Nothing too deadly.... people do not RP well... BEING COVERED IN FIRE properly most of the time, but why should they-when there is no actual mechanic obliding them to? I don't blame them.

Combust is not your shirt going aflame(even though that is pretty bad) it is being covered entirley head to toe in fire which you are frantically trying to beat out, and failing(if you fail). In PnP at least, you need to actually dedicate your action to trying to put out the flames to get the DC at all.....

Since you are in fact trying to beat the flames out for the DC and being on fire is pretty disruptive anyway, how about a little extra something to reflect how debiliating it is? What this is, I am not entirley certain-I think the best aproach might be a significant penalty to your AB, maybe even as high as e -8 or -9.... after all you are ENGULFED in flames head to toe, how precisley are you going to aim that sword as you try to beat the flames out?

Making them dazed may work better...

Why make that spell even more awsome?

Doesn't this go along with rp'ing you are blind when you can ooc see where the enemy is? Good to bring it up, however, that you ARE ON FIRE and likely would react somewhat different from normal, but the spell is great as is.

That spell is already ungodly powerful verse someone with a negligible reflex save. Adding to it's effectiveness won't encourge better RP, it will just make the spell that much more powerful. To my knowledge, it is magical fire as well. Flames that surround you from head to toe. I would consider that different as compared to, lets say, being covered in scalding oil and then being set ablaze.

Another case: It is very difficult to roleplay well and accurately when your character is about to die. Now I praise the people that can do this, but personally, I would be more focused on drinking a dispel potion than I would be typing out manical cries of pain and anguish. Usually I vouch the other way, RP is king, but certain situations arise when your next reflex save causes you to stay in this plane or send you packing to the fugue.

Combust is a pretty decent spell already. If anything, I'd like to script it so that you can burn other people by getting near them (another logical effect of being covered by fire).

I don't know Arkov... this "lighting other nearby characters on fire" idea sounds like something that you want to put in because you want to watch some panicking paladin start his whole party on fire, not so much because it is a logical effect. Just how combustable are people?

>_>

Well apparently they are combustable, since you can cast Combust on them! I don't think Fire damage for having somebody who's on fire crashing into you is too unreasonable. <_<

>_> [whispers to Arkov] put it in. <_<

As one who has this as his only offensive level two spell, I can add that while it's a very powerful spell, you also have to eat that attack of opportunity while casting it, making it a risky move at best versus most creatures actually worth casting such a powerful spell at. My wizard currently has 15 hp at level three, and that's not even two hits from most creatures. I'd venture to say that Melf's Acid Arrow can be equally good. You deal averagely slightly less damage versus things with a crappy reflex save, but the damage is less luck-based, and you don't have to get smacked with various lethal objects when casting it. So giving an additional perk to Combust wouldn't be that overpowered, IMO.

Wrex has a good point. Ive been smacked around a fair few times trying to cast this spell. Youve gotta get ridiculously close to do it, and sometimes it costs you. Also, why shouldnt a dude on fire be able to set other people on fire? Makes sense to me. >.>

Set other ppl on fire, that should be fun when NPCS are around :shock: OMG I GOT TOO CLOSE THAT WATCH GUY NOW THE WHOLE CITY WANTS TO KILL ME :(

There are ways to avoid Attacks of Oppertunity, you know.

Furthermore, Greater Skill Focus: Conjuration makes for a DC 19-21 to extinguish the flames. I don't see too many people make those Reflex Saves, so it's godly. Awesome. Do not make it stronger.

If you were going the SPAWNING combust then you had also consider spreading diseases (like ones made with contagion for example) There was a spell much like that in the HEART OF WINTER expansion to icewind dale , that dealt fire damage over time and spread to nearby allies. It was horrendously powerful of course (maybe level 4?)

If combust was going to do this, it would quickly go beyond it's level 2 power rating. You'd have to consider it happening to nearby items, chests, even rugs.

Though I too would like to see fire act in NWN like it feels like it should (and be more realistic) that should happen to all effects, and theres a LOT of work in that. It definitely wouldnt be fair that one spell alone gained a lot of effectiveness while others didnt (especially other spells that are UNDERpowered)

Since it does provoke an AoO, if it is made to have a chance of lighting others on fire, this should apply to the caster as well. Be careful playing with fire, you might get burned yourself.

People, if you play your cards right, it does not provoke an AoO. Trust me.

Perhaps an effect such as a diminished attack roll, and the additional effect of setting other people on fire, or just adding fire damage, on unarmed attacks? No accidental damaging, that way. Or, just the set-on-fire unarmed thing, if you don't want to make it stronger.

Wrexsoul As one who has this as his only offensive level two spell, I can add that while it's a very powerful spell, you also have to eat that attack of opportunity while casting it, making it a risky move at best versus most creatures actually worth casting such a powerful spell at. My wizard currently has 15 hp at level three, and that's not even two hits from most creatures. I'd venture to say that Melf's Acid Arrow can be equally good. You deal averagely slightly less damage versus things with a crappy reflex save, but the damage is less luck-based, and you don't have to get smacked with various lethal objects when casting it. So giving an additional perk to Combust wouldn't be that overpowered, IMO.

Bingo. You have to eat an AOO to cast it and the highest you can ever reasonably get the DC is 22, 23 tops with a GSF and a very high int modifier...... and it can be countered by casting a dispel on yourself, and its elemental damage which means a potion is going to negate alot of it as well. I think the power is being quite overestimated.

I never cast it on a NPC without being in defensive mode and I still have the risk when I get into range.... and you can always fail on the defensive cast and no wizard has enough spell slots to rest a ton of combusts considering some of the other vital lvl 2 spells.

It's probably different when you have the levels and loot, but at the moment, defensive casting means a 50% chance of failure for me with Combust. Not the best odds I can imagine.

....and when you have levels and loot, you are proboably going to use the far more powerfull spells you already have acess to.

Combust is hands down, one of the best spells in the second level range for direct damage already.

It doesn't need anything else. A clever caster knows how to get around the danger of the attack of opprotunity, and a guarentee of 2d6 damage with no save plus 1d6 per round until a save is made is great.

I've seen this spell do over 60 damage before and that is well worth getting slapped once by a monster even if you do take an AoO.

What Oro said. Combust benefits a lot from GSF already. At the lower levels especially it will easily outdamage any other spell.

Ain't broke. Don't fix. :)

We're throwing around the word "plausable" and "realistic" alot here, but since when is muttering a few words and a person being set on fire realitic or plausable (well I suppose it is in the setting.)

But still then you can say in the setting its realistic that the spell does'nt latch onto others because the magic is focused on one person and the flames are magical. Same goes with why fireball flames vanish after the initial explosion instead of giving it onhit combust effect.

End note

Its D&D it does'nt have to be realistic or plausable, its magic, you just summoned flames from out of nowhere be happy with that.

I hear cries to make our pyromancers and chosen arcanists more powerful so they can smite more PC's? I say we do it!

Naga

Its D&D it does'nt have to be realistic or plausable, its magic, you just summoned flames from out of nowhere be happy with that.

I guess they mean plausible in relation to the "pseudophysics" of the magic. Is the fire normal once it's set something alight? Is it magical the entire time ? Does it follow a casters direction or some other control mechanism like kossuth's influence maybe? Does it burn with normal fuels?

Plausible is a relative term given here in terms of the setting. It's also subjective because different people "believe" the spell should behave differently.

But given that if you START on this path , you'd have to look at ALL spells effects, in game physics etc to make is fair and reasonable right?, you may as well re-write NWN's back end from the ground up :) That might entail less work and a bigger bang for your buck. I'm sure people would love to see lightning arc along metal surfaces, walls, suits of armor and weapons and even reflect but thats not exactly a trivial exercise either however much we'd all like to see it.

I'd say theres a lot more things that will have a bigger impact to a wider group of players for a lot less effort, than the pseudorealism of one spell out of hundreds.

I think we should also add fear effects to all level 6+ spells that are offensive. Anytime enemies see one cast, they flee in terror just because they are impressive and scary spells.

If I see someone get FoD'd, should I stick around and charge the caster? No way!

---- Now, realistically, some thing might "make sense" but for balance issues, it wouldn't be good to change.

Closing the topic.