pyrotechnics + Flaming sphere combo

[MadBear]

So I was reading Treantmonk's guide to the wizard, and I came upon a really amazing looking combo. The combo is to use flaming sphere as the fire for pyrotechnics. The question I have for you playgrounder's is how would you interpret this rule:


You can extinguish the fire in that area, and you create either fireworks or smoke.

Does the Flaming sphere end when you cast pyrotechnic's on it, or is it optional to have the fire be put out?

[SharkForce]

So I was reading Treantmonk's guide to the wizard, and I came upon a really amazing looking combo. The combo is to use flaming sphere as the fire for pyrotechnics. The question I have for you playgrounder's is how would you interpret this rule:



Does the Flaming sphere end when you cast pyrotechnic's on it, or is it optional to have the fire be put out?

does it matter? the flaming sphere will create fire. put that fire out. or choose just a small part of the sphere (the rule is that you choose an area of flame smaller than a 5 foot cube. a 2 inch radius circle on the surface of the flaming sphere is a viable target, because it is an area of fire that is smaller than the designated area).

whether you interpret "can" as meaning must or not is irrelevant. you choose the target. there will be plenty of fires you can choose from.

[MadBear]

does it matter? the flaming sphere will create fire. put that fire out. or choose just a small part of the sphere (the rule is that you choose an area of flame smaller than a 5 foot cube. a 2 inch radius circle on the surface of the flaming sphere is a viable target, because it is an area of fire that is smaller than the designated area).

whether you interpret "can" as meaning must or not is irrelevant. you choose the target. there will be plenty of fires you can choose from.

nice. I hadn't thought of using just a part of the flame.

[ThermalSlapShot]

So I was reading Treantmonk's guide to the wizard, and I came upon a really amazing looking combo. The combo is to use flaming sphere as the fire for pyrotechnics. The question I have for you playgrounder's is how would you interpret this rule:



Does the Flaming sphere end when you cast pyrotechnic's on it, or is it optional to have the fire be put out?

I really don't think the designers intended for Flaming Sphere to be used that way.

However Flaming Sphere has a radius of 5' which makes it 4 squares (along horizontal) and is one piece. The flaming sphere really isn't multiple fires or anything like that. Pyrotechnics has a clause that says "and that can fit within a 5' cube within range". Flaming Sphere can't fit within a 5' cube because it is bigger than that. A radius of 5' makes the diameter 10'. The flaming sphere is just too big for pyrotechnics to work on.

However that being said, I would totally allow a wizard to use Flaming Sphere as a source for pyrotechnics but I would have the flaming sphere be completely destroyed as you are ripping a chunk out of its magic out.

The "you can" part of the wording applies to the entire spell. In order to get the pyrotechnics to work you must use the "you can" part of the spell. The spell uses normal english so trying to get around that goes against a design intent of the game itself.

[1Forge]

I would allow it since it dosn't affect combat, it should be fine. And even if it didnt work flamin gsphere could just set fire to something, then you cast it on that.

[ThermalSlapShot]

I would allow it since it dosn't affect combat, it should be fine. And even if it didnt work flamin gsphere could just set fire to something, then you cast it on that.

Are you kidding me?

Con save or be Blind for each creature within 10' of the flaming sphere.

20' radius heavily obscure area.

And that doesn't affect combat?

[Ziegander]

Are you kidding me?

Con save or be Blind for each creature within 10' of the flaming sphere.

20' radius heavily obscure area.

And that doesn't affect combat?

Since you can't target Flaming Sphere with Pyrotechnics, yeah, I'd say it doesn't really effect combat. Would be awesome if you could, like waaaaaay awesome, but the sphere is too big to be targeted.

[ThermalSlapShot]

Since you can't target Flaming Sphere with Pyrotechnics, yeah, I'd say it doesn't really effect combat. Would be awesome if you could, like waaaaaay awesome, but the sphere is too big to be targeted.

Sure you can't but thats not the issue.

1forge said they would allow it (flaming sphere as a target) and that it doesn't affect combat. If you allow flaming sphere to be a target of the pyrotechnics then it definitely affects combat.

[MadBear]

It's a 5' diameter, not a 5' radius. So it fits completely within the 5' cube. So in that regard, I would say it definitely qualifies for pyrotechnics.

[SharkForce]

hypothetically, let us suppose for a moment that I have a large bonfire. I take a large cleaver of some kind (like, giant-sized) and chop the fire in half, and shove half of it out of the way (apparently I am also a giant, and the handle of the cleaver is far enough away to not get too hot from the bonfire. whatever, it's just an example, people!)

do I now have one fire, or two? what about when the cleaver was between them, but I hadn't moved them separate? what about before I used the cleaver?

how about if one or the other or both halves light things on fire where they end up, but the fuel in the middle is exhausted and so you have a fire, hot coals, and fire, do I have more than one fire now?

you choose an area of fire that is up to the size described. it doesn't matter if the fire source is a candle, a torch, a bonfire, or a forest fire. you just pick an area to cast it on, and it works. you don't have to select "the entire fire", because fire is not an object with clear divisions. we define it as one fire arbitrarily based on whether or not there is anything in between it (and even then, I would bet very few "forest fires" consist of a single continuous wall of fire, but we would likely still describe it as a single fire).

[1Forge]

Are you kidding me?

Con save or be Blind for each creature within 10' of the flaming sphere.

20' radius heavily obscure area.

And that doesn't affect combat?

Not really I (the DM) prepare contingency's for stuff like that. They blind them? good job! but (rolles dice) oh no the explosion from the sphere has caused an avalanche! Or party roll to not be blinded! (a flash of light is a flash of light i don't care if the spell says otherwise) Then you have 10 blinded kobalds and a blinded barbarian in rage.

[Elbeyon]

Not really I (the DM) prepare contingency's for stuff like that. They blind them? good job! but (rolles dice) oh no the explosion from the sphere has caused an avalanche! Or party roll to not be blinded! (a flash of light is a flash of light i don't care if the spell says otherwise) Then you have 10 blinded kobalds and a blinded barbarian in rage.You say rocks fall (you die) if someone uses a spell? You ignore the rules and try to blind everyone for no reason at all because you are prepared? Those are not good/prepared answers at all.

[MadBear]

Not really I (the DM) prepare contingency's for stuff like that. They blind them? good job! but (rolles dice) oh no the explosion from the sphere has caused an avalanche! Or party roll to not be blinded! (a flash of light is a flash of light i don't care if the spell says otherwise) Then you have 10 blinded kobalds and a blinded barbarian in rage.

I don't mean to be offensive (but I'm sure it'll come across that way), but I think that DMing the way you just described ruins games. The situation you described means that you'll punish players for coming up with creative solutions to problems if it doesn't fit the narrative you described. Worse, it creates a nuclear arms race. If the blind now works out to some arbitrary distance, players can rightly expect it to do so against other foes. You've now turned a 10' radius blind into a 15/20/30/50' radius blind that the players can now (justly) expect to work in the future.

In all the 2 decades I've played as a player and DM, I've never seen a situation that was improved by letting players "succeed" and the promptly punishing them for it. That was something my group did in high school, and it quickly became apparent, that it doesn't make the game fun for anyone.

In conclusion, let it work, or don't let it work, either way letting it kinda work and punishing the players is a terrible plan.

[SharkForce]

yeah, that's not a plan you should have up your sleeve. do you also surprise your melees with discovering that all of their enemies reflect all melee damage when the melees try to use basic abilities in the exact way they're described in the rules?

[1Forge]

You say rocks fall (you die) if someone uses a spell? You ignore the rules and try to blind everyone for no reason at all because you are prepared? Those are not good/prepared answers at all.

No you misunderstand i only do this if appropriate, for example our wizard had thunderwave and i didnt know, he used it on the top of a mountain on some snow, while fighting the boss. I didnt expect this so i rewarded him (he buried it in snow) but countered it by saying he had destabalized the snow causing an avalance. I didnt kill him i gave him a chance to get off the snow slab, which he did flawlessly. It added flavor and filled time that was origonally for the fight.

Also the blinding allies thing is realistic flashes of light are flashes of light. Besides we have a long standing private joke where the fighter critically fails all checks vs blindness (without fail for 4 sessions in a row)

[1Forge]

I see the confusion though, i should have clarified before, I had a DM who didnt allow any creativity (our wizard bugged him so he said he exploded in blood for no reason, then halfway through felt bad and said he magically re-appered.

[SharkForce]

yes, a blinding flash is a blinding flash of light.

but if it wasn't limited in range, then you'd probably be blind right now because most likely you've looked directly at a star (or more likely many stars) for quite some time.

at some point, the light goes from blinding to not blinding. it has spread out enough that it no longer overwhelms your eyes to the point of blindness (though i doubt it is particularly pleasant to stare at either).

realistically, there would be varying degrees of light with varying save DCs. but this isn't realistic lighting effects, for two reasons:

1) nobody wants to figure out a new save DC every X feet from the center of the effect
2) it's magically generated. you can't just turn a fire into a flash of light using science, and if you could then the amount of fire would determine the amount of flash. instead, a candle is just as legitimate of a target (it produces a fire that is smaller than the area described) as a bonfire. for all we know, the light actually is contained entirely within that area and you're basically very briefly connecting that are and only that are to the plane of radiance (or smoke, if you choose smoke) and the only reason you need the fire at all is to provide a connection to the elemental plane of fire.

[1Forge]

yes, a blinding flash is a blinding flash of light.

but if it wasn't limited in range, then you'd probably be blind right now because most likely you've looked directly at a star (or more likely many stars) for quite some time.

at some point, the light goes from blinding to not blinding. it has spread out enough that it no longer overwhelms your eyes to the point of blindness (though i doubt it is particularly pleasant to stare at either).

realistically, there would be varying degrees of light with varying save DCs. but this isn't realistic lighting effects, for two reasons:

1) nobody wants to figure out a new save DC every X feet from the center of the effect
2) it's magically generated. you can't just turn a fire into a flash of light using science, and if you could then the amount of fire would determine the amount of flash. instead, a candle is just as legitimate of a target (it produces a fire that is smaller than the area described) as a bonfire. for all we know, the light actually is contained entirely within that area and you're basically very briefly connecting that are and only that are to the plane of radiance (or smoke, if you choose smoke) and the only reason you need the fire at all is to provide a connection to the elemental plane of fire.

Or just use the rule that within 10 ft your blinded out of it you like "dang that was a bright light glad i wasnt 5ft closer)

Also its not science theyre talking about the spell.

[lordshadowisle]

As written, I can see how it is possible to argue that one can simply target a portion of the flaming sphere. "Choose an area of flame", you just ensure that only part of the area overlaps with the flaming sphere.

I'm not a fan of such arguments though. This can lead to a chain of further arguments:
1) Let's say I target the left half (2.5ft worth of flame) of the flaming sphere. Then the blinding radius should be computed as 10ft from the edge of the flaming sphere!
2) Can't I hit a target 12.5ft away? Half of the target's body is within the blinding radius.
2) A target two squares away on the right can simply "dodge" to the right half (2.5ft) of the square, thus avoiding the stunning effect!

I find it to be simpler to rule if the smallest unit of measurement is a 5ft square.

I have no objections to casting pyrotechnics on a flaming sphere, but it must extinguish the whole 5ft sphere. Similarly, I think it's ok to cast it on a Wall of Fire, but it will only blast a breach the size of a 5ft cube.

[SharkForce]

except that the source is not noted as needing to be large. you can use a candle or a torch; that is an area of flame less than 5 feet square. there's no need to have them target half the sphere. just have them target a small section of the sphere. pyrotechnics has multiple functions; one of them is putting out fires. if you don't care about putting out fires, you don't need to use the full area that is available, because it says you choose an area of up to that size. not an area which must be that size.

[MadBear]

Or just use the rule that within 10 ft your blinded out of it you like "dang that was a bright light glad i wasnt 5ft closer)

Also its not science theyre talking about the spell.

I'm confused by this statement. This whole conversation started because you said "Or party roll to not be blinded! (a flash of light is a flash of light i don't care if the spell says otherwise". No one else is arguing that it should extend past the 10ft radius.

[lordshadowisle]

except that the source is not noted as needing to be large. you can use a candle or a torch; that is an area of flame less than 5 feet square. there's no need to have them target half the sphere. just have them target a small section of the sphere. pyrotechnics has multiple functions; one of them is putting out fires. if you don't care about putting out fires, you don't need to use the full area that is available, because it says you choose an area of up to that size. not an area which must be that size.

Seems like a fair assessment, and now I agree with you. I'm wary, though, of exactly how small the area of flame has to be before it becomes absurd.

[Slipperychicken]

Seems like a fair assessment, and now I agree with you. I'm wary, though, of exactly how small the area of flame has to be before it becomes absurd.

If a candle's flame is sufficient, then the caster could just deduct that much from the sphere.

As for absurdity: The guy is waving his hands around and shouting nonsense to make a candle explode like a flashbang. It should be pretty clear we crossed that line a while back.

[hawklost]

You know that there are Cantrips that work with Pyrotechnics too?

Produce Flame
Fire Bolt (assuming it hits something to light on fire)

And best of All
Create Bonfire

It creates a magical flame that can stick around. The Next round you can 'blow it up' completely and not be out a spell (other than Pyrotechnics of course).
Note, the sorcerer can do this with Quicken Spell in a single round.

PS
The only thing better about the sphere is that you can more it to the enemies during the second round (but it costs you a second level spell)

[SharkForce]

pretty sure the main reason flaming sphere is preferred is for the fact that it is a moderately decent spell in and of itself. that is, you're not spending a round *just* to set up pyrotechnics. you're casting a spell you might have considered anyways, and then casting pyrotechnics.

[Ziegander]

pretty sure the main reason flaming sphere is preferred is for the fact that it is a moderately decent spell in and of itself. that is, you're not spending a round *just* to set up pyrotechnics. you're casting a spell you might have considered anyways, and then casting pyrotechnics.

And now you're dealing fire damage and battlefield controlling enemies with a mobile control point. Pretty amazing.

[Gwendol]

That used to be a neat Warmage combo (in 3.5 pyrotechnics doesn't extinguish magical fires). But yes, it's supposed to work.