Shattered Kingdoms

Where Roleplay and Tactics Collide
VOTE NOW!
It is currently Mon Dec 23, 2024 12:14 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 10:38 am 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:05 pm
Posts: 2620
Location: *cough*
Drifter wins at life.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:06 am 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:32 pm
Posts: 424
theDrifter wrote:
archaicsmurf wrote:

Real life is irrelevant to computer games, but throwing more burning things on a fire source will only make it bigger, not diminish the flames.

I like phiezel's idea though. Add to the fire, make it better.

Understandable though.. if flamestrikes are divine, then there should be damage. I just didnt think about that.


If we're trying to apply real-life physics to fire elementals, then we have to consider what fire is in real life- The visible reaction of combustable material with oxygen to produce heat, light, probably carbon dioxide, and other stuff.

Thus a 'real life' fire elemental would need some sort of fuel source and oxygen source. Engulfing such an elemental in another fire would deplete its oxygen and/or fuel supply, thereby shortening the life of the elemental, which could be considered a way of 'damaging' it because eventually its fuel supply would be depleted.


Regardless of all of this, I think it is safer to assume that SK flamestrike is similar to DnD flamestrike:
DnD SRD wrote:
A flame strike produces a vertical column of divine fire roaring downward. The spell deals 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 15d6). Half the damage is fire damage, but the other half results directly from divine power and is therefore not subject to being reduced by resistance to fire-based attacks.



If you want to apply real physics, when two fires meet they do not diminish, rather they make a much larger fire. However, fires will consume much more fuel when burning hotter and brighter. Fire elementals are from the fire plane, held together by a central body that is the fuel. And since I am no plannar physicist, i cannot begin to draw knowledge of the other planes. Now going on what I do know, being drawn mostly from DnD SRD (as few actually touch on such things), and though it matters little because we have solved it I will continue with a few more quotes.

SRD V3.5 wrote:
Fire-Dominant: Planes with this trait are composed of flames that continually burn without consuming their fuel source.


ELEMENTAL PLANE OF FIRE
Everything is alight on the Elemental Plane of Fire. The ground is nothing more than great, evershifting plates of compressed flame. The air ripples with the heat of continual firestorms, and the most common liquid is magma, not water. The oceans are made of liquid flame, and the mountains ooze with molten lava. Fire survives here without need for fuel or air, but flammables brought onto the plane are consumed readily.



Now going off of that, when you add fire to a fire elemental, a being brought from another plane where air nor fuel is needed to survive, it would not be robbing it. At worst it would just sit there and do nothing as beings of fire take no fire damage. The issue at hand is Flamestrike is divine and fire, and thus divine damage affects a fire elemental.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 12:35 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:19 pm
Posts: 425
Malhavoc wrote:
Now going off of that, when you add fire to a fire elemental, a being brought from another plane where air nor fuel is needed to survive, it would not be robbing it. At worst it would just sit there and do nothing as beings of fire take no fire damage. The issue at hand is Flamestrike is divine and fire, and thus divine damage affects a fire elemental.


If it is true that fire elementals come from a plane of existence in which fire can burn forever without using up fuel or air, then the essential question becomes whether this is a property of the plane or a property of the fire on that plane.

That is to say, when you take fire out of a plane where it needs no fuel or air, is it able to survive on a plane where fire requires fuel and air? If it is, then it would be immune to flame, but otherwise, exposure to additional flames would increase the depletion of the fuel source thereby shortening its stay on the material plane.

The inverse of this question is addressed by the SRD description of the plane of fire but not in a very clear way:

SRD V3.5 wrote:
Fire survives here without need for fuel or air, but flammables brought onto the plane are consumed readily.


This suggests that material brought from other planes is "consumed" by the flames, but in the same sentence says that the flames do not require fuel. What is it then, that consumes these flammable fuel sources? Does the fire actually burn up the fuel sources, but continues to "survive" afterwards as a non-material force creating limitless energy from nothing? Does the fire "choose" whether to use fuel or oxygen? What happens to the leftover carbon charcoal after the fuel is burned in an oxygen-depleted fire, or is there an eternal source of oxygen that the existing fires choose to use only when destroying adventuring gear?

It also says that flames survive here without fuel or air, but does not say that flames from here survive anywhere without them.

It seems that there are some internal inconsistencies that may suggest a small chance that the plane of fire may not actually exist, or at least that the writers of the SRD do not have a completely clear understanding of its existance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:25 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 1:03 pm
Posts: 1593
Location: pyrathia
!!!STOP IT STOP IT STOP IT!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 10:55 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 1:58 am
Posts: 2423
Location: Athens, Greece
It's been a long time since I had agreed with mezcao, and now you made me do that again. Sad panda... )83


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 81 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group