Will save to extinguish fire on self?

I kinda like the idea of a concentration check or will save in circumstances like these, but I wouldn't force it.

Besides, I've lit myself on fire before; it isn't so bad as long as you put it out reasonably quickly. :p
 

log in or register to remove this ad


From the DMGp86 "Catching on Fire" and PHB113 "Alchemists' Fire", it seems that attempting to extinguish the flames is optional.

Alchemists' Fire: PHB113:
"On the round following a direct hit, the target takes an additional 1d6 points of damage. The target <B>CAN</B> take a full-round action to attempt to extinguish the flames before taking this additional damage. It takes a successful Reflex saving throw (DC15) to extinguish the flames.

I'd imagine they would have added verbage to state that a saving throw would be required to choose not to extinguish the flame.

The only ruling on this would be a house-rule I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:

Agreed. Honestly, I guess I have a phobia of fire that I've never realized before this thread. That coupled with the image of a man totally engulfed in flames running around screaming in pain when someone says "caught on fire" and I made more of it than I should and agreed with the Will save just based on fear :)

If someone has 50hitpoints, being caught on fire for 1-6 points of damage means that - maybe - a very small part of his arm is on fire, and that being the case I wouldn't have a Yeti stop attacking just because of that :)

In 2nd Edition - which I don't think had rules on catching on fire (could be wrong, my 2nd Edition memory is VERY fuzzy now) - I used to have a house rule that the fire did 1d6 points of damage on round 1, 2d6 on round 2, 3d6 on round 3, etc to simulate the spreading flames. With the abstract of hitpoints, I guess that simulation is built in (1-6 hitpoints when you have 10hp probably means you are engulfed by more fire than when you have 50hp), and that rule might make certain items and effects too powerful.

IceBear
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top