Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When does Fire Shield burn you?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 280776" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>I think that you have to use common sense for spells that are unclear.</p><p></p><p>In this case, damage should not be the relevant factor. Attempting to attack should be the relevant factor.</p><p></p><p>So, if someone attacks you, and they actually touch you, they are damaged.</p><p></p><p>It should not matter if your DR or Immunity to Acid or armor portion of AC or any other protections prevent them from actually damaging you (with whatever attack they are using), merely that they attempted to attack you, touched you, and got burned in return.</p><p></p><p>"Any creature striking the character with its body or handheld weapons deals normal damage"</p><p></p><p>A literal interpretation of this can be as follows: If I hit you with a touch attack, I deal normal damage of X. If I hit you with a regular attack that would have hit your touch attack AC but fails to hit your total AC, I deal normal damage of 0. Just because the damage in this case would be zero (stopped by armor) does not invalidate the statement that you got struck.</p><p></p><p>So, you can interpret this fairly easily to mean that touch attacks are affected.</p><p></p><p>What good is a damage shield type spell that only damages if the opponent successfully damages you? This gives high hit point opponents too much of an advantage. One full round attack by a combative type character could result in death for the Wizard, but just major damage for his opponent. If though, normal attacks that still hit touch attack AC damage the opponent, then the opposite can happen. The Wizard might take no damage, but his opponent might take a lot of damage.</p><p></p><p>Also, the spell is kind of bogus in that you cannot use it offensively either. The Wizard cannot grapple an opponent and damage him with the spell.</p><p></p><p>In my campaign, I would allow that. The Wizard should be able to control the spell such that if he gets on his horse, he can prevent it from damaging the horse (which it would not do as written anyway), but if he grapples someone, he can ensure that it damages him as long as he touches him.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 280776, member: 2011"] I think that you have to use common sense for spells that are unclear. In this case, damage should not be the relevant factor. Attempting to attack should be the relevant factor. So, if someone attacks you, and they actually touch you, they are damaged. It should not matter if your DR or Immunity to Acid or armor portion of AC or any other protections prevent them from actually damaging you (with whatever attack they are using), merely that they attempted to attack you, touched you, and got burned in return. "Any creature striking the character with its body or handheld weapons deals normal damage" A literal interpretation of this can be as follows: If I hit you with a touch attack, I deal normal damage of X. If I hit you with a regular attack that would have hit your touch attack AC but fails to hit your total AC, I deal normal damage of 0. Just because the damage in this case would be zero (stopped by armor) does not invalidate the statement that you got struck. So, you can interpret this fairly easily to mean that touch attacks are affected. What good is a damage shield type spell that only damages if the opponent successfully damages you? This gives high hit point opponents too much of an advantage. One full round attack by a combative type character could result in death for the Wizard, but just major damage for his opponent. If though, normal attacks that still hit touch attack AC damage the opponent, then the opposite can happen. The Wizard might take no damage, but his opponent might take a lot of damage. Also, the spell is kind of bogus in that you cannot use it offensively either. The Wizard cannot grapple an opponent and damage him with the spell. In my campaign, I would allow that. The Wizard should be able to control the spell such that if he gets on his horse, he can prevent it from damaging the horse (which it would not do as written anyway), but if he grapples someone, he can ensure that it damages him as long as he touches him. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When does Fire Shield burn you?
Top