| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| beezly02-17-05, 05:30 PM | Can you dual weild produce flame and fight with it as if fighting with two weapons? What is the rule for that? |
| Stuntman02-17-05, 05:55 PM | You can only have one touch spell active. If you cast a second one, the first one ends. |
| beezly02-17-05, 06:00 PM | The thing is is that it isn't a touch spell, it's a spell with a range of 0 feet that you can use to make touch attacks. Produce Flame Evocation [Fire] Level: Drd 1, Fire 2 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: 0 ft. Effect: Flame in your palm Duration: 1 min./level (D) Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: Yes Flames as bright as a torch appear in your open hand. The flames harm neither you nor your equipment. In addition to providing illumination, the flames can be hurled or used to touch enemies. You can strike an opponent with a melee touch attack, dealing fire damage equal to 1d6 +1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120 feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage as with the melee attack. No sooner do you hurl the flames than a new set appears in your hand. Each attack you make reduces the remaining duration by 1 minute. If an attack reduces the remaining duration to 0 minutes or less, the spell ends after the attack resolves. This spell does not function underwater. |
| BW022202-18-05, 01:17 AM | >Can you dual weild produce flame and fight with it as if fighting with two >weapons? What is the rule for that? Humm... Two of the same spells effects don't normally work on the same subject. You can't have two shield spells up, for example. Your DM can easily rule that the spell doesn't create two flames, but one spell effect is surpressed until the first spell is used up. Certainly, the spell would allow two-weapon fighting as a light weapon, if you had something else in your other hand. You could also cast produce flame and two-weapon fight using the two spells. DMs call on whether the spell effects are different when cast twice. |
| Daeger02-18-05, 06:38 AM | I don't know why people keep assuming you want to cast it twice. Anyway, since it basically describes using produce flame as an attack action, then yes, you can do this, but there are factors to consider. Every single time you use it the duration goes down by a minute. And it's only 1 minute per level. After a couple rounds you have to cast it all over again. The damage factor is also pretty low. Really, it wouldn't be worth it. |
| was_fired02-18-05, 06:52 AM | Last I checked only throwing it dropped the duration by a minute. In melee you get to play with it for one minute per level. Looking back on the RAW you are in fact correct, but I don't know if that is the intent of the spell. Oh well I will keep interpretting it as meaning that causing the flame to reform (which only takes place upon throwing) is what uses up a minute's worth, and this is why they placed the burn a minute per attack right after the ranged attack half of it rather than earlier on. |
| Ilium02-18-05, 09:29 AM | I don't know why people keep assuming you want to cast it twice. Anyway, since it basically describes using produce flame as an attack action, then yes, you can do this, but there are factors to consider. Every single time you use it the duration goes down by a minute. And it's only 1 minute per level. After a couple rounds you have to cast it all over again. The damage factor is also pretty low. Really, it wouldn't be worth it. I think you'd have to cast it twice because the spell description says "your open hand" not "your open hands". You get 1 hand filled with firey goodness. As far as allowing it, I definitely would as the DM. It basically gives you a weapon. If you have the feats to use two weapons, casting the spell twice should give you two weapons. No problem. |
| Kulthos02-18-05, 03:17 PM | A better use for produce flame is to throw it. A halfling druid with produce flame, rapid shot, and who is riding his/hre dire bat animal companion can be pretty cool. |