• NJSpradlin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I know the D&D community is pretty big here, but how would you as a DM rule this?

    Fireball is a fire explosion, less force but more fire, in my mind. Compared to how this is just a splash of liquid fire.

    Me thinking to myself I’d say this would have cone fire spread with a high(er) probability of causing burning, but lower upfront* fire damage. The DOT might not be too insignificant, either.

    • explodicle@local106.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’d treat it as a thrown flask of oil. If they’re not proficient with improvised weapons and roll a natural 1 on the attack, they hit themselves.

    • micka190@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Alchemist’s Fire is basically the Molotov Cocktail of 5e, so I’d just use that.

      1d4 Fire damage per round unless they take an action to put the fire out seems pretty reasonable to me. Puts it on par with a shortsword at the very least.

      Fireball’s damage is insane (the designers intentionally made it deal more damage than spells of the same level “because it’s an iconic spell”), so I wouldn’t really use it as a baseline for balancing anything, personally.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Alchemist’s Fire also exists in 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 3.5. I dunno about WoW with dice 4th edition, or 1st edition. My parents had both the red and blue boxes, but we read the rules and immediately went for AD&D cause that was more flexible when we started the family game in Dragonlance.