Flame Arrows and indefinite duration

[visitor]

I had always assumed Flame Arrow was intended to be used by casting, then plunking away until either 12 arrows/bolts are fired or concentration ends (up to one hour).

However, looking a bit closer at the second sentence, which says:



"The spell's magic ends on the piece of ammunition when it hits or misses, AND the spell ends when twelve pieces of ammunition have been drawn from the quiver."



So there seems to be a distinction between the spell's magic on the ammo vs the spell itself. You could cast the spell, pull 12 arrows out of the quiver (imbuing them with +1d6 fire damage) and create a stockpile for friends and family.




I've tried to interpret it thinking once the last ammo/charge is used all the magic is meant to end, no saving up on enchanted ammo. But then the first part of that sentence is a bit superfluous. Also, if you were being very literal, the second part would mean you couldn't use the last arrow... as once 12 "have been drawn from the quiver" (not fired) the spell and spell effects are done.

So, either spell effects = spell, and the language they used is a bit extra and loose. Or, spell effect =/= spell and they didn't put a expiration date on your flame arrow stockpile.


Does that sound about right?

[Silpharon]

That's not how I originally interpreted it either, but after rereading it, you might be right.

The concentration part was what concerned me, but it appears the effect is on the quiver, not the ammunition. So the ammunition could stay 'flamed' indefinitely even though concentration on the quiver broke.

You're essentially making magic arrows then... You could dump unused spell slots nightly to grow the hoard.

I'm not convinced this was intended, but RAW it seems fine to me.

[MaxWilson]

As a technicality (vs. actual play), that is extremely amusing. Nice find!

[Gtdead]

By RAW it seems you are right and you can keep the arrows, then repeat as much as you like. So yes, which defeats the whole purpose of concentration.

I can't find any good argument to counter this RAW. The spell states that the magic fades on a hit or a miss and the only way to do that is an attack which is a combat action. I'm not aware of any other usage of the terms "hit" and "miss".

[GeoffWatson]

As soon as you pull the 12th the spell ends OR when concentration ends.
So you only get 11 shots, and have to use them within an hour.

[Jerrykhor]

No DM would be this pedantic... Or would they? Maybe one may surprise me some day.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

No DM would be this pedantic... Or would they? Maybe one may surprise me some day.

I like this technicalities so I allow them the moment a player explain them properly.

[Valmark]

Mmm... Now I'm thinking about some kind of plot involving a group of forest bandits/rebels known for their mysterious fire arrows. I mean, could already do that, but I prefer it when I can make something with RAW sources.

[Droppeddead]

As soon as you pull the 12th the spell ends OR when concentration ends.
So you only get 11 shots, and have to use them within an hour.

This. And since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time, you can't build a stockpile. That said, I would have no problem allowing the caster to hand out 11 arrows to 11 archers for a nasty ambush within the next hour...

[Unoriginal]

I had always assumed Flame Arrow was intended to be used by casting, then plunking away until either 12 arrows/bolts are fired or concentration ends (up to one hour).

However, looking a bit closer at the second sentence, which says:



"The spell's magic ends on the piece of ammunition when it hits or misses, AND the spell ends when twelve pieces of ammunition have been drawn from the quiver."



So there seems to be a distinction between the spell's magic on the ammo vs the spell itself. You could cast the spell, pull 12 arrows out of the quiver (imbuing them with +1d6 fire damage) and create a stockpile for friends and family.


You couldn't, because the spell ends when 12 pieces of ammunition are pulled out of the quiver. Regardless of if you're firing them or not.

Furthermore, that the spell has *more* ending conditions doesn't change the fact it has a maximum duration of 1 hour, with Concentration.

The spell ends if you lose concentration, if the 1 hour duration runs out, or if you draw 12 pieces of ammunitions from the quiver.


This. And since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time, you can't build a stockpile. That said, I would have no problem allowing the caster to hand out 11 arrows to 11 archers for a nasty ambush within the next hour...

Don't see any reason why this wouldn't work, yes. It does pack quite a punch too.



By RAW it seems you are right and you can keep the arrows, then repeat as much as you like. So yes, which defeats the whole purpose of concentration.

I can't find any good argument to counter this RAW. The spell states that the magic fades on a hit or a miss and the only way to do that is an attack which is a combat action. I'm not aware of any other usage of the terms "hit" and "miss".

The spell ending ends the magic on the arrows.


Mmm... Now I'm thinking about some kind of plot involving a group of forest bandits/rebels known for their mysterious fire arrows. I mean, could already do that, but I prefer it when I can make something with RAW sources.

Interesting to note, burning arrows are a known Gnoll tactic.

[Contrast]

You couldn't, because the spell ends when 12 pieces of ammunition are pulled out of the quiver. Regardless of if you're firing them or not.

Furthermore, that the spell has *more* ending conditions doesn't change the fact it has a maximum duration of 1 hour, with Concentration.

The spell ends if you lose concentration, if the 1 hour duration runs out, or if you draw 12 pieces of ammunitions from the quiver.

This would be my read as well.


Don't see any reason why this wouldn't work, yes. It does pack quite a punch too.

I mean...does it pack more of a punch than just casting Fireball or Conjure Animals which you could do for the same spell slot. More work for less payoff.

[Unoriginal]

I mean...does it pack more of a punch than just casting Fireball or Conjure Animals which you could do for the same spell slot. More work for less payoff.

8d6 from a Fireball is a lot less than 11d8+(Dexmod*11)+11d6 from Flame Arrows ambush. Granted each of the attacks need to hit and the AoE of the Fireball can make it more useful or be an hindrance if the enemies are spread out.

So it's situational but hardly "less payoff". If you have a whole bunch of henchmen already it can be worthwhile.

[Gtdead]

The spell ending ends the magic on the arrows.


The description clearly states that the magic remains on the arrow until it hits or misses, and the spell itself acts on the quiver. So the spell ending means that the quiver stops providing flame arrows, but spares the arrows already drawn.

This was my first reaction too BTW. But it's not what it says :p

It's obvious that the author intended for the arrows to be used immediately in combat.

[Unoriginal]

The description clearly states that the magic remains on the arrow until it hits or misses, and the spell itself acts on the quiver. So the spell ending means that the quiver stops providing flame arrows, but spares the arrows already drawn.

This was my first reaction too BTW. But it's not what it says :p

"The spell's magic ends on the piece of ammunition when it hits or misses" does not mean "the spell's magic ONLY ends on the piece of ammunition when it hits or misses".

Furthermore, even if you want to go with a literalist reading, it says "the spell's magic ends on the pieces of ammunition when X", which clearly means that what is on the piece of ammunition is the spell's magic, same as it is on the quiver.

If the spell's end, then the spell's magic which is on the arrows ends too.

[Gtdead]

"The spell's magic ends on the piece of ammunition when it hits or misses" does not mean "the spell's magic ONLY ends on the piece of ammunition when it hits or misses".

Furthermore, even if you want to go with a literalist reading, it says "the spell's magic ends on the pieces of ammunition when X", which clearly means that what is on the piece of ammunition is the spell's magic, same as it is on the quiver.

If the spell's end, then the spell's magic which is on the arrows ends too.

I disagree for a single reason. The only way for the 12th arrow to work is if this is true: "the spell ends, but the spell's magic on the arrow remains until x". If it worked like you say, then you could only use 11 arrows, not 12, because when you draw the 12th and the spell ends, the arrow will instantly lose it's magic.

The problem is that a clause which allows the last arrow to be magic, works backwards on every arrow because there isn't any indication that it doesn't. All we know is that the spell's magic remains after the spell has ended. Not that it only applies on the last arrow.

PS. This discussion is both smart and silly..

[Valmark]

There is also to say that a spell's magic and the spell itself are two separate things- for example in Conjure Elemental the spell can end early while the elemental stays there and only disappears after X condition is met.

[Unoriginal]

[QUOTE=Gtdead;24750236]I disagree for a single reason. The only way for the 12th arrow to work is if this is true: "the spell ends, but the spell's magic on the arrow remains until x". If it worked like you say, then you could only use 11 arrows, not 12, because when you draw the 12th and the spell ends, the arrow will instantly lose it's magic/QUOTE]

Fair, I freely admit that neither interpretation is likely to be what was intended. It would be dishonest of me to claim the contrary.

On the other hand, there is no way that saying a 3rd level spell can create no-duration consumable magic items by bundles of 12 at no cost (aside from the cost of a quiver and the pieces of ammunition) can be reasonable. It costs more gold to have a permanent light spell on one item.

Saying that the 12th arrow has no magic on it because drawing the 12th arrow is (one of the) trigger(s) for the end of the spell may be just as silly as the other reading, but at least it's reasonable in term of power. And you can still hand out the flame arrows to your team aslonh as they use it within the hour.

[Gtdead]

I don't think anyone is ever going to use this that way. For me it's just fun trivia.

[Droppeddead]

I disagree for a single reason. The only way for the 12th arrow to work is if this is true: "the spell ends, but the spell's magic on the arrow remains until x". If it worked like you say, then you could only use 11 arrows, not 12, because when you draw the 12th and the spell ends, the arrow will instantly lose it's magic.

The problem is that a clause which allows the last arrow to be magic, works backwards on every arrow because there isn't any indication that it doesn't. All we know is that the spell's magic remains after the spell has ended. Not that it only applies on the last arrow.

Except that it doesn't. The spell's magic ends after an hour because that is the duration of the spell. Same as with any other spell that has a duration of one hour.

[Valmark]

Except that it doesn't. The spell's magic ends after an hour because that is the duration of the spell. Same as with any other spell that has a duration of one hour.

The Duration is Concentration, not one hour- it's an important distinction.

Conjure Elemental has a duration of Concentration up to an hour- if Concentration is broken, the spell ends but the elemental sticks around. Spell's magic and spell are two different things.

[MaxWilson]

Except that it doesn't. The spell's magic ends after an hour because that is the duration of the spell. Same as with any other spell that has a duration of one hour.

Spells like Goodberry create permanent magical objects which remain magical even after the spell has ended.

[Dork_Forge]

Spells like Goodberry create permanent magical objects which remain magical even after the spell has ended.

Goodberry seems to create persistant berries, but doesn't the last line mean that their magic fades? If they no longer sustain you for a day and give you a hitpoint, are they still magical? Or is this relying on the nebulous term 'potency'?

[Valmark]

Goodberry seems to create persistant berries, but doesn't the last line mean that their magic fades? If they no longer sustain you for a day and give you a hitpoint, are they still magical? Or is this relying on the nebulous term 'potency'?

Yes, the last line means the magic fades. Flame Arrows has no such specification, so no reason for that magic to fade.

[N7Paladin]

I agree with you on the wording analysis, however, it more likely seems to stem from an editing oversight (of which they've had their fair share), than an intentional direction of the rule.

That said, it would be imo shameful if any players wanted to abuse this oversight.

[Dork_Forge]

Yes, the last line means the magic fades. Flame Arrows has no such specification, so no reason for that magic to fade.

I wasn't referring to Flame Arrows, I was just talking about Goodberry.

[MaxWilson]

Goodberry seems to create persistant berries, but doesn't the last line mean that their magic fades? If they no longer sustain you for a day and give you a hitpoint, are they still magical? Or is this relying on the nebulous term 'potency'?

Yes, it fades eventually, but the magic of the berries outlasts the spell by a good 24 hours, and even after that you've still got permanent berries and/or a now-full stomach.

Edit: oh, I see the confusion. I meant (permanent) (magical) objects, not (permanently magical) objects. Sorry if that was confusing--perhaps I should have written it the other way around for clarity, e.g. "permanent objects which remain explicitly magical for a full 24 hours after the spell is over."

[Satori01]

On the other hand, there is no way that saying a 3rd level spell can create no-duration consumable magic items by bundles of 12 at no cost (aside from the cost of a quiver and the pieces of ammunition) can be reasonable. It costs more gold to have a permanent light spell on one item.


Flame Arrows is only usable by a 9th level Ranger, or 5th level Wizards and Sorcerers.
I'm fundamentally untroubled by the notion that hillbilly Rangers might have large stockpiles of ordinance and illegal fireworks.
It even smacks of verisimilitude. 😀

Any player can ask to create Flaming Arrows with access to arrows and oil, which is effectively, right from level 1.

Honestly, I have always interpreted the text of Flame Arrow as intending the magic to persist. The text goes to great pains to signal that there is a difference between the enchanted ammunition and the enchantment on the quiver.

[Contrast]

8d6 from a Fireball is a lot less than 11d8+(Dexmod*11)+11d6 from Flame Arrows ambush. Granted each of the attacks need to hit and the AoE of the Fireball can make it more useful or be an hindrance if the enemies are spread out.

So it's situational but hardly "less payoff". If you have a whole bunch of henchmen already it can be worthwhile.

So if we're assuming we have the henchman we're getting the 11d8+(Dexmod*11) regardless of what we spend the spell slot on.

So what we're actually comparing is if we want 11d6 damage or 8d6*(however many people Fireball hits). So a Fireball needs to hit a grand total of 2 people to come out ahead. In fact if we assume a 50% hit rate from these archers we could get within a couple of points of the same damage output as flame arrow just by upcasting Magic Missile using a 3rd level slot and it means you get to choose on the moment exactly what the most efficient way to apply the damage was (and don't risk wasting the spell slot if the ambush doesn't happen).

I guess there's an argument for the action economy of it (you could prep your henchman with this AND still cast a Fireball/Conjure Animals in the first round to maximise the initial nova strike) but my experience would be that if the DM is placing so little strain on your resources that Flame Arrow is a good use of your spells know/prepared/cast then you don't really need to worry too much as whatever you do will probably work out fine.

[MaxWilson]

Honestly, I have always interpreted the text of Flame Arrow as intending the magic to persist. The text goes to great pains to signal that there is a difference between the enchanted ammunition and the enchantment on the quiver.

Hmmm. I've never interpreted it that way before this thread, and I know full well that it's probably not intended, but... Flame Arrow is otherwise such a terrible spell that I'm tempted to adopt this interpretation anyway.

However... now that I look more closely at the spell, the fire damage only applies when you're drawing the arrow from that enchanted quiver. "When a target is hit by a ranged weapon attack using a piece of ammunition drawn from the quiver, the target takes an extra 1d6 fire damage." It appears that if you draw the arrow from the quiver before the attack instead of as part of the attack, you don't get the bonus damage, even if the spell is still ongoing.

It's such a terrible spell! Maybe a good fix would be to declare that its duration is now 1 hour (no concentration needed). At least that way it's good for adding damage in nova fights, where efficiency matters less than peak performance. You can have your Conjure Animals and still get +d6 on every arrow attack, which for a Gloomstalker/Fighter might be 6d6 extra damage or more, or 12d6 if you use Hunter's Mark instead of Conjure Animals.

[Satori01]

Yeah, the only thing the the Concentration duration on Flame Arrows guards against is players using the spell.

As a DM, I've made a custom magical quiver enchanted with a Flame Arrow effect, the sentient quiver concentrates on the spell for the character. Players love it.

Players don't really seem to even care about finding scrolls of Flame Arrow.
"How much can we sell this scroll for?"

[JackPhoenix]

So if we're assuming we have the henchman we're getting the 11d8+(Dexmod*11) regardless of what we spend the spell slot on.

So what we're actually comparing is if we want 11d6 damage or 8d6*(however many people Fireball hits). So a Fireball needs to hit a grand total of 2 people to come out ahead.

Not neessarily. It depends on target.... overkill is more of a problem with Fireball than with Flame Arrows. If you drop Fireball on 2 standard, 7-hp goblins, you haven't done 8d6*2 damage. You've done 14 damage. If you have two archers shooting the same two goblins, the damage from the spell it technically smaller (2* (7-(d8+Dex mod)), min 0 if the arrow would kill the goblin anyway, to be precise), but the extra d6 should be enough to ensure any goblin hit dies in 1 shot instead of 2, and you've got 9 arrows left.

Of course, if that's what you're worried about, you're better off with Melf's Minute Meteors.

[Segev]

The spell's magic ending on a specific piece of ammunition when it hits or misses a target doesn't preclude it also ending when the spell does.

Yes, the 12th arrow being drawn ending the spell does technically mean that the 12th arrow doesn't get the magic when you fire it, unless you go with a very generous reading that says that drawing and firing an arrow are all the same action, so the spell ends after that attack.

However, given that we also have problems with conjure elemental, magic circle, and planar binding's timings not quite working out as the apparent intent is, I think this is a case of poor wording of the spell, and, like the idea of conjuring an elemental into a magic circle and then using planar binding on it probably being the intended use of those spells in combination, it seems likely the intent was for all 12 arrows to work. Rule as you wish, but I would rule to match what I believe intent is, here, personally.

[Tanarii]

However... now that I look more closely at the spell, the fire damage only applies when you're drawing the arrow from that enchanted quiver. "When a target is hit by a ranged weapon attack using a piece of ammunition drawn from the quiver, the target takes an extra 1d6 fire damage." It appears that if you draw the arrow from the quiver before the attack instead of as part of the attack, you don't get the bonus damage, even if the spell is still ongoing.
Technically it doesn't say when it has to have been drawn from the quiver, just that it uses one drawn from it.

[MaxWilson]

Technically it doesn't say when it has to have been drawn from the quiver, just that it uses one drawn from it.

See the ammunition rules:

"You can use a weapon that has the Ammunition property to make a ranged Attack only if you have Ammunition to fire from the weapon. Each time you Attack with the weapon, you expend one piece of Ammunition. Drawing the Ammunition from a Quiver, case, or other container is part of the Attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon)."

If you draw from some other quiver, or from this quiver after the magic is gone, you don't get the bonus damage.

[Tanarii]

See the ammunition rules:

"You can use a weapon that has the Ammunition property to make a ranged Attack only if you have Ammunition to fire from the weapon. Each time you Attack with the weapon, you expend one piece of Ammunition. Drawing the Ammunition from a Quiver, case, or other container is part of the Attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon)."

If you draw from some other quiver, or from this quiver after the magic is gone, you don't get the bonus damage.
That rule requires you use a piece of ammunition. And it allows you to draw from a quiver as part of the attack.

If someone draws 12 pieces of ammunition and hands them to 12 henchmen, then they use it to make an attack, it should work under those two rules put together. (Explicitly they aren't drawing from a 2nd quiver in this hypothetical.)

It also works if you draw, hold it for a while, then use it to attack. Note that this matters with crossbows, since you might draw and load them before you attack due to the loading property.

[MaxWilson]

That rule requires you use a piece of ammunition. And it allows you to draw from a quiver as part of the attack.

If someone draws 12 pieces of ammunition and hands them to 12 henchmen, then they use it to make an attack, it should work under those two rules put together. (Explicitly they aren't drawing from a 2nd quiver in this hypothetical.)

It also works if you draw, hold it for a while, then use it to attack. Note that this matters with crossbows, since you might draw and load them before you attack due to the loading property.

Yes, I agree. But that's quite niche because you can't leverage Extra Attack effectively.

[Asisreo1]

Just as an hypnotic pattern has the spell end on individual creatures or all at once when concentration is dropped, so does a flame arrow's magic end on each piece of ammunition as well as all at once when the spell ends overall.

The distinction lies so that someone can't just use 1 piece of ammunition that they consistently recover with the flame arrow spell. They must move onto the next piece of ammo.

[Satori01]

The distinction lies so that someone can't just use 1 piece of ammunition that they consistently recover with the flame arrow spell. They must move onto the next piece of ammo.

The most persnickety reading of the Spell text would preclude casting the spell on an empty quiver, but if you had just two projectiles in there, why couldn't you simply put the same two projectiles into the Quiver over and over again?

I tend to track ammunition accurately, I've been on Gilligan's Island style tours that have gone awry leaving PCs down to only their Unbreakable Arrows, which might be just a handful. Double Dipping ammunition means the spell is useful in that survival scenario.

Also the spell doesn't state it makes the ammunition count as magical. Double dipping your +2 arrow multiple times, could be the intention. Why else have an hour long duration?

[Segev]

The most persnickety reading of the Spell text would preclude casting the spell on an empty quiver, but if you had just two projectiles in there, why couldn't you simply put the same two projectiles into the Quiver over and over again?

I tend to track ammunition accurately, I've been on Gilligan's Island style tours that have gone awry leaving PCs down to only their Unbreakable Arrows, which might be just a handful. Double Dipping ammunition means the spell is useful in that survival scenario.

Also the spell doesn't state it makes the ammunition count as magical. Double dipping your +2 arrow multiple times, could be the intention. Why else have an hour long duration?

An hour-long duration makes sure it's not something you cast in the morning, but instead have to cast when you expect to go into a risky situation (or wait for combat to break out and waste an action). It also prevents it from being cast before a short rest, if that matters for some reason.

As for re-dipping the same arrow, that's one possible reading. Another is that removing the same arrow 12 times is still removing "a twelfth arrow," colloquially. Plus, ammo is 50% lost each time it's fired, so you still run out pretty fast even if you do try to exploit it that way.

[Satori01]

Casting it at the start of a Dungeon, or after a Short Rest seems the most likely outcome.

A Spiritual Weapon or Shadow Blade lasts 1 minute. This is often just a single battle.
Shield of Faith lasts 10 minutes, often this means two battles.

The hour duration for Flame Arrows is to allow non-Extra Attack capable casters, ample time to use the ammunition.

12 pieces ammunition can go quick for a Hunter Ranger with Volley. For characters with Extra Attack, 12 pieces of ammunition is probably closer to being two combats. For single characters with a single attack, the spell might last all Adventuring Day.

A Flame Arrow cast in a 9th level spell slot let's you draw up to 24 pieces of +1d6 Fire damage ammo.

An Elven Sorcerer might spend a 9th level spell slot to create 24 Fire Arrows the night before a troll army attacks, if the magic on the arrow lasts until the projectile is used.

Even that is iffy.

I shudder to think what hellscape, alternate world would spawn a circumstance so diabolical that only a Flame Arrow spell Upcast to a 9th level spell could solve it. How many Sorcadin, routinely use Flame Arrows?

[Vogie]

Flame Arrows is something I allow Arcane Archers to use an Arcane shot to use, if they so desire.

[Droppeddead]

The Duration is Concentration, not one hour- it's an important distinction.

Conjure Elemental has a duration of Concentration up to an hour- if Concentration is broken, the spell ends but the elemental sticks around. Spell's magic and spell are two different things.

No, you are wrong. XGtE, page 156. "Concentration, up to 1 hour" Concentration itself doesn't decide the length of the duration of the spell, it just sets a condition on when it may end.

[Valmark]

No, you are wrong. XGtE, page 156. "Concentration, up to 1 hour" Concentration itself doesn't decide the length of the duration of the spell, it just sets a condition on when it may end.

It does decide the lenght of the spell- just not the maximum time. But anyway, even if you disagree on that do you agree on the fact that a spell's effect is different from the spell in regards to the Duration?

[Droppeddead]

It does decide the lenght of the spell- just not the maximum time. But anyway, even if you disagree on that do you agree on the fact that a spell's effect is different from the spell in regards to the Duration?

You're nitpicking semantics and my point is obvious to everyone. As for your question, it is clear that after an hour, maximum, the spell has no effect anymore.

[Valmark]

You're nitpicking semantics and my point is obvious to everyone. As for your question, it is clear that after an hour, maximum, the spell has no effect anymore.

Yes- after an hour the spell has no effect anymore. But the spell ended earlier as per the text of Conjure Elemental. As Max said (I think it was them anyway) there are spells like Goodberry where the spell ends immediately (Duration Istantaneous) and the spell's effect lasts 24 hours (indicated in the text).

Flame Arrows makes a distinction between the spell and the spell's effect- both arguments can be made then. Especially if you compare it to something like Hypnotic Pattern (somebody mentioned it) where the Duration is Concentration and the spell's effect explicitely ends at the end of the spell.