# DM's perspective: How to deal with the flaming sphere



## Orcus Porkus (Dec 15, 2008)

I find the flaming sphere to be quite challenging as DM, when my players use it.
So far, I've found only three strategies that work:
1) ignore it, and live with the damage
2) move the monsters so PC's are hopefully affected as well when the wizards wants to move the sphere
3) go after the wizard and kill him, which would end the sphere

This challenge also exists for other encounter long area effects.

Any ideas?


----------



## Eldorian (Dec 15, 2008)

Use more ranged attackers.


----------



## Orcus Porkus (Dec 15, 2008)

Yeah, but that doesn't solve the problem. I don't want to kill the wizard every encounter (read, focus all attacks on him) just to get rid of those area effects. It would be better to have a way to end the effect, without killing him.
Stunning him would work, because without being able to act, the wizard couldn't sustain the effect, right?


----------



## Solodan (Dec 15, 2008)

It depends on the intelligence of the monsters.

Smart monsters:  "Hey, that wiz just made this fire that's attacking me and my allies, it looks like he's controlling it still.  Lets take him out because he's clearly a very dangerous threat"

Dumb Monsters:  "Ack Fire!!!!  Can't hurt it.  Ooh, Tasty Defender!!!"

I don't think you'll kill the wizard every time, since it takes a smarter monster to want to kill the wiz.  However, if it proves to be an effective use of a daily, then it'll be an interesting challenge for your players to defend the wizard while mr. wizard does his flamy thing.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Dec 15, 2008)

Orcus Porkus said:


> Yeah, but that doesn't solve the problem. I don't want to kill the wizard every encounter (read, focus all attacks on him) just to get rid of those area effects. It would be better to have a way to end the effect, without killing him.
> Stunning him would work, because without being able to act, the wizard couldn't sustain the effect, right?




Stunning works, as does unconciousness, dazing at least forces the wizard to do nothing but sustain the effect, which may make it much harder for him to do other things that might be important (move, if he's in a bad spot, or take his second wind, etc).

Also, depending on the terrain feature, it will often require more a move action to get it into position, so if you daze the wizard and move away, it can't get to you until the wizard is no longer dazed. Also, depending on the wizards ability to move the zone/conjuration/etc, you may be able to get away from it although it may involve taking a double move and giving up the attack for that turn.

Ultimately though, unless the wizard is doing considerably more with the flaming sphere than the other PCs are doing with their daily powers, it may make the wizard player feel a bit cheated if you are trying to make his daily as ineffective as possible, while doing very little to make say ... the warlord's Lead the Attack [or even how to "beat" the Wizard's sleep].

Now, giving the monsters a good strategy against zones and such is fine, as long as you aren't actually looking for a way to make your wizard player stop preparing those powers altogether and swapping them out when they level as they find them no longer worth using.


----------



## Milambus (Dec 15, 2008)

Dispel?


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 15, 2008)

1st it is a daily so it isn't going to be every encounter (although saying that, there is always Stinking Cloud for the next encounter and more zones later on), it is also meant to be pretty effective. 

Admittedly if the encounter goes on for a large number of rounds or the enemy is effectively grouped it can do way more damage than any other daily at 1st level. On those occasions, feel free to target the wizard for death.

On other occasions either suck up the damage (it's his daily after all), keep mobile, spread out, get in among his allies (they won't appreciate the damage). Use stunning or dazing attacks on the wizard (although this isn't always an option depending on the monsters).

My problem with it is how does it move? Can it move through allies or enemies squares?


----------



## PeelSeel2 (Dec 15, 2008)

In my group if the party met a monster that did that, their would be about three to four of them gang up on it to take it down.

When I DM, that is how I play a lot of the monsters to.  They are going to take down the greatest threats.

I do not think it is unfair.  It creates interesting dynamics and situations.


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 15, 2008)

PeelSeel2 said:


> I do not think it is unfair.  It creates interesting dynamics and situations.




It makes the defenders actually earn their keep.


----------



## Orcus Porkus (Dec 15, 2008)

I think spells like Flaming Sphere and Stinking Cloud create a sense of despair among the monsters.
First of all, it's horrible to be burned, or suffer from the cloud. Second, there is no way to escape it unless the terrain allows you to put the PC's between you and the cloud/sphere whatever. Whenever the monster ends its movement, the cloud will be there, waiting for the monster to start his turn, and burn.
I think it's unrealistic to not try everything to take down the source of this misery.
That's why I asked the question originally. I don't want to turn almost every encounter into "kill the wizard". But I also don't want the monsters to just suck it up.
What I did yesterday with stinking cloud, the BBEG managed to shove the defender into the cloud. The wizard then rolled the damage for his friend, and reduced him to zero. That was very satisfying, but not every monster has powers with forced movement. Too bad it didn't work with the wizard. He would have been killed by his own stinks! Also, the wizard ended up with zero healing surges and 2 failed death saving throws.
I noticed in general, monsters tend to have more powers that create status effects and ongoing damage, while PC's tend to have more powers that push, slide, or pull. For battle tactics, the PC's are usually in an advantage.
Bull rushing a PC with low Fort might be an idea. The idea is to make PC's understand that this area effect is not just a toy to move around, it can also harm themselves easily.


----------



## DrSpunj (Dec 15, 2008)

Bagpuss said:


> My problem with it is how does it move? Can it move through allies or enemies squares?




I'm wondering this, too. Given that the errata states, IIRC, that it "occupies" a square I've been treating as if it effectively fills the entire square (more because of the heat & fire that it gives off than the size I'm imagining I guess) and that it cannot move through allies or enemies nor can they move through its square.

If someone has something more official to offer I'd appreciate the reference.

Thanks


----------



## IanArgent (Dec 15, 2008)

Run more encounters per adventuring day, use many NPCs per encounter, and use larger encounter spaces.

The wizard can only use it once (maybe twice, depending on items) per day. If you can force the Wizard to move, he can't move the sphere. And the NPCs want room to spread out.


----------



## DeathMutant (Dec 15, 2008)

DrSpunj said:


> I'm wondering this, too. Given that the errata states, IIRC, that it "occupies" a square I've been treating as if it effectively fills the entire square (more because of the heat & fire that it gives off than the size I'm imagining I guess) and that it cannot move through allies or enemies nor can they move through its square.
> 
> If someone has something more official to offer I'd appreciate the reference.
> 
> Thanks




I rule it similiarly, as a medium-sized object, except that it doesn't fill the square for purposes of "hard corners." As an object, I allow powers to push, pull and slide it -- if they can affect objects -- but the sphere itself cannot be damaged.

I also rule that the caster must always have LoE (but LoS is not required) to move it. It does not fly -- or even hover -- because it has no Fly speed. It moves like a creature except that it ignores difficult terrain and can move _over_ liquid as if it "swims" at its Move speed; it cannot submerge.


----------



## Nail (Dec 15, 2008)

Bagpuss said:


> My problem with it is how does it move? Can it move through allies or enemies squares?






DrSpunj said:


> I'm wondering this, too. Given that the errata states, IIRC, that it "occupies" a square I've been treating as if it effectively fills the entire square (more because of the heat & fire that it gives off than the size I'm imagining I guess) and that it cannot move through allies or enemies nor can they move through its square.



#1) A Flaming Sphere has the conjuration keyword.  

#2) Conjurations have the property that (PH, p. 59) "_allies of the conjuration’s creator can move through the space a conjuration occupies, but enemies can’t._"

#3) Conjurations "[do] not occupy any squares" (errata 8-11-08).

Additionally, the errata removed the requirement of conjuring the Flaming Sphere in an unoccupied square.     Interesting.....


----------



## DrSpunj (Dec 15, 2008)

Nail said:


> #1) A Flaming Sphere has the conjuration keyword.
> 
> #2) Conjurations have the property that (PH, p. 59) "_allies of the conjuration’s creator can move through the space a conjuration occupies, but enemies can’t._"
> 
> ...




Thanks for this as I don't have my books here at work, but what exactly does "occupies" mean since the current errata downloaded from WotC has this for the Flaming Sphere entry (emphasis mine):




> Effect: You conjure a Medium flaming sphere that *occupies* a square within range, and the sphere attacks. Any creature that starts its turn adjacent to the sphere takes 1d4 + Intelligence modifier fire damage. As a move action, you can move the sphere 6 squares.





Here we have the errata contradicting itself, don't we? The specific entry says "occupies" while the errata'd Conjuration section says they don't? And I don't find that Conjuration entry in the PHB errata after a quick scan, btw.

EDIT: Found this with a search of the errata which helps clarify this part (emphasis mine):


> “*Unless a power description says otherwise*, a conjuration cannot be attacked or physically affected, and a conjuration does not occupy any squares.”




So let me slightly revise my question above: Why does it matter that it "occupies" a square? What mechanical meaning does that have?

Finally, if they removed the requirement about needing to conjure it in an unoccupied square, does that mean that's legal to do? Or was it unnecessary and complicating text given that it's described as illegal under the Conjuration heading already?

I'm seeing this spell both as a DM & as a player, so I'm very interested in getting these specifics down.  

Thanks​


----------



## Nail (Dec 15, 2008)

DrSpunj said:


> Here we have the errata contradicting itself, don't we?



 Hmmm....I think it's easiest to say - as you have - that "specific over-rides general", and the Flaming Sphere occupies a space.

If so, then no other creature can occupy that square too (unless the Flaming Sphere becomes _helpless_ ).  (Is it possible for tiny creatures to ocupy the same square as a Flaming Sphere?)  Allies can pass through the square, while enemies can't.


----------



## DrSpunj (Dec 15, 2008)

Alright, so what about the "conjuring in an occupied square" bit you brought up? Is it legal to conjure it in the orc's square? And if it is, would the Wizard have to spend an action to move it out of that square if the Orc wasn't literally toasted to death since they can't both legally occupy the same square?

Or does the Conjuration section or some other section clarify what happens here so they just removed unnecessary text from the entry with the errata?


----------



## Milambus (Dec 15, 2008)

DrSpunj said:


> So let me slightly revise my question above: Why does it matter that it "occupies" a square? What mechanical meaning does that have?




Things that occupy space can block off hallways/doors, prevent people from moving into a flank, etc.


----------



## Griogre (Dec 16, 2008)

Nail said:


> #1) A Flaming Sphere has the conjuration keyword.
> 
> #2) Conjurations have the property that (PH, p. 59) "_allies of the conjuration’s creator can move through the space a conjuration occupies, but enemies can’t._"
> 
> ...




Just want to point out #2 is no longer correct. This paragraph was errataed out and *totally replaced* with #3 (#2 was in the paragraph that was replaced):

Conjurations [Revision] 
Player's Handbook, page 59 
Replace the second paragraph with "Unless a power description says otherwise, a conjuration cannot be attacked or physically affected, and a conjuration does not occupy any squares." 

Given this change it was necesary to errata Flaming Sphere to say it *takes* up a space because normally conjurations don't.

Flaming  Sphere  [Revision] 
Player's  Handbook,  page  160 
Move the Effect line above the Target line and replace the text with the following: 

Effect: You conjure a Medium flaming sphere that occupies a square within range, and the sphere attacks.  Any creature that starts its turn adjacent to the sphere takes 1d4 + Intelligence modifier fire damage.  As a move action, you can move the sphere 6 squares. 

Thus, the general case is conjurations take up no space, but in the specifice case of flaming sphere it *does* occupy a space.


----------



## DrSpunj (Dec 16, 2008)

Oooo! Good catch, *Griogre*!

So with that understood, can the Wizard's allies move through the Sphere's space as they normally would any other ally or not?

My instinct says "no" given that the sphere definitely occupies a square _and_, well, it's on fire! 

So I guess it's not so much that allies couldn't move through the square, just that they'd take damage if they really wanted to do it. My next thought is how much damage should they take? Given the sphere attacks when the Wizard throws it against a target I could see using the Hit dmg (2d6+IntMod) but since an ally is just trying to slide by and not really throwing himself against the Sphere I'd probably allow it at my table with just the Effect dmg (1d4+IntMod).

At least until we get errata or some clarification otherwise. Maybe in Arcane Power?


----------



## Mistwell (Dec 16, 2008)

We've had threads on nerfing the Wizard's Sleep daily (make Sleep weaker or less useful).
We've had threads on nerfing the Wizard's minion-killing at-wills (make minions stronger).
And now we have a thread on nerfing the Wizard's Flaming Sphere daily (make Flaming Sphere weaker or less useful).

All while most people seem to think the Wizard is weak, and Mearls is outright saying today he accidentally designed the Wizard as slightly underpowered.

So why all the attempts to nerf the few things that Wizards actually do well?


----------



## DrSpunj (Dec 16, 2008)

Umm, who's nerfing? I'm just trying to figure out the best answers to situations that either have or I expect to come up in the game I DM with a Wizard with this Daily Power or for the Wizard I play. I haven't seen enough of the Wizard's abilities to make any changes to the class, but I read Mearls' comments tonight and am curious to read the full entries for both the Druid & the Invoker.


----------



## Skallgrim (Dec 16, 2008)

Someone earlier in the thread had some good suggestions, and I'd like to chime in on them as some of them arose in the last session I ran.

The wizard was in difficult terrain.  The "main enemy" (the person he really wanted to damage) kept near the wizard's allies.  The "main enemy" sent minor enemies to harass the wizard.

This meant that while the Flaming Sphere was very useful, it was a REAL hard decision for the wizard.  The more he did with his flaming sphere, the less able he was to defend himself against the minor enemies.  The wizard's allies were reluctant to back away from the BBEG to attack minor enemies, as those enemies were not the ones they needed to stop.  The wizard kept having to use a minor to sustain the sphere, and generally needed a move to keep it near the BBEG.  That meant that he could either try to move to avoid combat, use another attack, or attack with the sphere.  

In the end, he kept the sphere up to the end of the combat, but nearly died himself.  He had at least one turn where he couldn't make an attack with the sphere, as he really needed to defend himself instead.  He also had one or more turns where the sphere did no damage, as he couldn't move it adjacent to the BBEG without burning a downed and badly injured ally.

This was great.  It made him tactically think about the sphere, and it often meant that what the party wanted him to do was not what he wanted to do:

"Burn him!" 

 "I can't! I'm down to 6 hit points over here!  I need to kill this skeleton before he kills me!"

"Well, at least keep the sphere going!"

"What if I miss?  I'll need to move away from this guy."

"I'll kill the skeleton before he can attack you"

"Are you sure?"

"Well, I'll try to, any way."

"I'm dropping the sphere."

"Noooooo!"


----------



## BradfordFerguson (Dec 17, 2008)

Interesting thread.  I think the original premise is slightly flawed... Why try to neutralize one of the few things that a wizard is good at?  Not sure what level your game is at, but I tend to have monsters ignore damage if they are stuck (fighter's challenge) or if they are attacking an enemy that they perceive as weak or perceive as needing to die.  It's kind of a case-by-case thing for me and usually I glance at least once at the creatures Intelligence before deciding what they do.


----------



## Ebon Shar (Dec 17, 2008)

Does a flaming sphere provoke opportunity attacks or threaten a target?  We've been ruling that it does, but that just feels wrong.


----------



## Mahali (Dec 17, 2008)

Ebon Shar said:


> Does a flaming sphere provoke opportunity attacks or threaten a target?  We've been ruling that it does, but that just feels wrong.




No to both.  How would it provoke? A: It's not a creature or animated object that be destroyed/killed.

See A plus add it has no actions of it's own, it's not intelligent, programable, or had any instincts. It cannot make AoO.


----------



## infocynic (Dec 17, 2008)

Flaming Sphere is crazy good at level 1. Conjure it on turn 1 and stand back, let the frying begin. It autokills minions, so you can probably take down at least one a turn, or force them to avoid clumping, which hopefully leaves them in lousy positions, and it can potentially attack for 2d6+x every turn, which is more than any other wizard at-will, and is actually sneaking into the realm of striker damage (most warlock powers are 1d6, plus 1d6 curse), or at least great weapon fighter. If you had a bard around to slide you now and then you might even avoid using a move action to keep yourself in range, or you can as stated before just rely on your defenders.

Against a solo or elite, 1d4+4 (or 5 if you count a +1 implement) unavoidable damage (because the wizard will happily move the sphere to hit you and only you, which is pretty hard to avoid unless you move 7+ and want to take OA's) is very very good. An above-level elite soldier might have defenses that mean the party is hitting on the order of 25% ... fortunately, you just need to keep that sphere up to whittle it down in no time.


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 17, 2008)

Mistwell said:


> All while most people seem to think the Wizard is weak, and Mearls is outright saying today he accidentally designed the Wizard as slightly underpowered.




He made it clear he was referring to only the wizard's At-Will powers.


----------



## balard (Dec 17, 2008)

FS is nice. It really helps in a fight, but you must use it early. Different from Sleep or a 3|W| attack. It limits the actions of the wizards a lot, and MAKE him a target. The party must work well to protect him, and capitalize the Sphere. It is a strong daily? Yes. But I don't think it is a uber one.


----------



## Mistwell (Dec 18, 2008)

Bagpuss said:


> He made it clear he was referring to only the wizard's At-Will powers.




And?

If the Wizard powers in general are weak, such as their at-will powers (most-often used powers), then nerfing or finding ways to avoid or diffuse wizard powers just hurts them that much more.

The attempts by DMs to nerf or avoid or diffuse spells like Sleep and Flaming Sphere are fine if those same DMs are increasing the power of the wizard at-wills and/or encounter powers, or finding ways to making those powers more effective.  But it doesn't seem like that's the way these DMs are thinking about the situation.  They seem to be looking to decrease the effectiveness of the daily powers (and sometimes even the at-wills and encounter powers if they increase the power of minions) while not increasing the effectiveness of the other powers.  And if that is the case, then it's overall a nerf of the Wizard - a class which many feel is already weaker than most classes.


----------



## Herschel (Dec 18, 2008)

Bagpuss said:


> It makes the defenders actually earn their keep.





Yep.

As a DM running intelligent baddies, I want to go after the Strikers first, or anything dealing large damage. This is not only the smart/realistic thing to do, but is the reason why a role exists and gives them a chance to do their thing. It's ASSUMED by the designers the baddies will go after certain types. Otherwise, why not play a group of all strikers with a controller?


----------



## Nail (Dec 18, 2008)

Herschel said:


> It's ASSUMED by the designers the baddies will go after certain types.



No.

The designers ASSUME there will be PCs from each role.  They've stated this time and again.  They don't assume "baddies will go after certain types".  The designers don't assume anything about who monsters are gunning for. 

The idea of party roles is partly tactical - no agrument here - but it is also party because of the Fun Factor(tm).  It's simply more fun if your PC contributes something to the party that no one else in the party can do.  ...And it's even more fun if your PC can do his schtick in more than one setting.


----------



## Jhaelen (Dec 18, 2008)

Nail said:


> The designers ASSUME there will be PCs from each role.  They've stated this time and again.  They don't assume "baddies will go after certain types".  The designers don't assume anything about who monsters are gunning for.



Hmm, while that is probably correct, the DMG does give hints how monster roles are intended to interact with the pc roles.

An interesting section is on page 10: 'Covering the Character Roles'. It specifically mentions which monster roles become more problematic if the party lacks characters of a certain role.

If you read the section from the monsters' viewpoint, you'll get an indication which pc roles they should try to take out first to gain maximum advantage.

Intelligent monsters should know about their role and who poses the most danger to them.


----------



## Nail (Dec 18, 2008)

Jhaelen said:


> Intelligent monsters should know about their role and who poses the most danger to them.



FWIW, I agree completely.

...and struggling to get back to the point of this thread: Intelligent monsters should be able to figure out in short order who controls the Flaming Sphere.  It's quite likely those same intelligent monsters will try to either: #1) limit their exposure to the FS or #2) try to kill the wizard.

But unlike previous versions of D&D, "killing the wizard first" is no longer the _de facto_ best plan....even with Flaming Sphere available.


----------



## Gort (Dec 19, 2008)

To be honest, I find that any power that allows sustaining for the entire encounter usually turns out to be pretty overpowered. See fighters and their _Rain of Steel_ power for an (in my opinion) even more egregious example.

At least with _Flaming Sphere_ the person you have to kill is a weedy controller instead of a big burly defender.


----------

