[3.5e, Spell] BURN EVERYTHING!

[Morcleon]

Fire damage needs some love. Also, who wouldn't want to be able to kill a fire elemental with fire? :smallcool:

Aura of Inherent Combustibility
Transmutation [Fire]
Level: Sorc/Wiz 5, Warmage 5, Wu Jen 5
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal
Area: 60-ft.-radius emanation centered on you
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: Yes; see text.

A faint, almost imperceptible red light bathes the area around you finish casting this spell. The temperature seems to rise a tiny bit and everything feels slightly warmer to the touch...

Everything within the spell's radius becomes flammable. Everything. This includes things such as water, metal and any tangible objects normally nonflammable. All creatures and objects within the area have any fire resistance and/or immunity from any source suppressed and gain vulnerability to fire. Objects within the area take full damage from fire, although hardness does still apply. The caster is immune to these effects.

A creature with the fire subtype may apply their spell resistance to this effect.

However, you may not use this spell to burn abstract concepts or game mechanics. Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.

Material Components: A dry piece of wood or similarly flammable object.

[vasharanpaladin]

Fire damage needs some love. Also, who wouldn't want to be able to kill a fire elemental with fire? :smallcool:

Searing Spell exists! :smalltongue:



Everything within the spell's radius becomes flammable. Everything. This includes water, metal, everything. Even plotanium.

[...]

You may not use this spell to burn abstract concepts or game constructs.


DOES NOT COMPUTE.

[Morcleon]

Searing Spell exists! :smalltongue:

Quiet, you. :smalltongue:


DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Abstract concepts and game constructs mechanics are not "things" in the sense of a D&D world. Changed around wording slightly to reflect this.

[vasharanpaladin]

Abstract concepts and game constructs mechanics are not "things" in the sense of a D&D world. Changed around wording slightly to reflect this.

Alright, fine, in that case I demand an upgraded version that will allow me to burn things that don't exist. :smallwink:

[Morcleon]

Alright, fine, in that case I demand an upgraded version that will allow me to burn things that don't exist. :smallwink:

Hm... I might add in a spell called "Aura of Abstract Combustibility" later... it'll definitely be 9th though. :smalltongue:

[TuggyNE]

Hm... I might add in a spell called "Aura of Abstract Combustibility" later... it'll definitely be 9th though. :smalltongue:

Nah, should be an epic spell. It's how all of the good ones work anyway.

[Morcleon]

Nah, should be an epic spell. It's how all of the good ones work anyway.

True, true. Would need lots of ad hoc modifiers though. :smalltongue:

What think you on this spell though? :smallsmile:

[Dark Elf Bard]

I ****ing love it. 9th or higher level would be good.

Will it make the AIR flammable? :smalleek: :eek:

[Morcleon]

I ****ing love it. 9th or higher level would be good.

Will it make the AIR flammable? :smalleek: :eek:

The current version or the planned one that lets you burn abstract concepts? :smallconfused:

I was originally going to say yes, but then I realized that doing so would make the spell just be "use fire, have raging inferno of 60' radius". So no, air does not count per se. I should add something to this effect...

EDIT: Although technically air is flammable already. Fire consumes oxygen, yes? :smalltongue:

[TuggyNE]

EDIT: Although technically air is flammable already. Fire consumes oxygen, yes? :smalltongue:

Only in the loose sense; fire is a type of rapid oxidation, and oxygen itself cannot generally be oxidized. You can't, for example, take gaseous O2 and burn it with itself to release heat; it already is as burned as it will get.

[Snowbluff]

The spell is potentially useful because you can burn something hard, and it will not go out as long as it is flammable. 5th level is kind of high for a torch, however.

[Just to Browse]

This spell is interesting.

First off, macguffins are no longer safe. If somebody is trying to transport a magic item, interceptors just need one suicide bomber with this cast, and then a lot of fireballs. I find that a toxic to gameplay, since it really doesn't seem like there's any way to avoid it. Perhaps exempt covered objects and artifacts.

Secondly, your allies hate you, because the terrible and unyielding FIRE OF DEATH does not exclude them. That has its benefits and detriments.

Thirdly, this plus fireballing yourself is a great death throe.

Fourth, I really like the tactical aspect. Fireball becomes a useful tactic, but it can't be used as a sniper weapon since you need to have your enemies in the aura. Of course, being within a 60' range means you're in charging/stabbing distance. It's an interesting tactic--I would be willing to play a sandbagged fire evoker with this spell.

My biggest qualms is that this spell is level 5. It's definitely appropriate to its level, because it has such amazing utility (BURN EVERYTHING), but I'd like to see a lower-level one usable for creatures, or a single-target version that lets you play the way you would with solarbeam in pokemon (sunny day -> SOLARBEAM -> SOLARBEAM -> SOLARBEAM)

[Snowbluff]

This spell is interesting.

First off, macguffins are no longer safe. If somebody is trying to transport a magic item, interceptors just need one suicide bomber with this cast, and then a lot of fireballs. I find that a toxic to gameplay, since it really doesn't seem like there's any way to avoid it. Perhaps exempt covered objects and artifacts. Did you read the spell? Hardness still applies. The object would be on fire, but not taking damage.


Secondly, your allies hate you, because the terrible and unyielding FIRE OF DEATH does not exclude them. That has its benefits and detriments.

Thirdly, this plus fireballing yourself is a great death throe.
It would only add the 1d6 damage of being on fire.

[Lateral]

Hm... I might add in a spell called "Aura of Abstract Combustibility" later... it'll definitely be 9th though. :smalltongue:

See, that just makes breaking your DM's game a little more direct. Rather than destroying his railroads and annihilating his campaign setting, you just cast this spell, reach over, and set his campaign notes on fire. :smalltongue:

[Morcleon]

The spell is potentially useful because you can burn something hard, and it will not go out as long as it is flammable. 5th level is kind of high for a torch, however.

Also lets you hurt everything with fire damage. :smallbiggrin:


This spell is interesting.

First off, macguffins are no longer safe. If somebody is trying to transport a magic item, interceptors just need one suicide bomber with this cast, and then a lot of fireballs. I find that a toxic to gameplay, since it really doesn't seem like there's any way to avoid it. Perhaps exempt covered objects and artifacts.

Covered objects are already exempt due to line of effect rules. If an artifact doesn't have enough hardness to resist fire, it doesn't deserve to survive. Besides, you can't use AoE to hit worn items, and targeting worn items is rather difficult.


Secondly, your allies hate you, because the terrible and unyielding FIRE OF DEATH does not exclude them. That has its benefits and detriments.

Hm... wait, what fire of death? Unless you specifically set your allies on fire, they won't be on fire.


Thirdly, this plus fireballing yourself is a great death throe.

You're immune to the effect. :smalltongue:


My biggest qualms is that this spell is level 5. It's definitely appropriate to its level, because it has such amazing utility (BURN EVERYTHING), but I'd like to see a lower-level one usable for creatures, or a single-target version that lets you play the way you would with solarbeam in pokemon (sunny day -> SOLARBEAM -> SOLARBEAM -> SOLARBEAM)

Possibly... :smallamused:


See, that just makes breaking your DM's game a little more direct. Rather than destroying his railroads and annihilating his campaign setting, you just cast this spell, reach over, and set his campaign notes on fire. :smalltongue:

The higher level version of this spell still won't let you burn game mechanics. :smallwink:

[Yitzi]

So when you need to destroy the Super-dangerous Major Artifact of Doom, you don't have to go on a campaign deep into enemy territory to the one place where it can be destroyed...you just need a single 5th-level spell and a tindertwig?

[Morcleon]

So when you need to destroy the Super-dangerous Major Artifact of Doom, you don't have to go on a campaign deep into enemy territory to the one place where it can be destroyed...you just need a single 5th-level spell and a tindertwig?

Whoops. I was going to put in a "excepting artifacts and deities" line in there earlier. :smalltongue:

[TuggyNE]

So when you need to destroy the Super-dangerous Major Artifact of Doom, you don't have to go on a campaign deep into enemy territory to the one place where it can be destroyed...you just need a single 5th-level spell and a tindertwig?

In all fairness, teleport is a fifth-level spell too. :smalltongue:

Also, as noted, hardness does still apply, though most artifacts don't seem to have unique hardness figures.

[Morcleon]

In all fairness, teleport is a fifth-level spell too. :smalltongue:

Also, as noted, hardness does still apply, though most artifacts don't seem to have unique hardness figures.

Some artifacts have a specific material they are made of. Some are books, and thus technically default to paper. "Oh, whoops, I accidentally dropped the Codex of the Infinite Planes into the lake... >.>" :smalltongue:

[Lateral]

The higher level version of this spell still won't let you burn game mechanics. :smallwink:

:smallfrown:

[Morcleon]

:smallfrown:

*pat pat* You could always just bring a lighter. :smalltongue:

Disclaimer: I do not support or condone arson. At all. >.>

[Lateral]

*pat pat* You could always just bring a lighter. :smalltongue:

Disclaimer: I do not support or condone arson. At all. >.>
That's pretty much what I meant. And arson would not be out of character at all, anyway.

[Yitzi]

In all fairness, teleport is a fifth-level spell too. :smalltongue:

And if you try to teleport into a place with enough magical energy to destroy a major artifact, you deserve what happens. :smalltongue::smalltongue:

[SolarEdge]

this could be cheesed so hard, with the elemental substitution metamagic

Edit but it gets worse, if a party has two spellcasters under this effect who also have the explosive spell metamagic can bump an enemy between them
without worry because its knocked prone too.
so a pair of wizard rogue evocation fire specialists find some fire giants immune to fire sure but that dosnt matter they are hasted make tumble rolls succeed. so they are now flanking fire giant now the cheese begins ass the first fireball (quickened) and a second (explosive) bypass his resistance doing huge damage knocking him prone and away triggering an attack of opportunity from the other cheese monkey. rinse repeat

[TuggyNE]

And if you try to teleport into a place with enough magical energy to destroy a major artifact, you deserve what happens. :smalltongue::smalltongue:

What does happen? Inquiring minds want to know!

[Yitzi]

What does happen? Inquiring minds want to know!

The PHB says "Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible. " It's up to the DM what exactly that means.

[Just to Browse]

Covered objects are already exempt due to line of effect rules. If an artifact doesn't have enough hardness to resist fire, it doesn't deserve to survive. Besides, you can't use AoE to hit worn items, and targeting worn items is rather difficult.So... no artifacts deserve to survive? Seriously, the sword of kas with +10 total enhancement only has a hardness of 20 (equivalent of ER20) and 110 hit points. That can easily be done at level 9 by a party of four.

And considering the items in this case are artifacts, they will most likely be in use. So again I request.


Hm... wait, what fire of death? Unless you specifically set your allies on fire, they won't be on fire.The AoE in 60' emanation on you. So you need to be in the middle of the fight, and you need to cast fire spells near you. The good fire spells, other than orb, are AoE, so your allies will be like wtf mate.


You're immune to the effect. :smalltongue:Why would I waste precious character resources on something like immunity to fire if I want to kill things? That detracts from my character resources spent on killing things.

[STRANGE]

Really like this spell, it has a lot of uses. Gonna use it in my campaign! :smallbiggrin:

[Yitzi]

The AoE in 60' emanation on you. So you need to be in the middle of the fight, and you need to cast fire spells near you. The good fire spells, other than orb, are AoE, so your allies will be like wtf mate.

Or maybe your allies can use old-fashioned torches and fire arrows to set the enemy on fire.


Why would I waste precious character resources on something like immunity to fire if I want to kill things? That detracts from my character resources spent on killing things.

Because D&D isn't about killing things. D&D is about achieving the goals of the adventure (whatever those might be), often by killing things before they can kill you. If it takes you twice as long to kill the enemy, but can last three times as long against it (and the same is true of the rest of your party), that's a net advantage.

[jedipotter]

I like this spell, but:

Why is this spell an evocation? You are altering and changing the physical properties of things. That is transmutation.

Why personal emanation? So a caster can set fire to things that are next to him? I think this would be better as a area effect spell. And having a caster walking around all the time with this spell active would be too much.

The spell has no save and no spell resistance? Um, why not? If it effects creatures, they should get both.

Does this spell effect magic? Like spells? Does this spell alter the way spells work, changing fire protection into fire vulnerability? And magic items too?

[Debihuman]

Plotanium? That's a new one to me.

Debby

[Morcleon]

I just got back from a trip, and I'm updating from my iPod, so it is very conceivable that I could have forgotten something. If I did miss your post, just point it out to me. :smallredface.


this could be cheesed so hard, with the elemental substitution metamagic

Edit but it gets worse, if a party has two spellcasters under this effect who also have the explosive spell metamagic can bump an enemy between them
without worry because its knocked prone too.
so a pair of wizard rogue evocation fire specialists find some fire giants immune to fire sure but that dosnt matter they are hasted make tumble rolls succeed. so they are now flanking fire giant now the cheese begins ass the first fireball (quickened) and a second (explosive) bypass his resistance doing huge damage knocking him prone and away triggering an attack of opportunity from the other cheese monkey. rinse repeat

An Energy Substituted AoIC actually doesn't really do anything. Using Energy Substitution on other spells to turn them into fire spells & damage really doesn't let you do much other that have different shapes and styles of blasting.

The second example... both wouldn't work and isn't remotely close to cheese. Firstly, explosive spell would either knock the giant out of flanking range (which is just in melee, where both the flanker and the provider must be), so sneak attack wouldn't work.

Secondly, this could be accomplished in the exact same fashion using [Cold] spells. Since, y'know, natural immunity to fire gives vulnerability to cold. Also, using cold spells saves a 5th level spell slot. :smallwink:


So... no artifacts deserve to survive? Seriously, the sword of kas with +10 total enhancement only has a hardness of 20 (equivalent of ER20) and 110 hit points. That can easily be done at level 9 by a party of four.

And considering the items in this case are artifacts, they will most likely be in use. So again I request.

Already changed. :smalltongue:


The AoE in 60' emanation on you. So you need to be in the middle of the fight, and you need to cast fire spells near you. The good fire spells, other than orb, are AoE, so your allies will be like wtf mate.

Wait, there are good blasting spells beside the orb line? :smalltongue:

Also, wouldn't they object to you hitting them with AoE spells even without this spell? :smallconfused::smalltongue:


I like this spell, but:

Why is this spell an evocation? You are altering and changing the physical properties of things. That is transmutation.

While that may be the trend for most transmutation spells, I'm following the even more common trend set by making mage armor a conjuration. :smalltongue:

In all seriousness though, it just seems more evocation-y than transmutation-y. Which I'll bet is exactly the same reason WotC put mage armor in conjuration. :smallbiggrin:


Why personal emanation? So a caster can set fire to things that are next to him? I think this would be better as a area effect spell. And having a caster walking around all the time with this spell active would be too much.

Because it's the Aura of Inherent Combustion, not the Immovable Ward of Inherent Combustion.

Also, it's a 1 min/CL spell. Unless you're dealing with Persist shenanigans (which transcends this spell entirely), you won't have it on all the time.


The spell has no save and no spell resistance? Um, why not? If it effects creatures, they should get both.

I might make it SR: Yes, but there's still not going to have a save. Reason being, it does no damage on its own. It requires casting another spell (which likely is both Reflex half and SR: Yes) to do any appreciable damage.


Does this spell effect magic? Like spells? Does this spell alter the way spells work, changing fire protection into fire vulnerability? And magic items too?

This does not actually change the spells/items themselves, it just temporarily suborns the listed effects of them.

If you're talking about burning spells, most don't have physical manifestations to burn. Those that do are either already objects (like wall of iron) or don't have HP (like wall of force, which you technically can burn, it just won't do anything).


Plotanium? That's a new one to me.

Debby

Refers to any DM fiat material without even a hint of mechanical basis.

It's more because I don't like DMs just being like "what? oh, you can't burn these walls even with that spell because it's made of a super special material." If they don't want their walls burnt/destroyed in general, they should make it out of a stronger material. :smallwink:

[Just to Browse]

Or maybe your allies can use old-fashioned torches and fire arrows to set the enemy on fire.Ahahaha... aaaahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA TORCHES... and... and fire... ARROWS?

AHAHAHAHAHA AT LEVEL 10 AHAHAHAHAHA


Because D&D isn't about killing things. D&D is about achieving the goals of the adventure (whatever those might be), often by killing things before they can kill you. If it takes you twice as long to kill the enemy, but can last three times as long against it (and the same is true of the rest of your party), that's a net advantage.Right, but that's not how D&D works. Fire resistance and immunity is a precious thing. I would rather cast a buff spell that makes my fighter stronger, or invisibility so I don't get stabbed for being a high priority target.But this is a moot point.

[Yitzi]

Ahahaha... aaaahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA TORCHES... and... and fire... ARROWS?

AHAHAHAHAHA AT LEVEL 10 AHAHAHAHAHA

Do you have an actual argument to make? The advantage of this spell is that it does turn mundane sources of fire into a deadly force. Laugh all you want, that's what this spell does.


Right, but that's not how D&D works.

D&D works however the DM and players want it to work. And if they want to use tactics and adventures where fire immunity is more valuable than haste, then it's worth getting fire immunity instead of haste.

[Lateral]

Do you have an actual argument to make? The advantage of this spell is that it does turn mundane sources of fire into a deadly force. Laugh all you want, that's what this spell does.

I think he's just laughing at the image. After all, usually by 10th level, setting people on fire is so useless that no one does it.

...However, even with this spell, there's really no reason to. Catching on fire is only 1d6 damage per round, the save DC is only 15, and you get to try again *every round*. Really, the best way to use this would be to pierce fire immunity or to destroy things, but setting people on fire isn't really practical past really low levels.

[Dungeon_Master]

Fire damage needs some love. Also, who wouldn't want to be able to kill a fire elemental with fire? :smallcool:

Aura of Inherent Combustibility
Evocation [Fire]
Level: Sorc/Wiz 5, Warmage 5, Wu Jen 5
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal
Area: 60-ft.-radius emanation centered on you
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

A faint, almost imperceptible red light bathes the area around you finish casting this spell. The temperature seems to rise a tiny bit and everything feels slightly warmer to the touch...

Everything within the spell's radius becomes flammable. Everything. This includes things such as water, metal and any tangible objects normally nonflammable. Even plotanium. All creatures and objects within the area lose any fire resistance and/or immunity from any source and gain vulnerability to fire. Objects take full damage from fire, although hardness does still apply. The caster is immune to these effects.

However, you may not use this spell to burn abstract concepts or game mechanics. Artifacts and deities are unaffected by mortal magic such as this.

Material Components: A dry piece of wood or similarly flammable object.

seems a bit off. first of all it clearly is transmutation (subverting existing qualities with the flammable quality).
might be best to re-write the wording to be "All objects/creatures/ (except the caster) become flammable. All [Fire] Designator spells cast within the area, or affecting any creature or object within the Effect of this spell become augmented by the searing spell metamagic feat. Additionally all Fire Immunity, Heat Immunity abilities of all creatures/objects become suppressed within the area of Effect. Creatures or Objects with the [Fire] Subtype (Only) can use their spell resistance, but do not gain a save. If a Creature Is unaffected by resisting from Spell Resistance, so too are all of its tended objects.


also the duration should likely be reduced to 1 round/Level
Saving Throw entry should be No(Object, Harmless)See Text
Spell Resistance entry should be Yes, See Text

just my thoughts on your spell to clarify things to make it more rules-legal

[Morcleon]

seems a bit off. first of all it clearly is transmutation (subverting existing qualities with the flammable quality).
might be best to re-write the wording to be "All objects/creatures/ (except the caster) become flammable. All [Fire] Designator spells cast within the area, or affecting any creature or object within the Effect of this spell become augmented by the searing spell metamagic feat. Additionally all Fire Immunity, Heat Immunity abilities of all creatures/objects become suppressed within the area of Effect. Creatures or Objects with the [Fire] Subtype (Only) can use their spell resistance, but do not gain a save. If a Creature Is unaffected by resisting from Spell Resistance, so too are all of its tended objects.


also the duration should likely be reduced to 1 round/Level
Saving Throw entry should be No(Object, Harmless)See Text
Spell Resistance entry should be Yes, See Text

just my thoughts on your spell to clarify things to make it more rules-legal

Yeah, transmutation probably should be there.

Searing Spell doesn't accomplish the effect I want, which is that everything is flammable, not that fire spells are made more powerful.

[Fire] subtype creatures being better protected also doesn't fit the concept, which again is that everything is flammable, including creatures like fire elementals.

1 min/CL duration is there so it can actually be used as a utility out of encounters.

There really isn't a need to put (Object, Harmless) after the saving throw entry, as it's already "no".

SR is a definite no, as pretty much all fire spells (except the orbs) allow SR already, and needing two SR checks makes things needlessly difficult.

[Dungeon_Master]

Yeah, transmutation probably should be there.

Searing Spell doesn't accomplish the effect I want, which is that everything is flammable, not that fire spells are made more powerful.

[Fire] subtype creatures being better protected also doesn't fit the concept, which again is that everything is flammable, including creatures like fire elementals.

1 min/CL duration is there so it can actually be used as a utility out of encounters.

There really isn't a need to put (Object, Harmless) after the saving throw entry, as it's already "no".

SR is a definite no, as pretty much all fire spells (except the orbs) allow SR already, and needing two SR checks makes things needlessly difficult.

without having the object or harmless descriptor your spell will not affect objects at all.
searing spell does exactly what you intend to accomplish, by allowing fire to damage fire immune/ resistant creatures. as your spell is written objects and fire subtype creatures would ignore its effects. regardless of the fluff intent in your text. and transmutation effect without SR or a save is such utter nonsense. putting it exactly as I wrote it only allows SR to fire subtype creatures. you at least have to make some concession. SR is not checked twice, once and only for a fire subtype creatures, others would be affected.
you midaswell make it an illusion spell for as effective as it is without the effects mentioned as I described.
you might even add the text " all creatures and objects are at risk of catching on fire within the aura"
PS go actually read searing spell metamagic feat from sandstorm. it allows fire to burn fire immune creatures.
you would need no special magic to set a flammable creature on fire such as a creature with the fire subtype. they are by their nature flammable and often described as being on fire, with no ill effects to themselves.

[TuggyNE]

without having the object or harmless descriptor your spell will not affect objects at all.

Ah, not quite. The important thing for spells is the targeting line, and after that the actual text of the spell; (object) is just to signify that the specified saving throw applies to [certain] objects, but if there's no save at all, it doesn't matter. For example, animate objects affects only objects, and has no saving throw, which means it does not have the (object) [or (harmless)] tag. Phantom trap is the same. Or consider acid fog, which also has no saving throw, and affects not only objects, but creatures; it, too, lacks (object).

[Dungeon_Master]

Ah, not quite. The important thing for spells is the targeting line, and after that the actual text of the spell; (object) is just to signify that the specified saving throw applies to [certain] objects, but if there's no save at all, it doesn't matter. For example, animate objects affects only objects, and has no saving throw, which means it does not have the (object) [or (harmless)] tag. Phantom trap is the same. Or consider acid fog, which also has no saving throw, and affects not only objects, but creatures; it, too, lacks (object).

phantom trap doesn't affect an object at all, it only affects creatures who can detect traps, by interacting with the object, the spell does not transmute nor affect the object other then an aura, to which other objects are unaffected.

animate objects has the target as being an object, thus no need for object descriptor. but also note that it cannot affect a creatures held or worn objects.

the suggested spell produces an aura, which would not affect objects unless specifically specified. thus making sure that a creatures' held or worn objects, living objects, undead, constructs and living constructs would be affected.

[Morcleon]

without having the object or harmless descriptor your spell will not affect objects at all.

Does this mean that acid arrow and scorching ray cannot be used to attack objects? Neither of them have the object or harmless tags. And the harmless tag would not fit at all, seeing as this spell most definitely is not harmless. :smallwink:


searing spell does exactly what you intend to accomplish, by allowing fire to damage fire immune/ resistant creatures. as your spell is written objects and fire subtype creatures would ignore its effects. regardless of the fluff intent in your text.

PS go actually read searing spell metamagic feat from sandstorm. it allows fire to burn fire immune creatures.
you would need no special magic to set a flammable creature on fire such as a creature with the fire subtype. they are by their nature flammable and often described as being on fire, with no ill effects to themselves.

I do know what searing spell does. I don't want it to only burn fire subtype creatures, I also want it to be able to burn normally non-burnable things like water and metal.

No, but you would need special magic to be able to damage fire subtype creatures with fire.


and transmutation effect without SR or a save is such utter nonsense. putting it exactly as I wrote it only allows SR to fire subtype creatures. you at least have to make some concession. SR is not checked twice, once and only for a fire subtype creatures, others would be affected.

SR would have to be checked twice: once for this spell, once for whatever damaging spell is cast (except for the orbs).

Anyway, I went and put in the SR for fire subtype creatures. :smalltongue:


you midaswell make it an illusion spell for as effective as it is without the effects mentioned as I described.
you might even add the text " all creatures and objects are at risk of catching on fire within the aura"

The fluff is the italicized text. The actual spell description overrides the fire subtype's fire immunity.


the suggested spell produces an aura, which would not affect objects unless specifically specified. thus making sure that a creatures' held or worn objects, living objects, undead, constructs and living constructs would be affected.

But it is specifically specified: "All creatures and objects within the area have any fire resistance and/or immunity from any source suppressed and gain vulnerability to fire."

[TuggyNE]

phantom trap doesn't affect an object at all, it only affects creatures who can detect traps, by interacting with the object, the spell does not transmute nor affect the object other then an aura, to which other objects are unaffected.

Sure it does. It's "Target: Object touched", what more do you want?


animate objects has the target as being an object, thus no need for object descriptor. but also note that it cannot affect a creatures held or worn objects.

Because it says it can't, yeah. If the spell says it does affect attended objects, it will. (Which, incidentally, suggests it should state that explicitly.)


the suggested spell produces an aura, which would not affect objects unless specifically specified. thus making sure that a creatures' held or worn objects, living objects, undead, constructs and living constructs would be affected.

Only attended objects would get a pass based on the current wording of the spell, which states "All creatures and objects". Even if it left out objects, undead and constructs would not be immune, since they are creatures, and it's not a Fort save.