Created Fire

[Dalin]

An orc shaman in tonight's game had the clever idea of creating a big fire to divide the party and block a passage. He was promptly killed, which the players thought would extinguish the fire. My understanding, however, is that killing casters doesn't end their spells; it only prevents them from maintaining them. So, Create Fire would still last for the remainder of its 1-minute duration. Right?

This also made us wonder about the effect of a 15-foot diameter, 12-foot high area of flame on the integrity of the dungeon. Would all that heat cause any cracking in the roof? How long might that take? This was just idle speculation on our part because we figured that one minute wouldn't be long enough to appreciably heat the rock, but could it be a plausible strategy for attempting to collapse a passageway? I mean, it's obviously plausible enough for DF, depending what the GM wants, but I just get nerdy about these things.

I suppose one could extrapolate from the existing rules for breaking through stone, though fire definitely doesn't count as a crushing or cutting attack. Three feet of stone has 468 DR (Exploits, p. 82) which at 1d-1 per turn would take 187 turns to reduce to the minimum DR 3. Then you'd be averaging .5 damage per turn (1d-4 with the DR) versus the 135 hit points, so another 270 turns to "destroy" three-feet of stone. By this flimsy logic, you might expect to start causing a partial collapse in eight minutes and might fill a ten foot high passage with rubble after maintaining the fire for 30 minutes.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Dalin

So, Create Fire would still last for the remainder of its 1-minute duration. Right?

That's how I've always ruled it.

I mean, it's obviously plausible enough for DF, depending what the GM wants, but I just get nerdy about these things.

A campfire, which is nowhere as much fire and heat as your "15-foot diameter, 12-foot high" column can cause collapses in natural caves... so yes. I'd say that much fire could collapse a dungeon ceiling.

[zuljita]

See Mage Hunter (Pyramid 3/109) to see a way to dispel ongoing spells when their caster dies. The presence of a power to do that is pretty clear that it's not automatic.

Regarding a cave in: so many other factors at play in real life like the kind of stone involved, the depth and so on. In general I'd avoid letting fire fill the void of earth spells though. You'd figure locals would know if the caves are vulnerable to such an attack since they cook food in the caves.

[Kromm]

It takes fire a long time to damage stone. What's really killer isn't fire . . . it's fire that burns down to coals for a few hours and then gets quenched with cool water. I'd generally say that Create Fire isn't in itself very useful for demolishing tunnels, but if you maintain it for 30+ minutes and then put it out with water (Create Water, for instance), the area in contact with the water (normally meaning the ground) will crack and become not much tougher than loose earth or sand.

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I'd generally say that Create Fire isn't in itself very useful for demolishing tunnels, but if you maintain it for 30+ minutes and then put it out with water (Create Water, for instance), the area in contact with the water (normally meaning the ground) will crack and become not much tougher than loose earth or sand.

Ahhh... the old disintegrate-the-floor-to-get-to-the-next-level trick!

[Dalin]

I just remembered another fire question that came up during our game. Under "Ordinary Fire" on page 68 of Exploits, it says that you take 1d-3 damage per partial turn or 1d-1 per full turn in flames. Thus, when the orc first engulfed the PCs, they had a chance to take the lesser amount of damage if they could make it to a non-flaming hex on their turn. Everyone thought this was quite elegant and believable.

Later, however, when the party was split and the fire was going to continue for another 50 combat turns, some of the PCs on one side ran through to the other. This took most of them two turns. (There were bodies strewn about the floor, so a number of hexes cost extra movement points to cross.) We weren't quite sure how to manage this. Technically, on the first turn they were outside the flame at first and then ran into it. Since it was a partial turn in the flame, that would be 1d-3. Then on the second turn, they started in the flames and then exited the flames, so that's 1d-3 again. This seemed correct by the letter of the rules, but felt a bit off since they spent most of two turns in the flames.

Did we handle that correctly?

(As I type this, the snow is coming down heavily outside my Minnesota window; a Create Fire spell seems especially appealing!)

[Black Leviathan]

Fire walls should be serious business. I'd say 1d6 matches up more with the old GURPS fire effects of moving through blazing fire. I'd give the 1d3 if you're moving through a burning building or trying to grab something out of a fire.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Dalin

Did we handle that correctly?

Yes. At least in my opinion.

Keep in mind, sometimes it's best to just go with the flow of the rules and not begin bogging it all down with "reality".

These are Big Damn Heroes, the kind of people that go into scary dark places and fight monsters. They should be able to run through a burning cavern and be (relatively) unscathed at the other side.


All that said, keep in mind the "Catching Things On Fire" rules. It's also fun to have delvers have to Stop, Drop, and Roll when their leather britches or fur cloak lights up. ;)

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Dalin

Technically, on the first turn they were outside the flame at first and then ran into it. Since it was a partial turn in the flame, that would be 1d-3. Then on the second turn, they started in the flames and then exited the flames, so that's 1d-3 again. This seemed correct by the letter of the rules, but felt a bit off since they spent most of two turns in the flames.

Did we handle that correctly?

My interpretation of that is if you both enter and leave on the same turn, you take the lower damage figure, and if you end your turn inside the flames, you take full damage for that turn. But lots of people seem to disagree with the way I interpret turns, as having functionally zero duration, with time between them that isn't part of anybody's turn.

Conversely I'd also rule if you started in the flames and immediately move *out* on your turn, you'd take no damage for that "second" turn, having spent effectively none of it in the flames, so if you have no DR it comes to much the same thing. If you *do* have DR though, well, you were exposed to a total of about 1 second of flames, but if you count it as two half seconds, you effectively get to double the amount of damage your DR soaks vs treating it as a full turn of exposure, and that's an iffy approach.

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Keep in mind, sometimes it's best to just go with the flow of the rules and not begin bogging it all down with "reality".

Yes, I agree. And during the game I try not to get bogged down by anything... if we don't know the rule by heart, we usually make something up and then figure out what we should have done afterwards.

But I do enjoy noodling over the rules and questions of "realism" between games.