more of an impact I suspect than the 8D4 version, especially if used against PCs and they are not aware that it is Extended.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

why would the spell heat up and then cool?

I think most of DM'ing is applying logic, and in this case I dont think the metal is going to heat up and then cool to only heat up again....although this would be funny to see the reliefof the warrior in the armor....hot hot hot ok its cooling down aaaaahhhh uuuhhnnnooo hot hot hot....I think extending it would extend the range of the spell duration so it would cause the 2d4 for the rest of the duration per round....after all an extended spell takes a more powerful spell slot to cast so why not?

Thorncrest