>Player: "I have fire immunity, right? I knock over the four braziers next to me and set the whole building on fire, burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!"
How would you rule this situation as a GM?
>>47330773
Have the important ones get away.
>>47330773
Fire doesnt spread THAT fast.
>>47330773
>rolls die out of sight
"The flame sparks, then sputters and dies."
>>47330773
Clever enough. I'll allow it.
>>47330787
What they said, but also.... Have you ever seen a tent full of berserkers that are also on fire?
Its not a bad plan. Depending on what system we're using and how mooky those barbarians are, I'd probably give it to them.
>>47330773
Buildings take time to burn, I bet you don't have "buried under hundreds of lbs of debris" immunity do you faggot, and if the barbarians are already in a rage before he did this then he's doing nothing but making the fight more intense and awe-inspiring for the bards to sing about so prepare your face for all the blunt/pierce/slashing damage coming your way.
>>47330773
What prevents the barbarians from getting out? I don't see four braziers becoming an instant death inferno unless the place is filled with combustible shit.
And fire immunity isn't necessarily smoke inhalation immunity.
>>47330773
"Debris falls, everyone dies."
"Yes, that includes you, hope you had a backup character."
>>47330805
>What prevents the barbarians from getting out?
"Someone else barred the door!"
A few knocked over braziers won't turn an entire house into a firestorm in just a few short moments.
But assuming it's a wooden house, or otherwise plenty of stuff around that can burn, this seems like a pretty good idea for that character (assuming a fight was coming and winning is a good thing), there and then at least. If people are too busy fighting to fight the fire, then having slowly growing zones of fire damage spread out from the knocked over braziers. This gradually gives an advantage to the fire immune guy, and presents a problem for anyone around who isn't. Possibly including the rest of the party.
Any enemy who isn't in a berserk frenzy will probably not stay within the fire to burn to a crisp though.
And once this fight is settled, depending on the weather and what else is around, the fire may or may not spread. In a wooden city, this could make the player somewhat less than idolized.
>>47330795
Its hard to be mad when youre on fire though.
Trust me, I know.
>>47330773
Fire immunity is not smoke inhalation immunity and if the building was so flimsy that the whole thing went up instantly then there's no reason the big muscle warlords couldn't have just smashed their way out through a wall and been fine.
>>47330839
Theyre barbarians.
They break down doors all the time during raids. This is not a problem for them.
I don't get it. Is this supposed to be a jab at the last GoT episode like it doesn't make sense? Don't tell me people are now butthurt over this.
>>47330847
If the guy thinks that a brazier can instantly burn down this place then i can only assume they are in a tiny hut made of nothing but straw. If so, the barbarians would only have to simply "destroy" the walls by casually walking against them and everything is fine.
It's not like the fire from the braziers just jump onto all the barbarians and stick to them like napalm.
>>47330864
>Don't tell me people are now butthurt over this.
There's been a suspicious lot of threads lately complaining about people being inspired by GoT for the games they run.
>Everyone suddenly becomes Medieval fire marshals and rule lawyers the exacting physics to fuck over a player
Not petty at all.
>>47330846
>>47330773
I think they had poured something on the floor before the meeting, but I'm not sure.
>>47330883
That was happening before this latest episode though.
>>47330888
>"Hey, why does it smell suspiciously like oil in here? And why is the floor so fucking slippery that I just fell?"
>>47330895
>implying it doesn't smell like oil already because of the braziers
>implying the kind of floor depicted in the show would be slippery
>even implying they would use oil
>saruman the implier
>>47330773
>How would you rule this situation as a GM?
Few things could have happened:
>The Fire simply doesn't spread. It hits the ground and the brazer dies: she's raped- possibly to death.
>The Fire doesn't spread fast enough. She isn't raped to death immediately, but is take out, beaten and then possibly raped to death at a later stage or point in time.
>The Fire DOES spread and she's just straight up crushed by a fucking supporting column, pillar or some other piece of rubble. This isn't a fucking tent fire or pyre- she's in an enclosed space.
>The Fire DOES spread but she dies from smoke inhalation or is suffocated by the fire itself. Again; enclosed space.
There's a lot of ways this could have gone wrong, but I suppose in terms of risk vs reward it was "okay".
>>47330773
If they had put a plan together ahead of time to coat the floor in flammable oil, barred the doors, and all of the barbarians had no weapons on them?
Hell yeah, the player wins in that situation.
>>47330913
>implying it doesn't smell like oil already because of the braziers
Oil all over the floor would smell very different.
>implying the kind of floor depicted in the show would be slippery
It would either be slippery, or icky and sticky. Noticeable either way.
>>47330773
I gleefully accept his actions, and roll 10d10 worth of damage, telling him to take that much damage. When he points to where it says "Fire Immunity" on his character sheet, I ask him if he has "Getting crushed by a burning fucking building" immunity, too.But in all seriousness if I was dumb enough to let that scenario escape me when planning the encounter, he deserves the win for using his strengths. He'll still have to escape the building with flaming and pissed off barbarians in it, though.
>>47330886
You're right, we should always let players do shit like this to let there never be any consequences for their actions or need to be wary of their surroundings.
Next time we fight some people on a dam I'm just going to "blow it up" and instantly win the fight, take the money, and the group will be on our merry way. Or fight a group of bandits in a crop field and set fire to that to set the whole field on fire "burning all the [bandits] to a crisp!" Or start an avalanche because Mulan did it in that one movie so why not right?
Thinking outside auto-attack mode is great and should be encouraged, but to say that he wouldn't instantly win and get a gold star for this is being a "rule lawyer" is certainly not petty at all.
>>47330773
"Okay, you knock down the braziers and the entire building erupts into a fiery inferno. Though the flames lick at your body, you feel none of their heat."
"However, the burning building is filling the air with smoke. Roll CON save against choking."
>>47330934
Yep. Petty.
>>47330942
I'm sure that your idea in your last session was great anon, but no need to get all hot and bothered that it didn't turn out how you wanted it.
Use your thinking-brain next time to do very good job.
>>47330934
>Or fight a group of bandits in a crop field and set fire to that to set the whole field on fire "burning all the [bandits] to a crisp!"
Obviously the best plan. What are you, fatuous?
>>47330773
Do you have oxygen deprivation immunity? What about protection from smoke inhalation? Falling debris? Flailing barbarians burning to death?
>>47330965P E T T Y
>>47330773
Okay, that fire's going to be a problem in a little bit.
Right now, you have bigger problems.
Namely, some very angry barbarians.
>>47330975
I mean if the characters abilities from the show are copied, then they DO have protection from smoke inhalation, and can breath in fiery conditions, as they've shown to be able to do before.
Also all you'd have to do is hide inside a doorway, where debris won't fall for a while. Its also not very hard to dodge people who are concerned with burning to death.
>>47330773
The barbarians are well versed in fire safety and they calmly and quickly evacuate the building. They assemble at the designated meeting point and the chieftan takes role while the barbarian who was designated Safety Marshal hands out juice boxes and granola bars.
>>47330967
>not tying wagons together in the field to make for a better strategic path for the fire to follow
You call yourself a field strategist?
>>47330977
>rage after DM kills me for my super-awesome-ultra plan
>see thread on /tg/
>"t-this is payback!" - you
Your snowflaking can only get you so far.
>>47330934
I would rather my players try to knock some braziers over than roll initiative and spend around two hours making attack rolls over and over. I would just say it works and reward them instead of trying half-fuck them for it.
And what about this >>47330915 faggot right here?
>>47331024
Can this murderer of his own uncle get any more petty and trivial with his attempt to project and contrive any excuse to not be that-DM?
Find out in two minutes when he tries to reply!
>>47331033
We need to know the surroundings.
Were his party members there? Are they fire immune? Are they in a wooden building, a thatch hut, or a stone building/castle? Are there multiple windows to allow for easy ventilation? I'm not saying that wanting to do some out-of-the-box things should never be done, I do them almost every fight I can when I am a player, but if you do things outside "roll to hit" combat then you should expect outcomes that are outside "you blocked it" or "you take (enter damage and type here."
If it's a wooden building then I would more than likely do a roll for a certain number of minutes based on the size of the building and make the fire spread accordingly, debris would have to be watched out for and it would fall in areas dictated by my best knowledge of support beam placements, and if there is not enough ventilation then it would make sense to make CON saves for that. Stone simply wouldnt burn and thatch would be easy to escape because...well it's thatch. Not seeing the problem outside the raping with that anons scenarios.
>>47331046
>DM didn't let me get an insta-win = That DM
Are you even trying?
>>47331033
If you're spending two hours making attack rolls you either need to design encounters better or stop playing DnD 4e
>>47331090
Holy shit, I thought you were just talking shit with the other dude, you really are That GM.
>>47330773
>...burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!
Oh, bad news, anon. The barbarians accepts their fate and attack you!
>>47330773
In situations like this I use the "Yes, and/but..." rule.
"Yes, but the braziers don't instantly engulf the barbarians or building in flame. The burning coals spills over the floor between you and them creating a barrier of glowing ash. The patch of hot coals would be painful to step on even wearing boots, but not for very long. There seems to be some agreement between the barbarians that the situation has become more metal."
The player's clever thinking gives them some kind of tactical advantage, but unless the floor is made of the oldest, dryest, shittiest soft wood (though given a quasi-medieval setting it would probably be a little bit damp) that fucker ain't gonna catch from a shitload of hot coals. Likewise for the barbarians. People aren't that easy to ignite on fire.
HERE IS A SUPER DUPER IMPORTANT NOTE ABOUT BRAZIERS:
Braziers are almost solely for burning solid fuels like coal or wood, the ones you see in movies are usually burning modern petrochemical mixes for convenience. Shallow pools of slow burning oil (commonly derived from animal fats) were also sometimes put into them, though only about the same as the average oil lamp. Braziers were also used to warm oil for ceremonial purposes, but in this context the oil itself is not on fire. They were also an early fryer for people who could afford it!
Braziers are actually pretty safe, because if you spill hot coals or burning wood everywhere you're also likely to spill quite a bit of ash that will help put it out.
A cresset is the cup full of burning oil (kerosene I think), though they were mounted on long poles and used as early streetlights usually only on special occasions because they were so expensive to maintain.
>>47331109
>That GM
I don't think you understand what that phrase means. If you attempt to, as the original post stated, "set the whole building on fire" that is going to take a few minutes and combat is still going to continue after you kicked the braziers down.
Fire spreads, wood gets burnt, and the building loses the ability to support itself. If the player expects the enemies to all be "burning to a crisp" then they will have to wait as knocking over a four braziers is not the equivalent to casting fire max level fireball spells.
>>47330886
The post is basically Godmodding. Of course we're pissed.
>>47330773
They break the wooden wall behind them with ease before escaping
>>47331138
No, I get it. It's just obvious at this point. None of your niggling, for example, suppose details of the event that might actually play in the player's favor. Maybe they choose to use the flame as their shield, forcing the enemy to approach them through a bonfire, or if the barbarians have a different reaction such as being scared of burning alive, or if the fire finds some accelerant and turns the room into a ball of fire within seconds.
But you didn't.
>>47330773
My players just thought of something outside of 'I hit him with my sword' I'm going to not only allow this, I'll even fudge shit rolls(Or not roll at all)to keep encouraging this behaviour.
>>47331183
We need the entire scenario to know what happened and I am going with the basics. A player is committing to this action because they have fire immunity and nothing else. Would that be stupid? Yeah it would, but I have seen worse and I am sure that you have as well.
We can also assume that this guys party was not with him as well since they would do this without concern of their teammates fire immunity so why would they be scared? It's one person that knocked over some braziers and we are, at the very east two, barbarians. And they did not attempt to use this as their shield, they used the braziers as an offensive weapon to incinerate their enemies as seen in the original post.
We do not know the exact setup of this situation, but I'm assuming you are either very inexperienced or very naive to believe that the player was in the right here by expecting an instant win out of this.
>>47330862
They wouldn't be carrying any weapons though because it's forbidden to do so in their sacred city.
>>47331226
I'm not surprised. You seem quite capable of assuming if nothing else.
For someone who keeps harping on about needing to know the situation, you sure do like putting a lot of imagined stupidity and shortsightedness in our hypothetical player, imagining every negative consequence instead of every potential consequence, good, bad, or neutral, and believing everyone else wants an instant win for their players.
So I'm with the guy earlier, but for real this time. That's damn petty, dude.
>>47330773
Legitimate tactic. Players should be commended for this resourcefulness.
The moment the DM okayed that backstory he was asking for this shit anyways.
>>47331195
This guy gets it.
Also, we use that quote around our table all the time.
>>47331276
>not allowing the barbarians to teleport behind the party and snap the necks of the their weaker enemies simply because of their amazing strength
If the players with lower STR have beef with it I'll just point to their weak and flabby arms in comparison to the carved and defined muscles of the barbarians and continue the session.
>>47331183
>Maybe they choose to use the flame as their shield, forcing the enemy to approach them through a bonfire
too bad all we got was 'i'll use it as an offensive weapon, expecting the entire place to go up in smoke instantly!'
>if the barbarians have a different reaction such as being scared of burning alive
any barbarians currently berserking probably wouldn't give a shit, but once the fire gets out of control (ie, most likely several rounds after the braziers were knocked down) then they'd feasibly start to flee
it's not going to be instant, you mongoloid
>the fire finds some accelerant and turns the room into a ball of fire within seconds.
such as?
unless you're fighting in a gunpowder storage with conveniently easy to knock over braziers, i don't see what could make the room burn fast enough to turn the barbarians into a 'crisp' in little enough time that the player doesn't have to /think/ about how they're going about this.
of course i suppose some systems have ways of letting a player set up this kind of situation themselves - for example a player in GURPS can spend a couple of unused character points to make a change to the scene if the DM thinks it's reasonable, one example given is a robot breaking into a science lab and a player spending a couple of points to make sure there's a security console nearby so that they can see and react to this better.
so i suppose you could spend a couple of points to have a convenient barrel of oil or gunpowder sitting next to a brazier
but again, we didn't get much more than somebody kicking over a couple of braziers and going 'i win'
>>47331285
try using your brain a little more
>>47330915
>enclosed space
they had fires in there. there'll be a hole in the roof like in every premodern house.
>>47331315
Q.E.D.
P E T T Y
E
T
T
Y
>>47331285
You are assuming that this situation wouldn't be fun. Attempting to escape the enemies sight and somehow locking them into the burning building as you make your escape, attempting to break windows and force enemies on high ground to make them inhale more smoke making the battle much easier for yourself, or maybe even just using it as a distraction to get away.
Yeah I do make assumptions, but not all of them are negative. You on the other hand seem very quick to read everything I am saying about this situation as negative. Why would anything that i stated above be seen as a fuck you to the players originality? All I ever really said was that the building would be on fire, smoke MIGHT be an issue depending on the building, and debris would also be an issue but this does not have to be a negative unless you see it as one. Think it's petty all you want, but I see it as a more exciting albeit reckless change to the battle that could have good or bad consequences depending on the circumstances that we were not given on the environment the player was in.
My only problem this entire time was that this is in no way, shape, fashion, or form a "burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!" scenario as the OP said without combat continuing and the player making that a reality through continued actions other that playground "because I said so" bullshit.
>>47330817
>>47330803
>>47330789
>>47330787
>>47330786
>NO FUN ALLOWED
All those DMs who use their position as a power fantasy disgust me. I bet you all get boners when you kill a character.
This is the only right answer: >>47330791
>>47331315
>try using your brain a little more
I did. I just happened to not be THAT GM while doing so.
>>47331315
You're so focused on being right, you're ignoring every single positive aspect to the plan just so you can shit all over it and make yourself feel clever. You're exactly the sort of autist that gives the hobby a bad reputation, unable to think outside the box.
In other words, your reaction to this is quite petty.
>>47331385
>Players can't fail. Especially bad ideas.
k
For the record I have zero problems letting my players do whatever the fuck they want. They also don't bitch when some of their dumber ideas fail.
You know why?
It's a fucking dumb idea.
>>47330773
>I'm immune to poison, I just put it in everyone's food
>I'm immune to disease, I just create a super plague
>I'm immune to cold, I just create an ice age
>I have access to other dimensions, I just destroy this oneit's a pretty good plan
>>47331378
>My only problem this entire time was that this is in no way, shape, fashion, or form a "burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!" scenario as the OP said without combat continuing and the player making that a reality through continued actions other that playground "because I said so" bullshit.
No seriously, that's just doing your absolute hardest to not accept that maybe combat did just end, that maybe the player did just throw a wrench into the works, and rather than rolling with it you just HAVE to take back control.
>>47331393
>If "clever" player actions don't always succeed you're PETTY!
Yeah, fuck tension. Fuck story telling. Hey, I have an idea... Why don't I let the players tell the story, make all the roles, AND GM, too?
>>47330773
>suffocation imminent
Roll a fort save, anon.
>>47331408
>If the players are creative the GM is not allowed to be.
k
>>47331318
>they had fires in there. there'll be a hole in the roof like in every premodern house.
I did not notice that.
That HELPS; that is a good observation.
>>47331385
Most of those are allowing the fire to spread and the action to continue, but if you just let this player get away with a victory simply because they said "it burns them all, the end" how is that any "fun" for anybody else involved?
What about if the other players just say fuck it in the future and throw a few torches on the ground because "they did it"? It's a dick move to not allow them to do the action, but to say that a building takes time to burn is apparently no fun allowed territory? You are a special kind of special anon.
>>47330930
>flaming and pissed off barbarians
wellp, i know what encounter I'm shoehorning into my next session
thanks anon
>>47331421
Who the fuck gives a shit about your fanfic nigga people are here to play a game
God damn
>>47331407
>>I'm immune to poison, I just put it in everyone's food
Hold it right there! How do you know you're not immune to whatever chemical reaction that poison had with every type of food and material on the table? What if the barbarians, realizing you did it because you're sitting there so smug, start to attack ignoring the burning in their throats and bleeding from their armpits? Roll for initiative!
>>47330773
>You succeed in burning the building and killing the men inside
>You emerge into a mob of people
>They don't know who you are and see you as a fire witch that just killed their leaders
>You are attacked by 1,000 Dothraki Bloodriders. Roll for initiative
>>47331445
>People are here to play your game, but only part of your game!
kek Roll for Troll, +5.
>>47331440
This. Just because the GM made it harder than a single round win isn't petty.
>>47331446
>Player: I'm immune to poison.
>GM: Did you know your character has an allergy to the food their eating right now?
>Player: INCONCEIVABLE!
>>47331457
>This. Just because the GM made it harder than a single round win isn't petty.
That's the very definition of petty.
>>47331468
Roll for Troll. +6 bonus.
>>47331421
>Yeah, fuck tension. Fuck story telling. Hey, I have an idea... Why don't I let the players tell the story, make all the roles, AND GM, too?
Christ, you're supposed to tell the story with the player, not make them dance like puppets to your script. Let the tension come from the aftereffects of their success, or let the scene be the capstone to tension you already built up.
>>47331421
>something I didn't say
That was an excellent strawman, 4/10 made me reply but didn't make me mad.
>>47331368
>i'll just insult everybody who disagrees with me so that i don't have to come up with a convincing argument!
boring
>>47331393
my point is the 'positive aspect' to the plan is something that doesn't immediately happen, i don't see why you don't get this
you still have barbarians to deal with until the fire spreads enough to deal with them on its own
i don't know why you expect a standing ovation and instant success for one line of greentext
>>47331408
what kind of wacky ideas do people have about fire that makes them think that it both immediately turns a room into a furnace and also causes everybody to cower and run about screaming when unleashed
where's the fun in an instant 'i win' button anyway
>>47331468
>of little importance; trivial.
>unduly concerned with trivial matters, especially in a small-minded or spiteful way.
i guess?
>>47331468
i mean, yeah it's cool for the one guy immune to fire, but any DM worth his salt should find a way to engage the other party members too. Yeah the bad dudes are dead and burning, but maybe you skill monkey wants to investigate the ashes or some shit. Maybe your paladork wants to heal an injured NPC, maybe someone wants to gather a crowd to make sure the fire doesn't spread. Maybe the minmaxing powergamer wants to eat infinite dicks.
unless your players are assholes, in which case fuck em, encounter over
>>47331475
But with your -4 WIS modifier, you only get a 2/10.
>>47331408
Anon, tipping over four braziers does not just end combat in a single flash of blinding light with everything okay and your enemies being incinerated with just the tipping of said braziers. It just doesnt. OP would more than likely have specified if there was anything to help the fire be more intense or even explosive, but to say that tipping over four braziers just ends the fight because the player says so is stupid.
How is there even anything to argue on this point? He even said the player stated it was to set the building ablaze and burn the enemy to a crisp. You would seriously just let them take that win? Just like that? Jesus, I'd hate to see the tantrums your players go on when you deny them a castles destruction because they filed down some rotted nail or some other bullshit.
>>47331491
>With.
The player has no right to Godmod. Sorry. This is a shitty player and deserves whatever bullshit I throw at them.
>>47331475
Roll for troll, +7 bonus.
>>47331507
Roll for Shitpost Save. -4 penalty.
>>47330773
In general, the only correct answer, (and the only answer needed) for questions like this is "You're welcome to try."
Unless there is a misunderstanding due to my poorly describing something, each player is responsible for his or her own actions.
>>47331507
i kinda wanna play a troll now
>>47331501
And none of these absolutely acceptable actions were even considered by Mr. Petty over here.
>>47331506
>Godmod
With his continued use of the strawman technique, observers begin to wonder if he will ever actually reply to a post.
>>47331525
>and set the whole building on fire, burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!
>not Godmod as fuck
If they player in OP said: "I knock the braziers over hoping to set the building on fire," and left it at that? No problem.
But it's Godmodding. Plain and simple. They deserve a shit show.
>>47331503
>Anon, tipping over four braziers does not just end combat in a single flash of blinding light with everything okay and your enemies being incinerated with just the tipping of said braziers. It just doesnt.
It does if I say it does. That's kind of the point of being the DM. I decide if combat even needs to happen, usually based on if the players want it and if it wouldn't ruin the moment.
> OP would more than likely have specified if there was anything to help the fire be more intense or even explosive, but to say that tipping over four braziers just ends the fight because the player says so is stupid.
None of this is true. You're just assuming all of this, and it has nothing to do with what the proper response as a GM should be, which for the record would be to analyze the player's plan and potential outcomes, analyze the state of the players at the table and what they came here for, and doing my job as a DM, including if it means granting the player their victory without feeling the need to waste theirs and everyone else's time by rule lawyering some way to extend the scene.
>>47330773
It depends on what the floor composed of and how much flammable material there. But in any case, there is plenty of time for those barbarian warriors to kill your character. This is a good maneuver to start your escape, but nothing more.
>>47331534
This.
Give the GM a better idea of what your character is trying to do. Help your GM improvise and make the battle more kickass through your decisions. Not some "my power is to have any power I want" childish bullshit.
This is like if someone says they have an army waiting for them and should have them at level 1 simply because "it says so in my backstory." I don't give a fuck about your backstory, I'll just say your army died of malaria if you keep that shit up, you'll get them when it is appropriate for your level and the story has progressed to the point that it would make sense for them to come in. You cannot just say "I incinerate my enemies" and expect a green-light from the GM as if you just found some cheat that no one has ever found out in the table-top genre.
Guys, he already admitted to being petty. It's just autism at this point because he's incapable of seeing anything wrong with his decisions beyond how they affect his fun and his control over the game.
>>47331534
Oh, so you're just a grammar nazi. My mistake, sorry.
>>47331585
Any time a player says something that I have to respond with, "Uh, no. That's not what happens because that's beyond your character's control..." It fucking ruins the fun for me, for them, and everyone else at the fucking table. No one likes people like this. At all. At any side of the cardboard divisor.
>>47331016
I'd play this game.
>>47331603
I sympathize. But maybe if you were slightly less autistic people would respond more favorably to your outbursts.
>>47331618
Maybe you should click the back links? The only person being autistic here is people defending this travesty of an OP.
Of course, you're going to pretend you're not trolling, retarded, or one of these players anyway.
Roll for Troll. +4.
>>47331624
as you can see here, my troll was top of his class in the Troll SEALS, i get a +11
>>47330773
The barbarians are also immune to fire because of runic wards tatooed on their foreheads. Your move, wizard.
>>47331624
No need, bro. Clearly I just take 20 when targeting someone who never took the 'Self-Awareness' feat at CC.
>>47330847
>anon's never seen a drunk brush past a bonfire, get mad at it for not apologizing and not watching where its walking, realize the fires scuffed his varsity jacket, then initiate a fist fight in blind rage
He lost, but thats beside the point.
>>47331639
Hmm. Says in your backstory you didn't knock any burning braziers over. I'll give you a +8 and no more.
>>47331555
>based on if the players want it and if it wouldn't ruin the moment.
If I was a player in this instance that the DM simply ended the fight because Dan flipped over some embers, I'd start asking a few questions. That would ruin the fun for myself and depending on the buildup/reason for that fight most of the other party members as well. Are you just going to say that the building turned to ash in a blink of an eye as well and...thats it? Are you going to say that they made a daring escape and railroad your other players who were expecting a fight to just accept that?
>You're just assuming all of this
That's what has to be done in this situation. and improvising your plans for the session and how the players change and modify it due to their actions is part of the plan, I agree, but while you seem to use the word "assume" as a bad word you are doing it in excess for this player.
How do you know the others are going to be cool with this shit? Maybe one wanted to take a barbarian alive. Maybe another wanted to search the building more. And whats wrong with extending the scene if you, as a GM, are more than confident in your abilities to make it worth the extra time? You seem to think that denying some player of their flawless victory because they had a modicum of inspiration is bad, but you are making your games integrity nonexistent if you just allow this to happen.
Let's say some player says they will strike a crack in a cave "really really hard to start a cave-in" at the very beginning of a boss fight. Would you just fast forward and say yay good job guys heres your exp! Or would you be a reasonable DM and say, "well you might, we don't know yet. Roll a ______check and we'll see fform there" and evolve the situation as it unfolds?
If it isn't the latter then you are lazy and the games that you DM are played with little to no integrity, and seem as boring and lifeless as BINGO.
>>47331667
>If I was a player in this instance that the DM simply ended the fight because Dan flipped over some embers, I'd start asking a few questions. That would ruin the fun for myself and depending on the buildup/reason for that fight most of the other party members as well. Are you just going to say that the building turned to ash in a blink of an eye as well and...thats it? Are you going to say that they made a daring escape and railroad your other players who were expecting a fight to just accept that?
Hey, I'm a diverse-minded GM. I'll of course make ADA accommodations for you.
>>47331678
if one player demands he ends the fight in a single move and the other players actually want to have a fight where they have input how exactly are you going to reconcile it?
Pulling out a "oh there were a dozen other beserkers outside of the tent" or something just feels off when the simplest course of action would just be to follow logic and physics in that trying to start an uncontrolled fire tends to not go exactly as planned
>>47330773
Reward him to creative thinking.
and stop whining
>>47331667
>How do you know the others are going to be cool with this shit?
He doesn't. That's why like someone with people skills he scans the table and takes a DM-sense survey of his players just like he said.
Know what he doesn't do? Assume everyone can't have fun because he's not having fun, assume other players won't be cool with it because he's not cool with it, and assume what a party wants in one situation can be applied to every other the same way because somehow this is a question of INTEGRITY.
Why the fuck would fire immunity not also cover smoke inhalation?
That's like saying someone is immune to cold but not to the dreadful effect of their metal armor becoming harder to move in so now they're paralyzed and starve to death
>>47331690
He can't. A good GM would just ignore the insta-win part of the player's action like it never happened and move right along with advancing the encounter.
>>47331678
Simply making accommodations for everyone and making it some safe-space with no fear of negative effects where everyone always gets their way is not fun.
There's no competition in that sort of game, no real need for problem solving as the bar is removed from the jump so everyone can make it, and while you are simply being facetious if you would put any sort of differing obstacles for players who are wanting a bit more of a challenge while letting others stay on easy mode then once again your games simply have no life to them. When everyone gets a gold medal no one does.
>>47331704
>...but not to the dreadful effect of their metal armor becoming harder to move in so now they're paralyzed and starve to death
And why is this a problem? Immunities are not blanket immunities.
>>47331690
>>47331707
There you go again, contriving as hard as possible for a scenario in which the player is the bad guy, and, oh, of course, the rest of the table is against them because I am!
>>47331718
Having been on both sides of this, yeah, if a player wanted an insta-win I'd be annoyed. As both a GM and a player.
It's just bad playing. It could have been creative but trying to force a free win is pretty boring and undoes that creativity.
>>47331712
Well because it's stupid. It's using a secondary nitpick to bypass someone's supposed immunity. Someone is immune to fire, but not to smoke inhalation ha ha so they die in fire anyway. It just seems like a dick move.
You're using the direct consequence of their immunity to bypass their immunity. One would rightly assume that a blanket immunity to fire also encompassed stuff like smoke, or the lack of oxygen as the fire burned it away, or the secondary heat.
It just seems petty.
>>47331712
then why would anyone even take fire immunity in the first place
>>47331690
In a normal group that gets hashed out among the players first, and the GM rules accordingly if it gets that far, at which point it starts bringing up serious questions of "Why are we playing with such a petty autist Holy Shit"
>>47331707
yeh, I'd most certainly make it have a pronounced effect, like the barbarians closest would catch on fire and act like a person on fire (IE running, panicking, turning to carbon) and many of the other ones would just flat out run away because shits on fire so the fight would certainly get easier
but having a few of the real badass barbarians go into the mother of all rages and charge the party while on fire would make for a way to good combat scene to ignore
Everybody is forgetting two major points.
1: They had inside help. One of the old queens or dosh khaleen could have replaced contents of the braziers with something more volatile and placed dry straw on the floors.
2: This is a low magic setting. The only magic the barbarians know is shitty blood magic and shitty curses. Nobody has seen something like immunity to fire before, especially not barbarians.
Barbarians are a superstitious folk, they believe in spirits and gods. When she walks out of the burning building everybody kneels, because the believe she is some kind of fire-spirit or god. You dont walk through the fire and stab fire-god in the gut, you flee, flee for your miserably lives.
>>47330773
Greater than 50% of death in structure fires are caused by smoke inhalation, a significant proportion of the remainder are killed by impact trauma following structure collapse.
>tl;dr Roof falls, everybody dies.
>>47331740
>Applaud the player when they're creative! Free win!
>Get mad because the GM is creative?
???
>>47331745
Because not all fire has smoke? And it's still useful?
Your dissatisfaction reeks of min-maxing.
>>47331718
>the rest of the table is against them because I am!
If the player used a spell that instantly burnt them all then I'd be fine with it, but just flipping a few braziers? I'd start flipping through /tg/ or some shit as this game was not to be taken seriously from the start.
>>47331745
protects you from a dragon's firebreath, fire based spells, burning oil, clothes catching on fire, intense heat of wide varieties etc etc
but making immunities go to far just leads to bullshit like claiming a cold immunity also protects you from the sheer force of an avalanche hitting you
>>47331756
They had already established that she could survive a blazing pyre, so immunity to smoke is a given.
Everybody bitching about the roof, this is not some kind of modern two floor building. It is a big wooden shed with a tarp on top.
>>47331749
Their god is a horse and they were established to hate magic and witches since the very first season.
>>47331746
>DM lets another party member get free kills from tossing a few braziers around
>Start doing that myself because it's faster and easier
>Everyone starts doing it and DM has to deal with it because thats the players decision
No, that is not what happens in normal groups. The DM is what makes the scenarios and sticks with the foundation of the game that they have made with a few exceptions made for extraordinary flashes of teamwork or individual creativity.
>"I have fire immunity, right? I knock over the four braziers next to me and set the whole building on fire, burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!"
Is not one of those two examples.
>>47331276
Well I guess the barbarians are dead.
Good job player, you killed all the barbarians. What now?
>>47331804
"I'm going to Disney World!" - 8 year old player
>>47331797
Yeah, they hate shitty blood magic. This is not a shitty and not a curse, its awesome magic.
Awesome magic that has not been seen in generations.
This scenario only works if the GM doesn't get creative, as well. It relies on other people being two-dimensional and accepting of directives from others.
It's just bad playing.
>>47331830
>Geas
You feel compelled to take your new ward to Didney Wurl lest you meet a terrible fate
>>47331749
But you forgot that 3.
3: Player made themselves a vegan to be extra snowflakey and as the gods demand blood they will find that this creature does not eat meat it is more than likely a false god or a demon of some sort leading to the death of character anyways.
>>47331766
>>Get mad because the GM is creative?
A GM should never be "creative" when it comes to directly bypassing the immunities and vulnerabilities of their players. That sort of shit leads to incredibly antagonistic gaming experiences.
A GM can be clever. People can use tactics and ambushes and gadgets and smart movements. But it has to predictable, and it has to be reasonable. There's a informational assymetry between the person arbitrating the rules and the person playing by those rules as a player. So the GM should not do "creative" things like:
"Oh, you're immune to the /fire/ but actually the /smoke/ kills you".
"Oh, you're immune to physical trauam so you die from an appendicitis incident that no doctor can remove"
"Oh, you'e immune to frost and cold but not to wind exposure"
"oh, you're invulnerable and can't die from any physical force - so the building lands on you and you suffocate".
No. That is shit. Don't do it.
>>47331830
Well fuck you, you dont eat your greans you dont get disney world.
>>47331842
"I have salt, right? I knock over the four salt shakers next to me and set the whole Gaes spell on fire, burning all spell on me to a crisp as salt has purifying power!"
>>47331851
>A player should never be "creative" when it comes to directly bypassing the encounter and vulnerabilities of their enemies. That sort of shit leads to incredibly antagonistic gaming experiences.
No shit?
Sorry, but giving a player a challenge to overcome is not the same thing as bypassing an immunity, especially if that challenge would be a natural consequence to ANY ONE ELSE without the immunity.
>>47331851
I mean is it now we link that old John Wick article?
"my player was immune to all diseases so I made a super plague that killed people and he was immune to the cure"
It was stupid then and it's still stupid.
>>47331851
A reasonable DM would not make the smoke kill them in one turn like an ass. The fire may even take a few turns to actually start as braziers are mostly embers anyways. It would take a minute at most for a smoke-worthy fire to begin to form more than likely.
Most of the posts are being over-simplifying assholes on both sides but saying that someone may die of smoke, and the lack of breathable air that entails, shouldn't be seen as a way of directly bepassing a vulnerability.
It's simply a new danger that the player must look out for. That's it.
It's just backseat GM'ing. I typically TPK players like this so they don't join my games again.
>>47330773
when my players kept setting things on fire I had to bring in Smokey the Owlbear.
Hello there, I would just like to quickly jump in to this awful thread and clear something up. "That GM" isn't the same thing as a "Poor GM". That GM is someone who goes out of their way to antagonize players. They railroad because it's not a collaborative game for them, it's a fanfic. They play /against/ their players because if the group succeeds they feel like they lost. On the other hand a Poor GM doesn't understand the game due to lack of experience or understanding. So its be great if folks could stop throwing it around for everything that pissed them off. Also the OP has been same fagging all thread and is obviously not looking to change his mind on the matter. Have a wonderful night.
>>47331942
>Also the OP has been same fagging all thread and is obviously not looking to change his mind on the matter.
But the OP never stated what he would do.
>>47331851
except with fire, having smoke be a major hazard is not a case of being "creative"
smoke hazard is a MAJOR part of any building fire, its danger is well known, logical and to obvious to handwave as well as being completely separate from the effects of heat.
Its more akin to a cold immune player diving into arctic water and complaining he can still drown
>>47331942
>That GM is someone who goes out of their way to antagonize players.
But Anon, not letting me do stuff to instantly negate your encounter despite even rudimentary knowledge or logic of the subject working against me antagonizes me.
>>47331966
Neither is saying, "I start a small fire and win the fight because of fire immunity!"
So... it's like others have said already, if you're a player and pull this you deserve a shit show.
>>47331872
Yeah but anyone else doesn't have the immunity. So to everyone else it's clearly still a challenge. That's why having the particular immunity is a good thing in the first place. It makes the sort of stuff thats challenging to any one else in the entire world not challenging to you because you literally get to go "Nuh, I'm immune". That's what an immunity is, the ability to hard-no a particular set of challenges because they simply don't matter to you.
In GoT Draenerys cannot be hurt by flame. Apparently. That's just a thing she can do. Don't know why, really. So she doesn't have to deal with the bad effects of everything related to fire like smoke or lack of oxygen or water evaporation or the explosive force from fire combustibles or anything like that. She's immune. I assume if she was next to an exploding mine she would not be hurt because the physical force just somehow doesn't apply. It's bullshit, but there it is.
>>47331900
Fair enough. And if its done reasonably then it probably works. It just seems like it slides close to a kind of ill-considered hard no on someone's character trait. They say they're immune to X, and the GM responds that yes of course! it's not X that kills them, it's the direct consequence of X and the character doesn't have the specifically specified required secondary power to avoid that consequence, ha ha.
That works very well in stories because it seems clever but it works less well in rpgs because it's sort of a dick move.
So it's not fire, it's the smoke! It's not the physical trauma of being shot, it's the ensuing lead poisoning! You're immune to electricity but not to the heat generated by the bolt of lightning that just struck you.
Like imagine I was playing a character who never needed to eat. I'd feel a little weird if my character eventually died because "Oh, you don't need to eat - but your gut bacteria still requires some sustenance, and without it, it died and now your immune system is compromised".
>>47331961
It seems like they were hoping for a majority on their side, and when it didn't came they jumped in to comment. Then again I am just assuming which they also seem to have a problem with.
>the Dark Lord attempts to reason with the party
>"I roll to stab him in the neck"
>>47331987
nah, to be equivalent it'd have to go
>I stab the dark lord in the neck, he instantly dies
remember there's no rolling involved the player demands the fire instantly ends the encounter
>>47331986
I've been the assuming anon.
>>47330773
>>47330934
>>47331024
>>47331090
And most of the others in that chain are me as well. Not the OP. And if you tally up those who would allow the bullshit to those that wouldn't, you are actually in the minority friend.
>We finally track down the BBEG
>He's holding a party for many of the other Noble families of the kingdom.
>We infiltrate the party as guests.
>Our plan is a meticulous approach as we find and rescue his slaves, slip sleeping draughts into most the wine and poison into the rest to off just the BBEG and we'll kidnap several others to use as political leverage.
>Barbarian, both Clerics and Sorceress, both coming from known important families, if foreign ones, will do most the hobnobbing and excuse their lack of grace on different customs.
>Find out the BBEG has a sadism streak where, in the dining room, a Drow slave, sorry, chattel, is trapped in the middle of the table, flesh from her legs prepared as an hors d'oeuvre.
>Barbarian, a sometimes cannibal herself, tries to maintain cover, Clerics and some of the less horrible Nobles leave the room is disgust.
>Sorceress has biggest reaction.
>She looks the BBEG right in the eyes and preps Fireball.
On the upside, ending the slave trade was easy once most the Noble families suddenly found themselves decimated.
The Slaves present had also been rescued prior to the explosion.
Though we a now 'persona non grata' for most the region and there likely is a fairly large bounty on our heads as well.
And standing kill-on-sight orders within the kingdom in question.
>>47331979
At best you could say she has multiple immunities. But if someone in my game thinks they can pass through ice like it was air because, "LOL I have a cold immunity!" is being retarded. Because this is where it's headed. If you're immune to cold but get stuck in a frozen block of ice, no, it doesn't mean you can simply ignore it. If you start choking on smoke just because you have immunity to heat you better figure out a way out of it or die.
I don't play this game where you tack on extras to immunities to min-max your way out of area because, "It's killing your fun," because, "I might actually die."
That's part of the game. If you're not mature enough to handle it then my game isn't for you. Find another table.
>>47331979
But smoke is not breathable air. If your character did not need to breathe then this wouldn't be a problem.
>>47332002
I'm on your side. I'm talking about the fellow you were responding to.
>>47332002
Wait read part of that wrong. It's more of him attacking dissenting opinions. Sorry it's late on my side.
>>47331385
But retard-kun, fire just doesn't spreads that fast, stating it doesn not make the DM an asshole, you are just a fucking spoiled kid
>>47330773
>How would you rule this situation as a GM?
The brazier's gonna fall over and hit the solid stone floor, nothing catches fire. Maybe one of the furs on the wall gets a bit scorched. The player has made a fool of himself and is "escorted" out of the room, while the rest of the party receives a -3 penalty to CHA rolls for the rest of the encounter because their sociopathic friend just tried to set the building on fire on a whim. Roll for diplomacy.
>Barbarians are too stupid to put a fire out.
>>47332099
>WE WUZ FIREFIGHTERS N SHIET
>>47332086
>solid stone floor
Yet another angry anon makes up another detail to ensure he remains morally and intelluctually superior to the person he is replying to.
>>47332111
>Players define the scene and not the GM.
>>47330773
>You knock the first brazier, fire starts, roll initiative
What did he even expect ?
The majority of barbarians easily escape. Some die while trying to brave the fire or getting stampeded over by their brethren. The player doesn't mind the fire and heat but succumbs quickly to a very painful death due to carbon monoxide poisoning.
>>47332111
Fine, wooden floor then. Exceptionally dry wooden floor, freshly waxed and uncovered. Perfectly prepared to catch on fire, because every other kind of floor wouldn't fucking catch fire easily enough to kill a room full of people instantly. It still doesn't because Olaf the Quick uncorks a casket of beer to subdue the flames. You have successfully pissed off Olaf. That was his favorite casket of beer. He grabs the empty brazier and swings at you. Roll for initiative.
>>47332134
how the fuck does a fire spread so quickly in a room that has doors, that people die from it? do they just jump into the flames and stay still until they're dead?
I don't know about as a DM since I never have DMed and don't think I ever will.
As a fellow player witnessing this happen though, I'd be pissed off for missing out on the chance to see the mega rape the DM described would happen. I mean come on, I'm pretty sure I heard him say the horses would get in on the action.
>>47332135
>throwing alcohol
>on a fire
>>47332148
They're male oppressors, anon. Clearly they're too stupid to run a government without slavery or live without a woman keeping them alive every second.
>>47332152
>Beer won't put out a fire.
Beer has, at best, 5% alcohol. In the past "daytime" alcohol had roughly 3% alcohol and they saved the good stuff for dinner.
>>47332152
It's beer, not rum
>>47332152
He didn't say that it was moonshine anon.
Go try to start a fire with whatever beer you may have and see why you need to delete your post before more people see it.
>>47332152
Medieval beer =/= cleaning ethanol. People drank like 4 liters of it per day, they would've been blackout drunk every day if there was even a tenth of the alcohol today's beer has in it. You fudge your roll. Olaf hits you square in the head.
>Pyromancer Anon the Cunning has died.
>>47332148
They're hotheaded barbarians.
>>47332162
>plot twist: the barbarians areall women
>>47330773
"Do you need to breathe?"
>>47332172
What's funny is beer was something, like, 60% of their caloric intake, too. Shit used to be good for you.
>This is now a beer thread.
>>47332177
I have to be really drunk for that one.
>>47332176
If I knock down that brazier will you die?
>>47332167
>>47332170
>>47332171
>>47332172
If the fire is big, the beer won't put it out, and then once the water content boils off, the alcohol will burn.
>>47330773
>rest of the party also dies in the fire
>players roll new characters
>fire immunity anon is their new BBEG
>>47332162
>thinking that barbarian male are in any way the victims here
#gnomelivesmatter Let's not forget that at the end of the day the barbarian males put this on themselves for their racist policies put into effect centuries agothough ended half a century agoand how the gnomes are the REAL victims here.
I mean they represent a large enough chunk of the population to merit some sort of screentime in this battle and I have yet to see one post, ONE FUCKING POST, about them.
>>47332184
Roll to save for extreme pain. +3
>>47332190
>A CASKET of beer can't put out a brazier of fire.
k
>>47330773
If he tells me that way, only a nice carpet gets slightly burnt and the barbarians are pissed as fuck. I hate when players tell me what happen as a consequence of their actions, it's not how it works.
Now, it is a decent plan, and it would make for a way better combat (for him) if the whole building was on fire, so if he just decides to kick the braseros and prevent the barbarians to put the fire out or get out (in a normal combat sequence) I would give him nice bonuses
>>47332186
see
>>47332196
The part about the casket of beer was meant for you.
>>47332186
He said a cask anon. That would be more than enough to put out the embers that a brazier would have spread onto the floor.
You are just digging yourself deeper.
>>47332192
I heard your type was good at building.
BUILD CASTLE WALL
How THE FUCK are 4 braziers enough to light A WHOLE BUILDING on fire instantly?
>>47332186
>If the fire is big
It's not, it's only 4 braziers
>>47332206
Braziers do not contain fucking bonfires on a regular basis.
>>47332192
>>47332217
>Gnomish immigrants with a Mexican accent.
FUND IT
>>47330773
>I knock over the four braziers next to me
Good plan
>and set the whole building on fire
Like they said, fire doesn't spread that fast
>>47330888
>I think they had poured something on the floor before the meeting, but I'm not sure.
Well, they would need some form of accelerant or kindling to start a fire.
At any rate, knocking over the braziers is a sound tactical move and if a fire starts it could give the immune player an strong advantage until the clean air ran out.
>burning all the barbarian warriors to a crisp!
Yeah, no.
Unless all the barbarians and the floor were covered with pitch, oil, kerosene, or sumptin' (which is a highly unlikely scenario) that is not going to just happen.
Some are going to be distracted by the contents of the braziers spilling, the subsequent fire, and trying to put out the flames.
Distracted enemies will be vulnerable to attacks of opportunity or the equivalent.
Determined or berserking enemies will take fire damage.
In short, this is a good idea that would help in a battle against larger numbers, definitely facilitating an escape, possibly helping a battle, but not killing all the enemies.
Unless these barbarians happened to have a racial weakness to fire that makes the presence near braziers suspect.
Are pic related the barbarian warriors in question?
>>47332218
Because the players said it was. We are now the Peoples Democratic Union of the Players, DMs must now bend to our rule zero.
>>47332224
Yes, that's what I'm saying, anon.
>>47330773
>you fucker are immune to heat, not lack of oxygen
>>47332226
>Poor man's KKK outfits.
Goddamn racist barbarians.
>The strawman was an added bonus.
>>47332226
>barbarians aren't oiled up and ready for some posing 24/7
bruh
>>47330773
Your clothes were burnt off and you were executed via rectum expansion for indecent exposure to the Chief's wife by the dead barbarians family members. You enjoyed every second of it until the end.
Don't like it? Then go make your own campaign. Then we all enjoy playing a normal session without them.
>>47332250
I'd hit that, get what I'm saying?
No homo.
>>47332257
Roll for Gay. -20 penalty.
>>47332257
>>47332240
>>47332226
>>47332240
>>47332203
>hurr durr I'm teh Dee Emm I say how the story goes >:(
That DM found.
>>47330773
Short term? More and more of the building starts burning. Some areas become dangerous to enemies.
Long term? Entire building becomes death trap for anything that breathes.
>The roof falls on you, you die.
>>47332272
>Everyone ELSE is wrong! I'M RIGHT! I HAVE TO BE! IT'S MY OPINION!
k
>>47332272
>hurr durr I'm teh Dee Emm I say how the story goes >:(
Well yes. If you aren't happy with that get out of my house.
>>47332203
This is good.
>I hate when players tell me what happen as a consequence of their actions, it's not how it works.
This so much.
>only a nice carpet gets slightly burnt and the barbarians are pissed as fuck
This gave me a giggle, it's so very barbarian.
>Oh heavens, that savage heathen has upended our antique bronze braziers on that lovely Elvish woven berber rug we found at that little shop when we went wine tasting in halfling country.
>Let us have at that scandalous ruffian!
>To fisticuffs!
>>47332284
Even with good ventilation (even with a fire hole in the roof for smoke it still wouldn't have that but whatever)... the building itself is still pretty dangerous. It's like walking through a collapsing building with no visibility.
>>47330773
>the barbarian queen hops on your dick
>you are crowned king
>free blowjobs every day for the rest of your life
>also unlimited riches
>>47332272
Isn't that, like, why DMs exist in the first place? And by all accounts everything from the amount of time fire spreads, to smoke inhalation, to the barbarians' reactions fit within the established framework of the game.
Maybe you should play one of those "postmodern collaborative storytelling experiences" instead.
>>47331749
>replaced contents of the braziers with something more volatile and placed dry straw on the floors
"Whoah, guys, why are the fires so ridiculously strong in this highly flammable hut today? And why is there shit all over the floor?"
>>47332292
And that's how you lose your players. If I wanted to be railroaded, I'd ride a fucking train.
>>47332309
>And that's how you lose your players.
But I don't.
I don't coddle my players, I offer them challenges. They prefer it that way.
>>47330773
>Roll to knock over each one individually
>It's only going to set the building on fire if there's enough easily flammable material nearby
>Barbarians have plenty of time to escape, or murder player
Players can take actions, they don't get to decide the results.
>>47332309
>Not giving you your way in one round (fuck that ONE sentence)...
>Railroaded.
>>47332309
Anon, if it bothers you and you want control of the story, just write a fucking book on your own. Off 4chan. And away from us. Really far away from us.
We'll all be happier.
>>47332326
Actually no, write it here, it's more entertaining.
>>47332244
>Goddamn racist barbarians.
heh
>>47332250
>>barbarians aren't oiled up and ready for some posing 24/7
Can we get a /fit/ ruling on the flammability of barbarian body oil?
>>47332272
>>>47332226 (You)
>>hurr durr I'm teh Dee Emm I say how the story goes >:(
>That DM found.
Assuming for the sake of discussion, that you are not an idiotic shitposting troll, can you cite anything wrong with my post or explain how it could have been done better?
>>47332309
And if you wanted to just do everything your way you would DM a game for your-fucking-self.
The faggot said that he just incinerated everything just because they said so. No you didn't, you actually undressed and presented yourself to your new masters. I don't know why you would decide to do this but oh well I mean that IS what I heard so whatever tickles your pickle man, roll that new character or whatever.
Say that you are attempting to set the place on fire in order to do X to better help the DM sculpt the scenario and ask what roll would be necessary to make it happen. That faggot didnt even make up some bullshit "brazier-tipper" roll and go with that for comedy relief, he just had the balls to simply say "I did this" while thinking that shit was going to fly. Well shit doesn't fly, unless it is yours because they are just ravaging your ass right now. I mean seriously I do not understand your fetish but I'm not one to judge.
That is the only way to deal with those kinds of players, throw their shit right back at them and either they learn to not be little snowflakes thinking that the narration revolves around their one character, or they fuck off. Either way is a win.
>>47331385
>ITS MY FUN TO SPOIL YOUR ADVENTURE WITH MY RULE FUCKERY
aha, good luck finding a new group then
>>47332341
>Can we get a /fit/ ruling on the flammability of barbarian body oil?
All we can say is they're HOT HOT HOT!
>>47332341
>flammability of barbarian body oil?
If we are talking vegetable oils like high-quality olive oil - and I am pretty sure those barbarian raids in the southlands exist ONLY to acquire high-quality olive oil, it is only flammable when it's at 200°C.
So the barbarian would probably be burnt before the oil catches fire on his muscular body.
>>47332302
>it's like
It isn't like that, it literally is that
>>47332393
You're 100% right anon. I concede the point for victory.
>>47332405
Autism prevails again!
>>47332203
Please tell me you are looking for a player
>>47332377
>All we can say is they're HOT HOT HOT!
pic related
>>47332386
>If we are talking vegetable oils like high-quality olive oil - and I am pretty sure those barbarian raids in the southlands exist ONLY to acquire high-quality olive oil, it is only flammable when it's at 200°C.
>So the barbarian would probably be burnt before the oil catches fire on his muscular body.
The fact that I didn't doubt for a moment that I would quickly receive factual statistics on the flammability of barbarian warriors greased up in body oil is one of the many reasons I love /tg/!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27ApyQ8kERk
This is the scene in contention, everyone.
>>47330773
>"Where did you get fire immunity from? That's not a class feature, nor from your race..."
>"You see, I have this crazy backstory..."
>>47332460
>It's 37 pages long.
Here's a part of it...
>Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time the moon came up she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew, and her thirst sent her crawling to the stream to suck up more water.
>>47332449
And it was stupid, but it doesn't really make sense to compare it to the discussion in question. In the episode, the player didn't say "I tip over thing everyone are dead". The GM did.
>>47332472Sauce?
>>47330773
Man, fuck fire. Every time someone even tries to do a campaign outside of a damp, rocky dungeon, like a magical library, a giant tree or even a castle, it always devolves to fucking "burn it all down" mentality.
It's hard to rule in favor of it, since suddenly every encounter and action in said dungeon becomes a tedious game of Forest Fire Simulator 3000 and makes every encounter a slight variation of "X is on fire".
Ruling against it, though, always comes off as forced:
>Oh, I'm sorry, you can't burn down the dungeon that is literally made out of books because, err... They're, like, magic 'n shit...
>The barbarians stop, drop and roll towards you through the burning debris. Roll for initiative.
>Well, i-in that case, I'm just gonna have the building fall on you. Serves you right for ruining my masterfully crafted campaign! Neah neah!
>>47330787
YES IT DOES. Fire safety is nothing to fuck around with.
Check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsaLCdC3iWw
Room gets completely overrun by fire within 50 seconds
Or if you have strong stomach you can watch this video of The Station nightclub fire (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOzfq9Egxeo), which is pretty horrifying.
Fire is all well and good in a game but please treat it seriously.
>>47332519
Fire actually goes out quite often. It's not a given.
>>47332536
All of those things are flammable. Extremely. It's not stone floors and hardwoods (which are unlikely to catch fire so freely).
>>47332449
Is the fucking dirt floor flammable or what ?
>>47332449
Those are clearly braziers of elemental fire.
Seriously, fire pours and splashes out of those things in a clearly magical manner.
>>47330773
do it but grant no xp
its not like the cow that started the chicago fire turned into an epic level rogue from level one, because of how many people it killed
>>47332554
I actually sighed a bit when the fire decided to whip around the room chasing them.
The only way to explain this is that she's not only immune to fire but also controls it. Otherwise this scene is overly forced. Which just adds another reason to call her a Mary-Sue but whatever...
>It'll still be forced, though.
>>47332449
So OP is just a retard butthurt about some dumbass TV show?
>>47332449
that's even dumber than the OP made it sound like.
>>47332571
>its not like the cow that started the chicago fire turned into an epic level rogue from level one, because of how many people it killed
>>47330773
That TV scene is a good example of bad story-writing.
>>47332597
I stopped watching after that one gay spear boy got his eyeballs popped out by The Mountain. That scene was so hamfisted. You could see it coming a mile off and it was almost comical with its timing.
>>47332509
A Dance with Dragons
Let's talk about Game of Thrones for a second, the last episode was pure fire but that last scene ruined it.
Daenerys should not exist, the story should only be centered in Westeros, we would've had none of the slave and sons of the harpy shit nobody cares about, she literally always survives in the last second because of some mary sue power or a dragon, it's a shame, the series would've been extremely good if it only happened in Westeros.
>>47332547
That would slow the fire a bit, but you have to be aware of flashover.
Flashover is where gases from burning stuff (furniture, carpets, tapestries, etc.) releases gasses that are flammible, but where the ignition point is higher than the fire around it. The hot gasses are carried towards the ceiling as the smoke rises, and once the fire becomes hot enough the gases ignite and combust. once that happens it's game over, everything in the catches alight from the incredible heat.
Behold: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtMmymOxdjc watch from around 2:45 to see it
>>47332341
Going by a mix of online Pathfinder and D&D rules:
1. Wood/darkwood has 5 hardness with 5hp per inch. Also since we're talking about a floor, let's make that "per square inch" instead.
2. You knock down the brazier. Congratulations! There are embers and burning coals and oil on the floor. Let's use Alchemist's Fire as a guideline on effect radius and relevant effects:
>...within 5 feet of the point where the flask hits takes 1 point of fire damage from the splash.
So now you have potentially 5 square feet of floor all set to burn. Potentially.
2. So, objects and creatures must make a DC15 flammability check to avoid catching fire. Again, DM fiat, we can roll for the entire affected area (if your group wants to spend time rolling for every square inch, that's fine too).
3. A DC15 means roughly 75% chance of the floor catching fire. If the floor passes, well, so much for that. Roll initiative.
4. Say the floor failed its DC. Say you actually rolled individual wood planks or divided the floor into fourths or whatever. By whatever means, there's now a part of flooring on fire. All adjacent flooring must now also make a DC15 save on the next round. This looks slow on paper but is actually exponential once it starts growing (just like real fire?). And so on.
5. Now as far as I'm aware, there are no rules explicitly stating how long wood burns, so I'm substituting this bit from Alchemist's fire to determine how "sturdy" wood is:
>A direct hit deals 1d6 points of fire damage [...] On the round following a direct hit, the target takes an additional 1d6 points of damage.
So with hardness 5, it would take 5 rounds of nat6's before the building collapses.
6. Smoke inhalation.
>A character who breathes heavy smoke must make a Fortitude save each round (DC 15, +1 per previous check) or spend that round choking and coughing. A character who chokes for 2 consecutive rounds takes 1d6 points of nonlethal damage.
Conclusion: read the fucking rules.
>>47332633
>Let's talk about Game of Thrones for a second
>>>/tv/
>>47332449
The khals could have just rushed and tackled her after she tipped over the first brazier.
Why did fat Kelly C. not just tip the braziers towards HERSELF, thereby shielding herself with flame and preventing the khals from touching her? This would be even more emasculating for the khals, because then they could do absolutely nothing to her.
>>47332635
Well, there's that, also the example YouTube used a dried Christmas tree to start the fire... I mean... no offense, but that'd set any room on fire in 30 seconds.
>>47332650
>in 30 seconds.
That's 5 rounds of combat. Enough for barbarians to flee or ravage OP's little face
>>47332636
Honestly, you can omit the floor having to roll a flammability check. Instead, the barbarians have to roll a ranged touch attack against an AC of 10 to put out the fire. Four buckets of non-flammable material can put out 5 square feet of burning stuff.
Depends on how you wanna play it out though.
