Two clarifcation questions - healing word and fire shield

33 posts / 0 new
Last post
Just curious about this. Deleted after reading FAQ but second question is still there.

2. If I am a mage and cast fire shield (a minor action) then move, and my move provokes an AoO, can I have the shield cause damage? The power states

You gain resist 10 cold and resist 10 fire until the end of the encounter. Whenever a creature makes a melee attack roll against you, it takes 2d6 + your Intelligence modifier fire damage. No creature can take this damage more than once per turn.
1. Once per day.
2. Yes.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I've got a related question to Fire Shield.

Last night I was in a play test for an upcoming LFR mod and an enemy used Fire Shield. The Shaman in the party attacked with a Melee Spirit power.

What's the resolution of the fire shield damage.

The Spirit Companion (SC) isn't a creature so I'd imagine that the SC takes no damamge since they don't qualify for the text. That and the SC can only be targeted by Ranged and Melee attacks and Fire shield is neither of them.

Any other thoughts on this?

Relevant texts below:


html_removed
html_removed
html_removed
html_removed

Fire Shield (minor action; encounter)


The XXX gains resist 10 cold and resist 10 fire until the


end of the encounter. Whenever a creature makes a melee attack


against the XXX, that creature takes 2d6 + 5 fire damage. No creature


can take this damage more than once per turn.



Call Spirit Companion


Your soul reaches out to your spirit friend, which faithfully appears at your side.


At-Will   bullet.gif     Conjuration, Primal
Minor Action      Close burst 20


Effect: You conjure your spirit companion in an unoccupied square in the burst. The spirit lasts until you fall unconscious or until you dismiss it as a minor action. The spirit occupies 1 square. Enemies cannot move through its space, but allies can. When you take a move action, you can also move the spirit a number of squares equal to your speed.
    The spirit can be targeted by melee or ranged attacks, although it lacks hit points. If a single melee or ranged attack deals damage to the spirit equal to 10 + one-half your level or higher, the spirit disappears, and you take damage equal to 5 + one-half your level. Otherwise, the spirit is unaffected by the attack.

Damage is not transferred fromt he Spirit COmpanion to the Shaman (AFAIK).  If the companion is making the melee attack, the Fire Shield should affect it.  At least that's how I'd rule on it at the table.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
The shaman attacked so he would take the damage.  The rules for conjurations state that "If you can attack with a conjuration, you make the attack", so the companion is not the one making the attack.  This is the same reason that a Shaman can get Iron Armbands and feats like Back to the Wall to help his spirit melee attacks.
The spirit of a shaman though has hit points (sort of) and it can be attacked directly. In that regards it is more of a summoning as opposed to a conjuration. I would also rule that the spirit takes damage, and if that is more then the spirit can take in a single attack (certainly possible) then it is removed, dealing damage to the shaman as per the official rules.
The shaman attacked so he would take the damage.  The rules for conjurations state that "If you can attack with a conjuration, you make the attack", so the companion is not the one making the attack.  This is the same reason that a Shaman can get Iron Armbands and feats like Back to the Wall to help his spirit melee attacks.



Sure, you use the Shaman's attack stats, but the Shaman isn't making the melee attack, the conjuration is.  If the Shaman was adjacent to the enemy and striking them, then I'd agree, but they're not.  A shaman's conjuration breaks a lot of rules for conjurations.  Considering that the companion can be targeted and take damage, I see no compeling rules reason why it shouldn't take the damage.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf

Sure, you use the Shaman's attack stats, but the Shaman isn't making the melee attack, the conjuration is.



Conjurations never attack.  Conjurations are something through which the caster attacks.  ("If you can attack with a conjuration, you make the attack.", PH2 p. 220).

A conjuration is more accurately thought of as just another weapon you can wield than a creature with an independent existence.

Sure, you use the Shaman's attack stats, but the Shaman isn't making the melee attack, the conjuration is.  If the Shaman was adjacent to the enemy and striking them, then I'd agree, but they're not.  A shaman's conjuration breaks a lot of rules for conjurations.  Considering that the companion can be targeted and take damage, I see no compeling rules reason why it shouldn't take the damage.



Fire Shield says the damage happens when a creature makes a melee attack roll.  The companion is not a creature, the PHB2 FAQ confirms this.  The companion does break some rules for conjurations, but that doesn't mean they should all be ignored.  I see nothing that would break the rule about the PC being the one that is making the attack.


Sure, you use the Shaman's attack stats, but the Shaman isn't making the melee attack, the conjuration is.



Conjurations never attack.  Conjurations are something through which the caster attacks.  ("If you can attack with a conjuration, you make the attack.", PH2 p. 220).



A conjuration is more accurately thought of as just another weapon you can wield than a creature with an independent existence.



I find this pretty thin.  Especially considering that anything with the Spirit keyword, especially melee spirit range, treats the companion's square as the origin of the power, not the shaman's.  Top that off with, while the Shaman has to make the attack roll since a conjuration has no stats of its own, the Shaman still isnt making a melee attack itself, so I still dont' see how the effect is jumping away from the origin square of the power to the Shaman standing 10 squares away.

Also, considering that the Conjuration keyword says: "Powers that have the conjuration keyword create conjurations, objects or creatures of magical energy," the notion that it isn't a creature and so can't be affected by the power is stretching it.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
It isn't a melee or ranged attack, so the spirit is immune. That one is pretty much guaranteed.

The more interesting question is whether the shaman counts as the one attacking and takes the damage. By RAW, the answer may be yes, since it's the shaman taking a melee action that originates from a different square. Which is... certainly odd. I'd have to look more closely at the melee spirit rules, but things like "an attack you make through your spirit companion" seem fairly damning in that regard.
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
Thanks all for your response. It looks like this is a job for Customer Service.

It's the creature wording in the Fire Shield power that's got me confused along with the question of is the shaman performing the power so they take the damage or is the spirit companion so they would take the damage if eligible.

Thanks all for your response. It looks like this is a job for Customer Service.




Yes, Customer Service will give you an answer to this question.  If you ask them enough times, it is likely they will give you every conceivable answer to this question.

Personally, I don't even really see the quandary.

"Whenever a creature makes a melee attack against [the caster], that creature takes damage."

Did the shaman make a melee attack against the caster of Fire Shield?  The only way you can answer that with anything other than a 'Yes' is if you believe that a shaman using an attack with a range of 'melee spirit' is not making a melee attack, and that has a whole range of other implications, most of which will not be in the shaman's favor.
So, does the Beastmaster Ranger, who uses the attack option, take the damage, or does his animal companion?
An animal companion is not a conjuration. It has its own stats. There is no doubt about the animal companion being affected by the fire shield.
I've got a related question to Fire Shield.

Last night I was in a play test for an upcoming LFR mod and an enemy used Fire Shield. The Shaman in the party attacked with a Melee Spirit power.

What's the resolution of the fire shield damage.

The Spirit Companion (SC) isn't a creature so I'd imagine that the SC takes no damamge since they don't qualify for the text. That and the SC can only be targeted by Ranged and Melee attacks and Fire shield is neither of them.

Any other thoughts on this?

Relevant texts below:

html_removed html_removed html_removed html_removed

Fire Shield (minor action; encounter)


 


The XXX gains resist 10 cold and resist 10 fire until the


 


end of the encounter. Whenever a creature makes a melee attack


 


against the XXX, that creature takes 2d6 + 5 fire damage. No creature


 


can take this damage more than once per turn.


 



Call Spirit Companion


Your soul reaches out to your spirit friend, which faithfully appears at your side.


At-Will        Conjuration, Primal
Minor Action      Close burst 20


Effect: You conjure your spirit companion in an unoccupied square in the burst. The spirit lasts until you fall unconscious or until you dismiss it as a minor action. The spirit occupies 1 square. Enemies cannot move through its space, but allies can. When you take a move action, you can also move the spirit a number of squares equal to your speed.
    The spirit can be targeted by melee or ranged attacks, although it lacks hit points. If a single melee or ranged attack deals damage to the spirit equal to 10 + one-half your level or higher, the spirit disappears, and you take damage equal to 5 + one-half your level. Otherwise, the spirit is unaffected by the attack.





Well I asked the question of Customer Support and got the answer that I expected. It appears that the Spirit Companion is makingthe attack andthe Spirit Companion is a conguration not a creature so is not affected by the Fire Shield. As for what happens to the Shaman using their action for the Spirit Companion to make the attack, nothing happens since it Compnaion made the attack no the Shaman.

Customer Service's response below:

Thank you for contacting us. I found the answers that we need to help you out here. First off, the spirit companion is a conjuration, not a creature. So therefore, the Fire Shield would not deal its damage to the Spirit Companion seeing as the text of Fire Shield states "Whenever a creature makes a melee attack roll against you, it takes 2d6 + your Intelligence modifier fire damage. No creature can take this damage more than once per turn."

As for the damage from the Fire Shield, it simple does not happen. There is no damage dealt, so none to distribute.



My question of Custom Service:

I was participating in a playtest of an upcoming LFR mod over the past weekend and an issue arose when an enemy used the Fire Shield power and then the Shaman used a Melee Spirit power against the enemy.

It would seem to me that the Spirit Comanion would not be affected by the damamge from Fire Shield for 2 reasons:
1) The Spirit Companion is not a creature rather it is a conjuration so therefore may only be affected by damage that falls into point 2. and;
2) The Spirit Compnion can only be targeted by Ranged or Melee attacks and Fire Shiled is Personal so neither of these 2 things.

So the question is:
What is the effect of Fire Shield on the Spirit Companion? and;
What happens to the damamge if the Spirit Companion is not subject to it?


If I were you I would send them a follow up question about the whole creature issue since the Conjuration keyword rules state very clearly that conjuration powers create objects or creatures out of magical energy.  Unless they're saying a COmpanion is an object which is unlikely.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
Well, someone could totally ask a completely separate - a shaman makes a Melee spirit attack. Does he get iron armbands? Does it trigger abilities like fire shield?

And then the third one, more separate, for fun, is the 'A shaman's spirit companion strikes something that deals X damage to creatures that hit it and X is more than 10 + 1/2 level, does the spirit companion die?'

Though really I think the last question isn't terribly up for debate, it's still fun to see if you can get differing answers
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
If I were you I would send them a follow up question about the whole creature issue since the Conjuration keyword rules state very clearly that conjuration powers create objects or creatures out of magical energy.  Unless they're saying a COmpanion is an object which is unlikely.



I can see what you're saying from the conjuration section of PHB 2 where it says they're an object or creature but on the Shaman forum it's spelt out from Customer support that Conjurations are not creatures rather they are conjurations therefore are not affected by anything that targets creatures.

Sorry I can't provide the specific link I'm on the work network and it's taking long enough just to open this thread let alone opening another :S

As the response from CS sugests above though, Fire Shield attacks a creature, Spirit Companions are conjurations not creatures therefore they aren't affeted by powers that deal damage to creatures.

The only exceptions to this specifically for Spirit Companions is where the power is a melee or a ranged attack. Fire Shield is a personal power.



Just an FYI Bernid as a sometime DM of yours, I'd be zapping that Spirit Companion with Fire Shield and imposing the appropriate effects if the damage kills the SC.

The Spirit Companion isn't intended to make the character immune to things like Fire Shield imo, but rather make an interesting dynamic for a character that is different from other leaders (especially the PHB1 ones). So if you make OA's on a peep with a Fire Shield you should be taking the consequences of making such an attack.

And no a CS response carries very little weight with me, they are simply contradictory to often.
Just an FYI Bernid as a sometime DM of yours, I'd be zapping that Spirit Companion with Fire Shield and imposing the appropriate effects if the damage kills the SC.

The Spirit Companion isn't intended to make the character immune to things like Fire Shield imo, but rather make an interesting dynamic for a character that is different from other leaders (especially the PHB1 ones). So if you make OA's on a peep with a Fire Shield you should be taking the consequences of making such an attack.

And no a CS response carries very little weight with me, they are simply contradictory to often.



Spirit companions don't have hit points and have no rules for anything at all happening to them except for melee and ranged attacks. Personally, I think this is a bad decision and it actually led to me not using a spirit companion character for a few levels to avoid the cheesiness, but there you go. Your ruling doesn't matter for CS, it's explicitly against the rules for conjurations. Some groups would be cool with it, some aren't, but you're in the wrong if you get in an argument over it at a table.

So if you want the Fire Shield to still have an impact on the character, damage the Shaman. He's making a melee attack, after all. It's a little odd, but similar to the case of fire shield triggering on someone using an eldritch blade to melee attack from 5 squares away. I'd suggest describing it as fiery feedback similar to the feedback he takes from the spirit itself dying. And at least follows _some_ rule as written.
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
I wrote CS about the whole issue that the conjuration rules text says it creates an object or creature out of arcane energy.  The gist of the conversation was this:

Me: You guys said it's a conjuration, not a creature, but the conjuration rules say a conjuration creates an object or a creature.  So, a spirit companion is or is not a creature?

CS: The FAQ says a Spirit Companion is a conjuration, not a creature.

Me: Ok.  You do realize that this FAQ entry flies in the face of the conjuration rules text in every publication it's been in, right?

CS: Umm... we sent this to the developers, hopefully we'll see a FAQ entry or update on it.

[line goes dead]

Heh.  Laughing
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
I wrote CS about the whole issue that the conjuration rules text says it creates an object or creature out of arcane energy.  The gist of the conversation was this:

Me: You guys said it's a conjuration, not a creature,m but the conjuration rules say a conjuration creates an object or a creature.  So, a spirit companion is or is not a creature.

CS: The FAQ says a Spirit Companion is a conjuration, not a creature.

Me: Ok.  You do realize that this FAQ entry flies in the face of the conjuration rules text in every publication it's been in, right?

CS: Umm... we sent this to the developers, hopefully we'll see a FAQ entry or update on it.

[line goes dead]

Heh. 



It's definately a problem with a keyword base rules system. It's the same problem in a lot of CCGs (White Wolf's V:tES is the worst for it that I know of in CCG land)

Personally I think they should have avoided the use of keywords like "Creature" or "Object" in the conjuration description and described them as something like a being or entity of pure energy.

As far as I can see there's no reference to "being" or "entity" as keywords in 4th ed. That would remove some of the confusion around them.



Spirit companions don't have hit points and have no rules for anything at all happening to them except for melee and ranged attacks. Personally, I think this is a bad decision and it actually led to me not using a spirit companion character for a few levels to avoid the cheesiness, but there you go. Your ruling doesn't matter for CS, it's explicitly against the rules for conjurations. Some groups would be cool with it, some aren't, but you're in the wrong if you get in an argument over it at a table.

So if you want the Fire Shield to still have an impact on the character, damage the Shaman. He's making a melee attack, after all. It's a little odd, but similar to the case of fire shield triggering on someone using an eldritch blade to melee attack from 5 squares away. I'd suggest describing it as fiery feedback similar to the feedback he takes from the spirit itself dying. And at least follows _some_ rule as written.

Actually my ruling I posted follows the part of the conjuration rules where it says that a conjuration creates an object or a creature. The Spirit Companion takes the form of a creature in all descriptive text, I've never seen it alluded to as a stick....sorry object. Use of words like "being" also imply creature. So I'm ruling it is a creature. (Part 1 of ruling)

So taking the text of fire shield - "Whenever a creature makes a melee attack roll against you" and saying the Spirit Companion is a creature which has explicit rules for its defences, and how it interacts with damage and the environment (ie the exceptions), the issue is reduced to "who takes the damage?"

The answer I give - the Spirit Companion (part 2 of ruling) - follows IMO the intent of the Spirit Compnaion (to go into melee rather than the Shaman), and creates less stretch of the funciton of the interacting powers than applying the damage directly to the Shaman, or negating the Fire Shield entirely (granting to much boon imo to the Spirit COmpanion).

Fortunatly I would also be happy to let the Player of a Shaman take back the OA or whatever rather than just enforce the ruling on them, if they were not aware of my thoughts before hand. (And as Benird knows where to find me if he wants to change my mind before a game I figure he will let me know if there is a problem ;))
Actually my ruling I posted follows the part of the conjuration rules where it says that a conjuration creates an object or a creature. The Spirit Companion takes the form of a creature in all descriptive text, I've never seen it alluded to as a stick....sorry object. Use of words like "being" also imply creature. So I'm ruling it is a creature. (Part 1 of ruling)

So taking the text of fire shield - "Whenever a creature makes a melee attack roll against you" and saying the Spirit Companion is a creature which has explicit rules for its defences, and how it interacts with damage and the environment (ie the exceptions), the issue is reduced to "who takes the damage?"

The answer I give - the Spirit Companion (part 2 of ruling) - follows IMO the intent of the Spirit Compnaion (to go into melee rather than the Shaman), and creates less stretch of the funciton of the interacting powers than applying the damage directly to the Shaman, or negating the Fire Shield entirely (granting to much boon imo to the Spirit COmpanion).

And that's fine... but the problem is that damage from any source other than a melee or ranged attack literally does nothing to the spirit companion. The conjuration 'lacks hit points' per RAW. So expect the shaman to nod and go 'Okay, it's fine' just like if you tried to tell a wizard that his Flaming Sphere took damage from something. I don't _like_ that, but it is still the case. Similarly, it's immune to damage for starting in an aura, ongoing damage in any way, an attack that 'pushes' the spirit companion doesn't work, etc... conjurations are currently working very stupidly in the rules. In a home game I'd be inclined to work with a shaman player (or work with a DM if I played a shaman - I'm currently avoiding the class) so that the whole thing made sense for everyone involved, maybe move it towards something closer to the beastmaster ranger's companion.

But, in LFR, that's not the case. So I might feel free to discuss conjuration stuff with a player beforehand (and have, in one group) and say how I'd like certain things to work out, but knowingly go against the rules that you do clearly know, with or without a CS ruling, expressly against the wish of the player, just because you don't like it? No. Bad. Have a discussion with the player, meeting of minds, rule appropriately, or don't DM for that character. 
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
And that's fine... but the problem is that damage from any source other than a melee or ranged attack literally does nothing to the spirit companion.


It is not entirely unreasonable to assume the damage from fire shield is a melee attack. After all, it is caused by a melee attack.
I do not care in particular whether the companion takes the damage fro fireshield specifially though I lean to ruling it does), but I do think it is silly to assume it is not a creature.

Conjurations are objects or creatures (iml), so (imo) a spirit companion is a creature.

And consider the consequences if we rule it isnt: if I have a NPC shaman, no PC can harm the companion, since all PC powers target creatures.

Gomez
It is not entirely unreasonable to assume the damage from fire shield is a melee attack. After all, it is caused by a melee attack.

It is unreasonable to assume it's a melee attack. Those are keyworded rules terms. It also needs to be targeted by the attack, which it wasn't. If it's any consolation, it also takes no damage from dancing on lava. Yes, I understand and sympathize that you really want the ruling that fire shield applies to work and in the thematic way you desire, but stretching with things like 'it might be a melee attack' doesn't work.
I do not care in particular whether the companion takes the damage fro fireshield specifially though I lean to ruling it does), but I do think it is silly to assume it is not a creature.

Yeah, it's fine for it to be a creature. Whether it's a creature has nothing to do with whether fire shield works, though
And consider the consequences if we rule it isnt: if I have a NPC shaman, no PC can harm the companion, since all PC powers target creatures.

Do you think that PCs can't harm doors, since they're not creatures? ;)
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
And that's fine... but the problem is that damage from any source other than a melee or ranged attack literally does nothing to the spirit companion. The conjuration 'lacks hit points' per RAW. So expect the shaman to nod and go 'Okay, it's fine' just like if you tried to tell a wizard that his Flaming Sphere took damage from something. I don't _like_ that, but it is still the case. Similarly, it's immune to damage for starting in an aura, ongoing damage in any way, an attack that 'pushes' the spirit companion doesn't work, etc... conjurations are currently working very stupidly in the rules. In a home game I'd be inclined to work with a shaman player (or work with a DM if I played a shaman - I'm currently avoiding the class) so that the whole thing made sense for everyone involved, maybe move it towards something closer to the beastmaster ranger's companion.

But, in LFR, that's not the case. So I might feel free to discuss conjuration stuff with a player beforehand (and have, in one group) and say how I'd like certain things to work out, but knowingly go against the rules that you do clearly know, with or without a CS ruling, expressly against the wish of the player, just because you don't like it? No. Bad. Have a discussion with the player, meeting of minds, rule appropriately, or don't DM for that character. 



This was what I argued at the time and why it was decided that the Fire Shield didn't affectthe spirit.

The keyword on the fire Shield power is Personal and so therefore is neither a melee nor a ranged attack and therefore may not affect the spirit. It the fire Shiled power had text like, "Make a melee attack against a creature who hit you with a melle attack. This attack automaticly hits." Then it could be argued about whether a conguration is a creature or not, which CS has stated a number of times consistently that they're not.

Calite and I can take this up off the forum though since we're both in the same play group.

It is unreasonable to assume it's a melee attack.


No, it is perfectly reasonable. It is not actually stated what the attack is. That may have been an oversight. so it is reasonable to make an assumption on the type of attack. One can assume it was ment to be an melee attack (there is no data to say it is, but neither is there data to say it isn't - fater all it is not defined as ranged, area, close burst, or close blast either). That assumption may be wrong, but it is not unreasonable.

Yes, I understand and sympathize that you really want the ruling that fire shield applies to work



No, I don't care much. I *think* it is logical for it to work, mostly on the basis that the function of the fireshield is to disuade craetures to attack. I may be wrong, but I am not trusting CS to give a proper ruling. 

Do you think that PCs can't harm doors, since they're not creatures? ;)



Well, since this whole discussion is only focused on the RAW, I guess they wouldn't.

Gomez
It is unreasonable to assume it's a melee attack.

No, it is perfectly reasonable. It is not actually stated what the attack is. That may have been an oversight. so it is reasonable to make an assumption on the type of attack. One can assume it was ment to be an melee attack (there is no data to say it is, but neither is there data to say it isn't - fater all it is not defined as ranged, area, close burst, or close blast either). That assumption may be wrong, but it is not unreasonable.

I guess I was not clear. Fire Shield is not an attack at all. Ie, abilities which trigger off of someone being subject to an attack, or a melee attack, will _never_ trigger off someone taking damage from a fire shield. As a helpful hint, the relevant keywords are 'Melee' and 'Attack', and the lack thereof speaks volumes.

Yes, I understand and sympathize that you really want the ruling that fire shield applies to work

No, I don't care much. I *think* it is logical for it to work, mostly on the basis that the function of the fireshield is to disuade craetures to attack. I may be wrong, but I am not trusting CS to give a proper ruling.

There are some interesting things that can or can't be figured out about this, but it is literally _impossible_ for fire shield to do anything to a shaman conjuration, whether CS rules or not. The same applies, fwiw, to chillborn auras, dragon breath, beholder explosions, abyssal horde ghoul explosions, and any number of abilities. Anything that is not a melee or ranged attack, basically. Including, for ref, an ability that was 'An enemy within 10 squares takes one billion damage'.  Shaman conjurations have the following rule:
'The spirit can be targeted by melee or ranged attacks, although it lacks hit points. If a single melee or ranged attack deals damage to the spirit equal to 10 + one-half your level or higher, the spirit disappears, and you take damage equal to 5 + one-half your level. Otherwise, the spirit is unaffected by the attack.'
Other than that, they may only be affected by abilities that target conjurations. Like Dispel Magic and a bare smattering of other abilities.

They're particularly frustrating at low level where entire sets of creatures can't do anything to them, even on a crit. And they can't even bull rush the conjuration out of the way.

Do you think that PCs can't harm doors, since they're not creatures? ;)

Well, since this whole discussion is only focused on the RAW, I guess they wouldn't.

Heh. There is actually a difference between normal DMing - such as deciding which objects can or can't be attacked (that being up to the DM), how many hp they have, etc, and completely ignoring the rules for certain things. Basically having fire shield damage a shaman's spirit companion is (sadly and mysteriously) equivalent to fire shield damaging a blade barrier or flaming sphere. Or to going 'Hmm, the minion crit the spirit companion, it dies' even though the minion can only do 5 and could never, ever, ever do anything to the spirit companion. Great for a home campaign, but antagonistic behavior in LFR. Though I totally think something like doing an arcana stunt to have your fire shield pop a Bigby's Icy Grasp would be pretty nifty

Just don't blatantly disregard the rules for the most integral part of the shaman class cause it doesn't sit right or seems against common sense. Cause, by design, it doesn't make sense, so it's just asking for trouble. Maybe with lots of liquor it makes sense. And an eye closed. No, the other one. Yeah, now the spirit floating over the pit that no one can forcibly move, doesn't provoke opportunity attacks when it moves around, and whose melee attacks come from a guy standing 20 squares away totally makes sense

P.S. Again with the obvious caveat that a DM and PC can work things out between them to make the rules work however they want. It's just one or the other trying to blatantly change the rules against the wishes of the other that's bad.
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director


They're particularly frustrating at low level where entire sets of creatures can't do anything to them, even on a crit. And they can't even bull rush the conjuration out of the way.





I'm not sure why this is an issue. See PH2:


"Occupies No Squares: The conjuration occupies no squares."



A conjuration  occupies no squares, thus doesn't inhibit movement - rules exist for how you can move or end movement in an occupied square, but a conjuration doesn't occupy a square, so those rules don't apply.


As long as we're focusing on RAW...


 


--


Pauper 

You want to check the rules for spirit companions, not conjurations in general, unfortunately. 'You conjure your spirit companion in an unoccupied square in the burst. The spirit lasts until you fall unconscious or until you dismiss it as a minor action. The spirit occupies 1 square. Enemies cannot move through its space, but allies can.'
Keith Richmond Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
And that's fine... but the problem is that damage from any source other than a melee or ranged attack literally does nothing to the spirit companion. The conjuration 'lacks hit points' per RAW.

FYI this post made me see where it having no effect is right - much as I might think that isn't the intent of the spirit companion, and not that it's lack of hit points matters either.

There is a major problem with the wording of the Spirit Companion as it stands, immunity to all Burst and Blast attacks is rediculous, without even looking at fringe cases like Fire Shield.
Sign In to post comments