PDA

View Full Version : Laser guided fireballs



TIPOT
2015-05-17, 07:51 AM
Does anybody else have a problem with how wizards can drop a fireball with overly perfect accuracy. As many groups do we use a battle grid, but this makes it relatively trivial to place spells such as fireball/grease such that it misses allies in melee combat but still hits all enemies. It kind of bugs me that it can be placed so perfectly past most of the party in the midst of combat and more to the point bugs some of the other players.

Generally this isn't that much of an issue as the spells won't kill most enemies. However, we've being playing through the Red hand of doom (which has a lot of 10+ easily kill-able mook encounters) and I'm worried that the knight is starting to feel bit irrelevant as the wizard can pretty much solo most combats.

Any suggestions on what I should do?

Orderic
2015-05-17, 08:14 AM
Have the enemies plan for area of effect spells. Don't just position them in such a way, that one fireball can hit all of them, have hitting them with a fireball actually be an extremely ineffective choice.

For example where would the wizard throw his fireball, if the group is surrounded and he has to position it in such a way, that only the edge would hit one or two? Or what if the enemies storm right into the middle of the group, causing any firebball to hit a few party members as well?

Magic is not something unknown. In fact, it is well known enough, that people WILL plan around it.

Kriton
2015-05-17, 08:27 AM
Yes, being a primary caster is a huge advantage in DnD, but I don't see how messing with the accuracy of AoE spells make the melee members of the party feel better about it, I think your wizard is being considerate of the other party members' feelings when using harmful AoEs and not including them by accident.

If the rest of the party is starting to feel irrelevant maybe you should ask him OOC to try and tone it down,(maybe prepare more irrelevant spells?) but I think he is already doing it by using fireball:P

Also you could try to add elements to the encounters that play to the other party members niches(and do it often enough that your wizard can't possibly prepare enough spells to address them all).

Strigon
2015-05-17, 08:27 AM
Also, in order to actually cast fireball, a wizard must have at least 13 int (probably more; that would be a horribly unoptimized wizard). That's roughly an IQ of 130, which is significantly above average. Given the amount of time they've probably spent learning everything about that spell before being able to cast it, and their high intelligence, it doesn't seem that odd to me that they'd be able to eyeball it in combat quite effectively.

Kalmageddon
2015-05-17, 08:32 AM
Also, in order to actually cast fireball, a wizard must have at least 13 int (probably more; that would be a horribly unoptimized wizard). That's roughly an IQ of 130,
No, no it's not.
Please.

Strigon
2015-05-17, 08:50 AM
How do you figure that, then?

Jormengand
2015-05-17, 09:37 AM
How do you figure that, then?

IQ 130 puts you at about the 97.34th percentile (http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx), which is about a 16 on 3d6 (http://www.sysabend.org/champions/rules/3D6Percentiles.html) or a 17 on 4d6b3 (Tell Anydice to "output [highest 3 of 4d6]"). That's how.

The dumbest wizard capable of fireballing has an IQ of 115, which is pretty smart but nothing special. The average grammar school kid could wreck him in an intelligence-based contest.

DigoDragon
2015-05-17, 10:01 AM
Does anybody else have a problem with how wizards can drop a fireball with overly perfect accuracy

Aiming at a specific square on the ground is a ranged attack vs. AC 5.
A 5th level wizard/sorcerer has a BAB of +2

So if you were to make them roll to hit a specific spot, they'd just need a 3+ on the die (assuming they don't have any other bonuses like Dexterity). It isn't much of a problem for them, so it doesn't change much.

Slipperychicken
2015-05-17, 11:00 AM
Does anybody else have a problem with how wizards can drop a fireball with overly perfect accuracy. As many groups do we use a battle grid, but this makes it relatively trivial to place spells such as fireball/grease such that it misses allies in melee combat but still hits all enemies. It kind of bugs me that it can be placed so perfectly past most of the party in the midst of combat and more to the point bugs some of the other players.

Generally this isn't that much of an issue as the spells won't kill most enemies. However, we've being playing through the Red hand of doom (which has a lot of 10+ easily kill-able mook encounters) and I'm worried that the knight is starting to feel bit irrelevant as the wizard can pretty much solo most combats.

Any suggestions on what I should do?

That's caster edition for 'ya. When you have well-played casters, the muggle classes are basically janitors cleaning up whatever enemy hitpoints are left after the caster wins the fight. And as you've seen, casters can outdo muggles at their own jobs if they want to. Homebrewers have been trying to improvise fixes for a decade and a half, to no avail. You could try playing another game, like 5e (which is in many ways a less-busted version of 3.5), dungeon world, fate, gurps, etc.

mephnick
2015-05-17, 11:45 AM
I started to agree, then I thought about the insane accuracy professional athletes possess when playing at full speed (hockey, soccer, basketball etc) and it doesn't seem that silly that a "professional" wizard in a fantasy world could lob a fireball exactly where he wants it in the heat of battle.

Honest Tiefling
2015-05-17, 12:16 PM
I play wizards primarily, and if a DM introduced this, I'd probably leave. Why? Because I have a limited number of resources, and now I got a good chance of derp with them. Heck, if my fireballs are inaccurate, don't I run a good chance of toasting my own side? I mean, if you want me to set the party fighter on fire constantly I guess that could be hilarious, but I really don't see how that helps with balance. If anything, I think it would be super annoying for everyone, in that the wizard cannot act tactically and everyone else is on fire. I do HP damage to my own side! The temptation to prepare nothing but fireballs would be high. And I hope the enemies would also be under such house rules as well, which...In my prediction will lead to many a serious encounter quickly becoming a gigglefest as the enemy toasts or electrocutes themselves.

And now that I think about it, it would quickly lead the wizard to abandon blasting, a sub-par strategy, and adopt summoning. Even if I miss with a summon, it can quickly recover to deal damage. Through I would wonder if the party fighter would prefer to be set on fire constantly, or have dire tigers poof into existence in their square...Even if you rule I cannot summon a monster into another creature by 'accident' there is a good chance that the Dire Tiger is no longer a flanking buddy, but could actually block movement and charges and be even more frustrating.

Overall, making the wizard unplayable doesn't seem like a great fix. If other people aren't having fun, I would discuss things with the wizard's player and maybe they could tone things down a scootch. If they don't, they get the boot because they clearly don't care about everyone else's fun. In most cases, the other players will listen and probably work out a compromise to still have their caster-y fun without rendering everyone useless. I would really not try to solve things with a house rule like this, it will just take away from the battles and any sense of tactics. Also, you get the problem of what happens when someone joins with an un-optimized caster? That will either end in tears or flames.

JAL_1138
2015-05-17, 12:55 PM
That's caster edition for 'ya. When you have well-played casters, the muggle classes are basically janitors cleaning up whatever enemy hitpoints are left after the caster wins the fight. And as you've seen, casters can outdo muggles at their own jobs if they want to. Homebrewers have been trying to improvise fixes for a decade and a half, to no avail. You could try playing another game, like 5e (which is in many ways a less-busted version of 3.5), dungeon world, fate, gurps, etc.

Or head on back to AD&D and have the enemies shoot him. Casting time can be a brutal limitation on spellcasters because any hit disrupts casting completely and the spell fizzles (spell slot is lost too as if it had been cast).

Hawkstar
2015-05-17, 01:19 PM
IQ 130 puts you at about the 97.34th percentile (http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx), which is about a 16 on 3d6 (http://www.sysabend.org/champions/rules/3D6Percentiles.html) or a 17 on 4d6b3 (Tell Anydice to "output [highest 3 of 4d6]"). That's how.

The dumbest wizard capable of fireballing has an IQ of 115, which is pretty smart but nothing special. The average grammar school kid could wreck him in an intelligence-based contest.Die roll distributions are not supposed to model real-world distributions. 3d6 is just simple to roll, and creates a nice bell-curve result, while exaggerating the extremes to create larger-than-life characters.

... also, my entire immediate family regularly tests in the 95+ percentile.


I started to agree, then I thought about the insane accuracy professional athletes possess when playing at full speed (hockey, soccer, basketball etc) and it doesn't seem that silly that a "professional" wizard in a fantasy world could lob a fireball exactly where he wants it in the heat of battle.
I have not seen this "insane accuracy" that you speak of. Watching said sports, I see far, far too many shots taken that, if aimed at a specific point, miss it, and if aimed at another player, require the receiver to adjust on their end to intercept the ball/puck.

And accuracy is more an issue of dexterity (Hand-eye coordination) than Intelligence anyway.

Jormengand
2015-05-17, 02:52 PM
Die roll distributions are not supposed to model real-world distributions. 3d6 is just simple to roll, and creates a nice bell-curve result, while exaggerating the extremes to create larger-than-life characters.

Do you have a source for this? I've seen no indication that this is the case, especially since the nonelite array is specifically based on the 3d6 roll, and the elite array is, you guessed it, specifically based on the 4d6b3 roll. The 3d6 and 4d6b3 rolls do seem to be more integrated in the game system than you think.

Hawkstar
2015-05-17, 02:59 PM
Do you have a source for this? I've seen no indication that this is the case, especially since the nonelite array is specifically based on the 3d6 roll, and the elite array is, you guessed it, specifically based on the 4d6b3 roll. The 3d6 and 4d6b3 rolls do seem to be more integrated in the game system than you think.

The elite array is explicitly for larger-than-life characters. The 3d6 roll is just getting Attribute modifiers out of average performance, with deviation from the "10.5 Average across the board".

Jormengand
2015-05-17, 03:01 PM
The elite array is explicitly for larger-than-life characters. The 3d6 roll is just getting Attribute modifiers out of average performance, with deviation from the "10.5 Average across the board".

So in fact, the answer to my question would be "No"?

Mr.Moron
2015-05-17, 03:03 PM
It is what it is. At any rate their probably isn't much to be done about making a knight feel relevant alongside a wizard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFuMpYTyRjw) in a 3.P context.

At least not without a level of houseruling usually better reserved before a game. As a stop-gap measure you could try giving a few mooks in each encounter some magic resistance, so the the other characters have something to clean up after the explosion goes off.

More generally if you find precision fireballs to be a problem you could give them drift. That is once you target fireball roll 1d10-2(Minimum 0), the center point of the fireball moves that many squares in a direction decided by a d8 roll or other methods. Or something along those lines. However it's the kind of rule that's best introduced before the player selects fireball.

You could also pull the wizard player aside and go "Hey I know this is totally cool but <tell them the problem> this is happening, can we figure out something different since I really don't have the time to re-write the whole adventure?".

veti
2015-05-17, 04:30 PM
It's rare to get a perfect fireball target. Because as noted above, the antagonists know about fireballs...

I have a collection of houserules that have evolved over decades, which mean I don't see this phenomenon the way most 3.x players do.

First, I always make casters roll to hit. If shooting into a melee, the shooting-into-melee penalty also applies. (And the way I play, this -4 is applied after rolling, so you can't fix it just by boosting your BAB. Don't like it? Take Precise Shot.) And it's a ranged weapon, so range penalties also apply - the base range increment for all spells is 80'. Visibility modifiers also apply, if it's dark or smoky or the caster is disoriented or distracted.

A fireball isn't instantaneous: it travels at a finite speed from the caster to the target. That means that even if you do manage to aim it spang-on centre, if it's in a melee, there's still a chance that someone or something will get in the way before it reaches its destination, or that various combatants will move in and out of the area of effect in between the moment you commit to targeting and the moment it arrives.

I'm also a fan of the 1e rule that a fireball in an enclosed space spreads out to fill the same volume it would've done in an open space. That introduces an element of unpredictability, because the wizard can't know the exact dimensions of the spot they're fighting in. (Incidentally, this makes "dwarf" a good race choice for a blaster wizard.)

Basically, if you fireball into a melee, your chances of frying at least some of your own side are... significant. It gets better at higher levels as you improve your aim, but it will always remain a possibility.

Ettina
2015-05-17, 05:02 PM
Die roll distributions are not supposed to model real-world distributions. 3d6 is just simple to roll, and creates a nice bell-curve result, while exaggerating the extremes to create larger-than-life characters.

Simple to roll? Hardly. Rolling a d10 and adding ten would be a lot simpler.

Anyway, the minimum playable Int, according to game rules, is 3. According to the Int * 10 = IQ rule, that would be an IQ of 30, and someone like that is not going to make an effective adventurer. In fact, they wouldn't be able to live independently.

Whereas, if you look for an IQ score of equivalent rarity as a 3 rolled by 3d6, you get a 61. Which is cognitively impaired, but in a range where the person is likely to be able to function independently if they're taught life skills. In a d&d setting, a guy with a 61 IQ would do just fine as a fighter or something if they have other talents, which makes sense of why they'd put it as the minimum allowed score for a player.

As for adventurers being 4d6 drop lowest, that's because they're supposed to be somewhat above average, because those people are more likely to become adventurers.

Hawkstar
2015-05-17, 05:56 PM
Simple to roll? Hardly. Rolling a d10 and adding ten would be a lot simpler.But doesn't produce a bell-curve, and the "+10" becomes worthless - you might as well have a 1-10 for stats.


Anyway, the minimum playable Int, according to game rules, is 3. According to the Int * 10 = IQ rule, that would be an IQ of 30, and someone like that is not going to make an effective adventurer. In fact, they wouldn't be able to live independently.That's why they have a whole party to travel with!

Solaris
2015-05-17, 06:59 PM
I started to agree, then I thought about the insane accuracy professional athletes possess when playing at full speed (hockey, soccer, basketball etc) and it doesn't seem that silly that a "professional" wizard in a fantasy world could lob a fireball exactly where he wants it in the heat of battle.

Not to mention professional soldiers. I've hucked a simulator grenade up into a second-story window from the street at a full sprint while being shot at with simunition rounds (it worked, but I was dumb and stood below the window - that's a good way to get killed if it doesn't work), and both myself and several of my acquaintance have played the 'count down the grenade's timer to make it blow up at just the height you want after dropping it' game. Throwing a grenade to land at someone's feet is child's play.

Considering guys with room temperature IQs can pull it off with their malevolent and hateful mundane variants, I'm perfectly okay with not introducing increased danger to the melee combatants with the magic versions.

ExLibrisMortis
2015-05-17, 07:33 PM
(And the way I play, this -4 is applied after rolling, so you can't fix it just by boosting your BAB. Don't like it? Take Precise Shot.)
Can you explain this? I don't see how this would change anything at all?

@OP: If the module is too easy, you're free to up every enemy's saves by two and give them fire resistance 5. If your players ask, just claim that after a couple of batches got fried, the only goblins left are the ones who use factor one million sun block.

However, a mook will never really stand up to a fireball, else it wouldn't be a mook. A better way is to counter the fireball directly. A fireball is only one attack, and it takes only one counterspell to completely neutralize it.

Cloistered Cleric 4/Church Inquisitor 1/Paragnostic Apostle 1
Spontaneous domain casting (Magic domain)
Abilities: 13+ wisdom (to cast dispel magic), 14+ charisma (to have 5 turn attempts)
Domains: Inquisition (bonus, from Church Inquisitor), Knowledge, Magic, Purification
Feats: Divine Defiance, Domain Focus (Magic), Versatile Spellcaster
Items: dispelling cord (1000 gp)
Caster level 6, +1 for abjurations (Purification domain), +1 for Magic domain spells (Domain Focus)
+5 on dispel checks (+4 Inquisition domain, +1 Penetrating Insight, from Paragnostic Apostle)
+2 on dispel checks 5/day from dispelling cord

With one turn undead use, you can counterspell as an immediate action, burning any prepared spell(s) to spontaneously cast dispel magic. With Versatile Spellcaster, you have at least 5 third-level spells per day. Your bonus on dispel checks is +15, 5/day, and +13 after that (but you're out of spells anyway). At level 6, nothing magical is going to get past you for a long time.

Your players will quickly get tired of seeing everything counterspelled, so make sure this guy also uses his spell slots to cast buffs, or even blast right back at the party.

Hawkstar
2015-05-17, 07:48 PM
Can you explain this? I don't see how this would change anything at all?

@OP: If the module is too easy, you're free to up every enemy's saves by two and give them fire resistance 5. If your players ask, just claim that after a couple of batches got fried, the only goblins left are the ones who use factor one million sun block.

However, a mook will never really stand up to a fireball, else it wouldn't be a mook. A better way is to counter the fireball directly. A fireball is only one attack, and it takes only one counterspell to completely neutralize it.

Cloistered Cleric 4/Church Inquisitor 1/Paragnostic Apostle 1
Spontaneous domain casting (magic domain)
Abilities: 13+ wisdom (to cast dispel magic), 14+ charisma (to have 5 turn attempts)
Domains: Inquisition, Magic, Purification
Feats: Divine Defiance, Domain Focus (Magic), Versatile Spellcaster
Items: dispelling cord (1000 gp)
Caster level 6, +1 for abjurations (Purification domain), +1 for magic domain spells
+5 on dispel checks (+4 Inquisition domain, +1 Penetrating Insight from Paragnostic Apostle)
+2 on dispel checks 5/day from dispelling cord

With one turn undead use, you can counterspell as an immediate action, burning any prepared spell(s) to spontaneously cast dispel magic. With Versatile Spellcaster, you have at least 5 third-level spells per day. Your bonus on dispel checks is +15, 5/day, and +13 after that (but you're out of spells anyway). At level 6, nothing magical is going to get past you for a long time.

Your players will quickly get tired of seeing everything counterspelled, so make sure this guy also uses his spell slots to cast buffs, or even blast right back at the party.Isn't this level of munchkinry a bit excessive for a wizard that casts Fireball?

Of course, thinking back on my earlier comment on Fireball Accuracy, I remembered how damn accurate I am when I actually have something to aim at. I can't imagine someone being more than 5' off from their target with direct fire at almost any range, if they actually have something specific to aim at.

Mr Beer
2015-05-17, 07:49 PM
Battlefield control, save-or-die and buffs are all often better spell choices than blasting anyway. I don't see the problem and if there is one, I agree that the correct solution is to focus on improved opponent tactics rather than nerfing Fireball accuracy.

This seems like a dangerous thread to pull at, if you start here I think you have to review a lot of magic to ensure it's not suddenly a far better choice than Fireball. It might be a good start if your intention is to nerf magic in general though.

goto124
2015-05-17, 08:59 PM
I mean, if you want me to set the party fighter on fire constantly I guess that could be hilarious,

'OH NO IMMA ON FIRE AGAIN!'
'Why is the woman ALWAYS on fire anyway?'
'About time we get her a Ring of Flame Prote-OW WATCH WHERE YOU'RE CASTING THAT THATS IT WE'RE GETTING RINGS FOR EVERYONE!'

turbo164
2015-05-18, 11:09 AM
As mentioned, there are far scarier spells the wizard could be casting (and requiring an accuracy roll for Fireball would lead to the Knight getting teamkilled [I find it odd that "it bugs some of the other players" that they're not getting blasted by their teammate?] and/or the wizard choosing stronger spells instead). In the meantime, a few tweaks to help the Knight stay relevant:

*Red Hand of Doom does have a lot of mooks, but there's also some high health, spell-resistant officers and monsters. Feel free to adjust the ratios a bit, as well as replace some Alertness feats with Lightning Reflexes or something.
*Have some Knight-friendly loot drop from the aforementioned officers. A Belt of Strength+6, +2 Animated shield, and +3 Keen Greatsword won't quiiite solve the tier difference, but it's a start.
*Are they doing 5-minute adventuring days? That module does have a lot of timed objectives, so it's possible that at some point(s) they'll need to push ahead and complete a mission even after the Wizard is down to cantrips. (And then the Knight will get to show off their "can only hit me on 20" AC vs the un-Fireballed mooks ^_^ )
*Terrain can matter. When defending a tavern/hospital/etc, or fighting enemies already engaged with friendly groups OR with civilian prisoners, chucking fireballs is a bad idea. When fighting in a narrow tunnel or bridge, the Knight can pull a "YOU SHALL NOT PASS" (which admittedly a Solid Fog or something could do as well...).

Might see if there's anything relevant here as well:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?171284-The-3-5-Red-Hand-Of-Doom-Handbook-for-DMs-Major-spoilers!-WIP-PEACH!


Regardless, I don't think adding a houserule of "the Wizard now roasts the Knight on a natural 1" would help much.

Honest Tiefling
2015-05-18, 11:11 AM
'OH NO IMMA ON FIRE AGAIN!'
'Why is the woman ALWAYS on fire anyway?'
'About time we get her a Ring of Flame Prote-OW WATCH WHERE YOU'RE CASTING THAT THATS IT WE'RE GETTING RINGS FOR EVERYONE!'

Yeah. That's why I am a little curious as to why the solution to people feeling unneeded is to apparently light them on fire.

Maglubiyet
2015-05-18, 12:09 PM
I'm actually less surprised about the accuracy thing than the lack of collateral damage caused by the fireball. I guess it's not really a fiery explosion that displaces air and causes a concussive wave -- it's more of a ring of flames that immediately puffs out of existence after scorching everything inside it. No superheated blast, no counter implosion as the expanding air collapses back to the point of origin, no blinding flash of light, etc.

It's a burst of microwave radiation, a maser, fired from an suborbital platform that affects everything within a 40-diameter circle. The wizard is just using a laser pointer to paint the target.

Slipperychicken
2015-05-18, 02:25 PM
I'm actually less surprised about the accuracy thing than the lack of collateral damage caused by the fireball. I guess it's not really a fiery explosion that displaces air and causes a concussive wave -- it's more of a ring of flames that immediately puffs out of existence after scorching everything inside it. No superheated blast, no counter implosion as the expanding air collapses back to the point of origin, no blinding flash of light, etc.

It's a burst of microwave radiation, a maser, fired from an suborbital platform that affects everything within a 40-diameter circle. The wizard is just using a laser pointer to paint the target.

IIRC, fireballs used to create pressure in like 2e OD&D, but that caused so many physics problems (and related exploits) that they just removed that text. Because explosions with a 20ft blast radius tend to cause a lot of problems beyond fire damage. Like rebounding off walls, destroying structures, and creating shrapnel. Also, if you notice, fireball says that it incinerates basically every unattended object in the range, melts gold, and so on.

Still though, I'm always going to imagine it as an explosion. Lore be damned, I want to blow things up.

Hawkstar
2015-05-18, 03:34 PM
I'm actually less surprised about the accuracy thing than the lack of collateral damage caused by the fireball. I guess it's not really a fiery explosion that displaces air and causes a concussive wave -- it's more of a ring of flames that immediately puffs out of existence after scorching everything inside it. No superheated blast, no counter implosion as the expanding air collapses back to the point of origin, no blinding flash of light, etc. It's a conflagration, not an explosion. Note that the area is "Spread", not "Burst". And, everything in the area isn't merely scorched, but also ignited, melted, and incinerated. It may be "Duration: Instantaneous", but it explicitly sets everything on fire.

veti
2015-05-18, 03:39 PM
A fireball spell is an explosion of flame that detonates with a low roar

There (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/fireball.htm) you go. It's explicitly an explosion.

It just so happens that in 3.x, "explosions" don't have concussive effects: they do purely fire damage within a limited radius, because apparently the designers decided that realism was too silly.

Hawkstar
2015-05-18, 03:54 PM
There (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/fireball.htm) you go. It's explicitly an explosion.

It just so happens that in 3.x, "explosions" don't have concussive effects: they do purely fire damage within a limited radius, because apparently the designers decided that realism was too silly.

Note the "Low Roar". It's not a "KaBOOOM!" It's a low-pressure "Fwooosh!". I figure there might be a light breeze associated with it due to the thermal expansion of the gas that's already in the area, but it's not a sudden release of a lot of pressurized gas as say, a propane tank exploding would cause. It's more of the 'explosion' you get when you light a grill. Just a larger area.

Hmm... now I need to figure out how to get unpressurized propane to fill a 40' diameter globe without it completely dissipating, and then igniting it to see what happens.

JNAProductions
2015-05-18, 05:15 PM
Hawkstar, bad! Bad Hawkstar! No simulating Fireball in real-life! *Sprays Hawkstar with water* Bad Hawkstar!

:P

Telok
2015-05-18, 06:01 PM
For a smaller but similar effect you can put hydrogen gas through soapy water and (with practice) get hydrogen filled soap bubbles.

You put your igniter on a long stick.

Hawkstar
2015-05-18, 06:38 PM
Ideally, the ignition point would be the center of said bubble. I just want to measure the actual expansion of air and gasses from a depressurized fireball like that.

goto124
2015-05-18, 07:03 PM
Sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science?

Wartex1
2015-05-18, 07:13 PM
Perhaps it draws in air before it expands, igniting the oxygen as it's pushed back out at a relatively low speed.

Lord Torath
2015-05-18, 08:04 PM
For a smaller but similar effect you can put hydrogen gas through soapy water and (with practice) get hydrogen filled soap bubbles.

You put your igniter on a long stick.


Ideally, the ignition point would be the center of said bubble. I just want to measure the actual expansion of air and gasses from a depressurized fireball like that.Hydrogen implodes when it burns in oxygen; it doesn't explode. Here's the relevant chemical reaction:

2 H2 + O2 => 2 H2O

You've got three units of gas combining to form two units. And a mole of gas at standard temperature and pressure takes up about 22 liters (if I recall correctly) regardless of the type of gas. So if you're combining 2 moles of hydrogen and one mole of oxygen, you've got 66 liters combining to form 44 liters of water vapor.

You can ignite hydrogen soap bubbles in the palm of your hand without injury. My dad saw this demonstrated several times. They'd have a kid put his hand out, and fill it with hydrogen soap bubbles. Then they'd have other kids each focus on one finger (so they could find it and re-attach it after the demonstration) to make the poor kid even more nervous. Then they'd ignite the bubbles. And of course, no fingers were ever detached.

Nightcanon
2015-05-19, 07:48 AM
I have not seen this "insane accuracy" that you speak of. Watching said sports, I see far, far too many shots taken that, if aimed at a specific point, miss it, and if aimed at another player, require the receiver to adjust on their end to intercept the ball/puck.

And accuracy is more an issue of dexterity (Hand-eye coordination) than Intelligence anyway.Depends what you're 'throwing', doesn't it? If our little marble of bat poop and sulphur is thrown like a grenade, sure, dex is the stat to use; if it is being willed to move to a specified point by the power of the mind, then int is the determinant.
Anyhoo, any complications caused by adding 'realism' aren't going to take wizards down any pegs, they're just going to end up frying the poor mundanes or causing the wizard to pick more optimised spells.

Hawkstar
2015-05-19, 11:52 AM
Depends what you're 'throwing', doesn't it? If our little marble of bat poop and sulphur is thrown like a grenade, sure, dex is the stat to use; if it is being willed to move to a specified point by the power of the mind, then int is the determinant.You'd also use Dex if the extent of aiming is Pointing At The Target. Anything that requires aligning any body motion other than the focusing of the eyes is based on Dexterity.

Slipperychicken
2015-05-19, 12:32 PM
In older editions of D&D, the caster of a fireball would speak the distance and height while pointing his finger, which would be indisputably intelligence. Also, in 5e, any spell attack (including rays fired at people from the fingers) would use the spell attack bonus.

Knaight
2015-05-19, 12:53 PM
Hydrogen implodes when it burns in oxygen; it doesn't explode. Here's the relevant chemical reaction:

2 H2 + O2 => 2 H2O

You've got three units of gas combining to form two units. And a mole of gas at standard temperature and pressure takes up about 22 liters (if I recall correctly) regardless of the type of gas. So if you're combining 2 moles of hydrogen and one mole of oxygen, you've got 66 liters combining to form 44 liters of water vapor.

Assuming that pressures are low enough that the ideal gas law can be used (which they almost certainly are), if the resulting 44 liters are more than 1.5 times the absolute temperature of the initial 66 liters you're going to get expansion. Call it 300 K for the initial conditions (a bit above STP), which only needs upwards of 450 K for the result to expand. The gibbs energy of formation of gaseous water at STP is -228.61 kJ/mol. That releases a lot of heat. The specific heat of gaseous water is about 2 kJ/kgK, or 0.036 kJ/molK. If all the heat goes into the water, that's an increase of 790 Kelvin. OBviously some of that heat is going to be released to the surrounding atmosphere, but only 19% of the energy actually needs to be released into the water to expand.

MrZJunior
2015-05-19, 02:24 PM
http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/wandering-monster.html

This article has some ideas about how to contain the power of wizards and other spellcasting types.

Knaight
2015-05-19, 02:52 PM
http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/wandering-monster.html

This article has some ideas about how to contain the power of wizards and other spellcasting types.

That only even applies to blast damage wizards, which are by far the weakest sort. Even then it breaks down in a big way by the mid levels, where there are lots and lots of spell slots and individually they're still pretty potent.

MrZJunior
2015-05-19, 03:32 PM
How does it only apply to blast wizards? The point of the article is that you ought to string out the party and prevent them from controlling the pace of encounters.

Jormengand
2015-05-19, 04:11 PM
How does it only apply to blast wizards? The point of the article is that you ought to string out the party and prevent them from controlling the pace of encounters.

That's fine, up until the wizard learns rope trick, or decides to plane shift to a plane where every year on that plane is a second on the material and decides to rest there overnight and plane shift back.

Icewraith
2015-05-19, 05:24 PM
How does it only apply to blast wizards? The point of the article is that you ought to string out the party and prevent them from controlling the pace of encounters.

"Oh hey guys! Another dungeon on a 30-minute time limit!" Gets tiresome after a while. Not allowing the party to attempt to engage enemies on the party's terms stifles creativity and planning. If they're doing the whole five minute adventuring day you might have to prod them along, and the occasional tight timetable dungeon can be great to add tension, but like every other DMing trick it loses its value if you always use it.

I believe 3.5 or 3e had some language about requiring ranged touch attacks for wizards trying to place a fireball bead through tight confines like arrow slits. However, if the bead flies from your hand to its intended destination without worrying about things like air friction and wind wall (which it seems to do), then unless the wizard is trying something particularly fancy, there's no point in making it difficult for him to land the spell within a 2' radius of the intended corner of the square he's targeting.

Edit: Also, parties tend to overreact to attrition tactics. They'll drag out encounters trying to use as few resources as possible against your fodder monsters, which usually results in boring, grinding combats.

Slipperychicken
2015-05-19, 05:43 PM
Edit: Also, parties tend to overreact to attrition tactics. They'll drag out encounters trying to use as few resources as possible against your fodder monsters, which usually results in boring, grinding combats.

Well yeah. Otherwise they'll find themselves at a miniboss with half health and most of their spells gone. And then the DM will go online and complain about how stupid they are for not managing their resources properly. Besides, if the only way to make an encounter fun is for the PCs voluntarily waste more resources than they need to on it, then it wasn't exactly the most fun encounter to begin with.

Knaight
2015-05-20, 04:41 PM
How does it only apply to blast wizards? The point of the article is that you ought to string out the party and prevent them from controlling the pace of encounters.

Because the only way it actually limits wizards in particular is if they have the low end of staying power. When they don't (as every class has some limits, even if it is only HP), increasing the pace doesn't do jack. Non-blasting wizards tend to have spells sufficiently effective that past the earliest levels they don't run out of resources the earliest, and speeding things up only makes them more powerful.

Talakeal
2015-05-20, 05:37 PM
IQ 130 puts you at about the 97.34th percentile (http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx), which is about a 16 on 3d6 (http://www.sysabend.org/champions/rules/3D6Percentiles.html) or a 17 on 4d6b3 (Tell Anydice to "output [highest 3 of 4d6]"). That's how.

The dumbest wizard capable of fireballing has an IQ of 115, which is pretty smart but nothing special. The average grammar school kid could wreck him in an intelligence-based contest.

Could you please explain that last bit? I am having a bit of trouble understanding how an "average kid" has a significant mental advantage over someone with a 115 IQ.

ExLibrisMortis
2015-05-20, 05:44 PM
Could you please explain that last bit? I am having a bit of trouble understanding how an "average kid" has a significant mental advantage over someone with a 115 IQ.
Grammar schools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar_school) are, depending on where you are, not average, or definitely not average.

I quote: "In some LEAs, as many as 10-15% of 11-year-olds may attend grammar schools (for example in Gloucestershire), but in others it is as few as 2%. These very highly selective schools also tend to dominate the top positions in performance tables."

The grammar schools don't select their students by IQ, but there will be a strong correlation. If you assume 2-15% of the kids translates to about the 10% highest IQs, you're getting at what Jormengand meant (I think).

Talakeal
2015-05-20, 06:51 PM
Grammar schools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar_school) are, depending on where you are, not average, or definitely not average.

I quote: "In some LEAs, as many as 10-15% of 11-year-olds may attend grammar schools (for example in Gloucestershire), but in others it is as few as 2%. These very highly selective schools also tend to dominate the top positions in performance tables."

The grammar schools don't select their students by IQ, but there will be a strong correlation. If you assume 2-15% of the kids translates to about the 10% highest IQs, you're getting at what Jormengand meant (I think).

Ah, ok, its a cultural issue then. Here in the United States we just use the term "grammar school" to refer to any elementary school.

Rainbownaga
2015-05-20, 07:18 PM
I think the immersion breaking thing about fireballs is not the accuracy of the epicentre, but the uncanny ability to aim the edge such that it seperates two melee combatants, dealing full damage to one and leaving the other unscathed.

In games with grenades, this can make suicidal real life tactics effective (in melee combat? Throw a grenade to kill the bad guy and not me).

I think the alchemist has the best work around; fireballs that deal more damage on a direct hit at least offer an incentive to aim at the monster instead of exactly 30/40' away from the nearest ally.

Shpadoinkle
2015-05-20, 07:33 PM
I have no problem with 'laser-guided fireballs,' because it's freaking magic.

Even setting that aside, I think trying to hose casters on accuracy issues like this just hurts the players for no reason. Melee characters have a hard enough time without the constant threat of being nuked by their own allies.

Wardog
2015-05-24, 07:42 PM
If you were completely redesigning the magic system, having some sort of accuracy aspect to fireballs might be an interesting change.

But in the current system it would just make them less effective overall (and more dangerous to your allies). So it would basicly be a nerf, that only affect the least-broken aspects of wizardry, and one that rather than making muggles more useful makes them more likely to get accidently blown up.

Lvl45DM!
2015-05-24, 11:46 PM
Combat rounds last 6 seconds. Dont let them spend ages pondering where exactly to place the fireball and dont let them count out squares longer than six seconds. Let the player eyeball it and cast just like the wizard. They'll suck at first but get better and better which is honestly kind of awesome.

Not that you should force them to only have 6 seconds for everything. They need to look up a spell? sure thats fair. But allowing them infinite time to strategize and make logistical decisions mid combat grants them a huge advantage.

Oh and at my table there are no take backsies with regards to spell placement. None of this "There! no wait..there!" If they really truly dont want to shoot it at the first spot they waste their round and if they are particularly slow about the take back, they waste their spell.

Same rules are for everyone though, fighters and rogues etc.

Slipperychicken
2015-05-25, 01:39 AM
Maybe it's less laser-guidance, and more that the process of casting briefly brings up something akin to a magical VR, in which the area of effect, known enemies, and allies are all highlighted in his vision like he was laying down an AoE in a video game. The action he takes to cast still gives him a few seconds to place it, which for someone who knows what he's doing, definitely allows for accuracy to within five feet.

Jormengand
2015-05-25, 04:46 AM
Combat rounds last 6 seconds. Dont let them spend ages pondering where exactly to place the fireball and dont let them count out squares longer than six seconds. Let the player eyeball it and cast just like the wizard. They'll suck at first but get better and better which is honestly kind of awesome.

Not that you should force them to only have 6 seconds for everything. They need to look up a spell? sure thats fair. But allowing them infinite time to strategize and make logistical decisions mid combat grants them a huge advantage.

Oh and at my table there are no take backsies with regards to spell placement. None of this "There! no wait..there!" If they really truly dont want to shoot it at the first spot they waste their round and if they are particularly slow about the take back, they waste their spell.

Same rules are for everyone though, fighters and rogues etc.

This is the kind of house rule that has lead to my own system mysteriously failing to specify how long a round is. Because it's just really aggravating for at least one of the players. The way to handle this situation is not to annoy the hell out of the wizard, and everyone else while they're at it.

Kami2awa
2015-05-25, 08:40 AM
This is the kind of house rule that has lead to my own system mysteriously failing to specify how long a round is. Because it's just really aggravating for at least one of the players. The way to handle this situation is not to annoy the hell out of the wizard, and everyone else while they're at it.

Abstracted duration rounds have been around for a while, Call of Cthulhu uses them for example. In earlier editions on D&D, a round was 1 minute. To explain why it took 1 minute to hit someone with a sword, it was assumed that just 1 blow got through amongst a great number of feints, parries, and true strikes that failed to get through armour.

Jormengand
2015-05-25, 08:50 AM
Abstracted duration rounds have been around for a while, Call of Cthulhu uses them for example.

Oh, I don't doubt it. But when a house-rule is so obnoxious that it causes someone to implement a feature that they might not have wanted into a game just to stop DMs doing it to their players, then that says something about said house-rule.