What's The difference between using barrels and using grease spells?

[JamRock]

Alot of complaints are directed at barrelmancy but what's really the difference between using barrels and using spells like grease to set up grease fire combinations for barrelmancy to be so controversial?

[Locklave]

No, bad! Not more on this dumb topic.

[Slap Happy Pappy]

Ah, a simple 6 goblin fight. This should be easy enough.

*Goblin launches nuke*
*Goblin launches nuke*
*Goblin launches nuke*

... hrm...

[Hex]

Grease is a spell slot, you can carry as many barrels as you have carry limit. Also, you can place barrels around an area before triggering a fight, you'll run out of spell slots pretty fast if you start covering the ground.

[Vic20]

Have you ever tried to carry more than one barrel of anything at a time? Make it 1 per character, it occupies both hands, can't use your weapons until you drop it, and then who cares.

[teksuo]

you cant stack 13 greases and have 13 explosions all at the same time.

barrels will let you do that, easily.

[Hex]

Originally posted by teksuo:

you cant stack 13 greases and have 13 explosions all at the same time.

barrels will let you do that, easily.

Yup, you even bait certain enemies like the phase spider into a barrel farm and kill it instantly.

[JamRock]

Originally posted by Hex:

Originally posted by teksuo:

you cant stack 13 greases and have 13 explosions all at the same time.

barrels will let you do that, easily.

Yup, you even bait certain enemies like the phase spider into a barrel farm and kill it instantly.

That just defeats the fun. That underground battle was delightful to me because there were no pre-generated barrels involved. Just methodical spell sliging with spells like darkness/fog and distanced arrow shooting to take advantage of the stat advantage.

[[TE] Kuraudo]

to op: lighting grease on fire won't have the same effect as barrelmancy; it will be more akin to what firebolt does now to the ground for free.

[Meowella]

I mean, the grease spell doesn't do these explosions outside of Larian, so for some it's the fact the spell has been altered to be just as bad as barrelmancy.

I enjoyed environment manipulation in dos 1, didn't need it in dos 2 and my concern is trivialising combat in bg 3.

[[TE] Kuraudo]

Originally posted by Phill:

I mean, the grease spell doesn't do these explosions outside of Larian, so for some it's the fact the spell has been altered to be just as bad as barrelmancy.

I enjoyed environment manipulation in dos 1, didn't need it in dos 2 and my concern is trivialising combat in bg 3.

This. Gunpowder doesn't explode in Faerun specifically to prevent this kind of thing outside of magic anyway.

This problem could be instantly solved if they tied this to difficulty or game options. No one would complain if barrelmancy/environmental effects on firebolts was "larian mode" or "easy mode" or whatever you want to call it so the rest of us didn't have to deal with it.

Actually, let me go check the official forums and see if anyone has suggested this yet. Maybe Larian will bite.

[JamRock]

Originally posted by TE Kuraudo:

to op: lighting grease on fire won't have the same effect as barrelmancy; it will be more akin to what firebolt does now to the ground for free.

I totally get it now. That's terrible. I don't meta-game like that. Only times I used barrels were to throw one or two smoke powder barrels at charging enemies to follow up with a fire cantrip or push nearby barrels into existing flames.

In my head that's the same as grease + fireball but to put 10+ in areas before battles start to kill all the enemies in 1 blast is ridiculous.

[Planeforger]

To be more rules-accurate, they could replace some of the barrels with Web traps.

The Web spell's area effect *is* flammable in 5e, and Web traps were everywhere in BG1 and 2, so that would address both complaints (while still having exactly the same gameplay features).

As for the goblins, they could add the artificer class with the alchemist subclass. Then all of the alchemist's fire could be explained really easily. Or...just have a note in the Apothecary's store saying the goblins stole the alchemist's fire. Problem solved.

[BW022]

Originally posted by Uhura The Shaman:

Alot of complaints are directed at barrelmancy but what's really the difference between using barrels and using spells like grease to set up grease fire combinations for barrelmancy to be so controversial?

Again...

1. In 5e, grease can't be lit on fire.
2. In 5e, alchemists fire, oil, and acid are single target only, only have a 20' range, and are improvised weapons -- so typically no base attack bonus to hit. Alchemists fire and acid are also expensive. Oil only adds fire damage to your next fire attack.
3. In BG3, ignoring you shouldn't be able to, lighting grease on fire would take two actions -- one to cast grease and one to light it on fire. Bombs do it on one action.
4. Spells require spell slots, taking caster levels, giving up armor and weapons, lower hit points, etc. Tossing a mini-fireball takes nothing.
5. Casters in 5e are relatively rare. You don't expect 4-5 of them in a single combat.
6. The bombs do significant damage over an area with mass range. There are no 1st-level spells which do this and the closest is a 2nd-level spell like shatter or web on an already lit area.
7. The bombs automatically do damage regardless of a saving throw, even if you miss. That is equal or better than magic missile.
8. The bombs do repeated damage over time. This means casters must make multiple concentration checks -- and for all practical purposes it means will take down any concentration spells and/or make them pointless to cast for another turn -- since you know you are going to take more damage. Again, far beyond say shatter or equal to two rounds of magic missile cast as a single action.
9. The bombs affect an area over time. Thus, preventing casters or other characters from moving, forcing jump/disengages to avoid, or having to take damage to move. Again, beyond shatter, magic missile, and closer to web + burning.
10. The bombs unnecessarily waste time and prolong battles. If you get nuked by three or four of these, you'll spend rounds spreading out, casting healing, etc.
11. The bombs inherently unfair against PCs -- since enemies often start nicely spread out, in defensible positions, etc. while PCs are often moved together.
12. The bombs inherently prolong encounters since (knowing they are coming) you now have to spread out -- which in BG3 is a painful process of individually moving characters prior to the combat initiating. Typically adding a save or two since its going to be coming.
14. The bombs make spell casters far less useful. Why have a wizard take grease, web, or shatter when any rogue or fighter can toss them?
15. They make for boring fights. You can win by tossing five or six of these things out and wow... you haven't used any strategy, tactics, defenses, spells, etc. Likewise the goblins can win doing the same thing.
16. They highlight flaws in the game. If you accidentally move a character... maybe you can recover and move them back. Accidentally move them through flames and now they are toast. Trying to target someone in a window when there is a flaming/acid area around you... is just annoying. I once had a character die after the fight... because my main was standing in fire and at the end of the combat... everyone walked over next to him.
17. It adds little to the game. You can have ground effects in traps, putting in actual spell casters in encounters, specific (but rare) cases such a prepared oil puddles, etc. You don't have to hand them out like candy.
18. There is no defense against these in BG3. In 5e, you could use dodge (or high AC) and never by hit by any of these, ready actions against casters, stay out of range, etc. These things happily go through fog clouds, extreme range, any armor class, etc.
19. Having to spread out, repeatedly is boring. It makes melee/blockers useless, it makes healing or buff spells an invitation to get nuked, the protection fighting style pointless, etc.
20. You can see the slipper slope of encounter decisions which this has likely caused. Since any PC can now do 10hp of area damage to any group... goblins now have 2, 3, or 4 times the number of hit point you'd expect, are always spaced out, etc. Why? Because if they weren't they'd be a cake walk with BG3's own rules.
21. It cheapens the ground effects and (even if implemented correctly) the use of oil/acid/alchemists fire). It would be great if there was an encounter or two where ground effects were used. Maybe two or three times during the act. It would be special, memorable, different, etc. But overused it just becomes something you always do or consider. Gee... goblins... better spread out and wait for the incoming nukes.
22. This sets a bad precedence for game design. The game/engine supports this mechanic, so they'll change a load of rules just to make it happen... and then balance the system and encounters around the new rules. From PnP experience, the results of repeated rules changes is typically not good.

The game plays far better without them.

[[TE] Kuraudo]

Originally posted by BW022:

Originally posted by Uhura The Shaman:

Alot of complaints are directed at barrelmancy but what's really the difference between using barrels and using spells like grease to set up grease fire combinations for barrelmancy to be so controversial?

Again...

1. In 5e, grease can't be lit on fire.

woops, sorry this guy is right. My point still stands for the spell wall of fire and a barrel of grease (doesn't explode, but you can light it on fire).

EDIT: your other points are spot on; thanks for making them. Reposting the entire thing for visibility:

Originally posted by BW022:

Originally posted by Uhura The Shaman:

Alot of complaints are directed at barrelmancy but what's really the difference between using barrels and using spells like grease to set up grease fire combinations for barrelmancy to be so controversial?

Again...

1. In 5e, grease can't be lit on fire.
2. In 5e, alchemists fire, oil, and acid are single target only, only have a 20' range, and are improvised weapons -- so typically no base attack bonus to hit. Alchemists fire and acid are also expensive. Oil only adds fire damage to your next fire attack.
3. In BG3, ignoring you shouldn't be able to, lighting grease on fire would take two actions -- one to cast grease and one to light it on fire. Bombs do it on one action.
4. Spells require spell slots, taking caster levels, giving up armor and weapons, lower hit points, etc. Tossing a mini-fireball takes nothing.
5. Casters in 5e are relatively rare. You don't expect 4-5 of them in a single combat.
6. The bombs do significant damage over an area with mass range. There are no 1st-level spells which do this and the closest is a 2nd-level spell like shatter or web on an already lit area.
7. The bombs automatically do damage regardless of a saving throw, even if you miss. That is equal or better than magic missile.
8. The bombs do repeated damage over time. This means casters must make multiple concentration checks -- and for all practical purposes it means will take down any concentration spells and/or make them pointless to cast for another turn -- since you know you are going to take more damage. Again, far beyond say shatter or equal to two rounds of magic missile cast as a single action.
9. The bombs affect an area over time. Thus, preventing casters or other characters from moving, forcing jump/disengages to avoid, or having to take damage to move. Again, beyond shatter, magic missile, and closer to web + burning.
10. The bombs unnecessarily waste time and prolong battles. If you get nuked by three or four of these, you'll spend rounds spreading out, casting healing, etc.
11. The bombs inherently unfair against PCs -- since enemies often start nicely spread out, in defensible positions, etc. while PCs are often moved together.
12. The bombs inherently prolong encounters since (knowing they are coming) you now have to spread out -- which in BG3 is a painful process of individually moving characters prior to the combat initiating. Typically adding a save or two since its going to be coming.
14. The bombs make spell casters far less useful. Why have a wizard take grease, web, or shatter when any rogue or fighter can toss them?
15. They make for boring fights. You can win by tossing five or six of these things out and wow... you haven't used any strategy, tactics, defenses, spells, etc. Likewise the goblins can win doing the same thing.
16. They highlight flaws in the game. If you accidentally move a character... maybe you can recover and move them back. Accidentally move them through flames and now they are toast. Trying to target someone in a window when there is a flaming/acid area around you... is just annoying. I once had a character die after the fight... because my main was standing in fire and at the end of the combat... everyone walked over next to him.
17. It adds little to the game. You can have ground effects in traps, putting in actual spell casters in encounters, specific (but rare) cases such a prepared oil puddles, etc. You don't have to hand them out like candy.
18. There is no defense against these in BG3. In 5e, you could use dodge (or high AC) and never by hit by any of these, ready actions against casters, stay out of range, etc. These things happily go through fog clouds, extreme range, any armor class, etc.
19. Having to spread out, repeatedly is boring. It makes melee/blockers useless, it makes healing or buff spells an invitation to get nuked, the protection fighting style pointless, etc.
20. You can see the slipper slope of encounter decisions which this has likely caused. Since any PC can now do 10hp of area damage to any group... goblins now have 2, 3, or 4 times the number of hit point you'd expect, are always spaced out, etc. Why? Because if they weren't they'd be a cake walk with BG3's own rules.
21. It cheapens the ground effects and (even if implemented correctly) the use of oil/acid/alchemists fire). It would be great if there was an encounter or two where ground effects were used. Maybe two or three times during the act. It would be special, memorable, different, etc. But overused it just becomes something you always do or consider. Gee... goblins... better spread out and wait for the incoming nukes.
22. This sets a bad precedence for game design. The game/engine supports this mechanic, so they'll change a load of rules just to make it happen... and then balance the system and encounters around the new rules. From PnP experience, the results of repeated rules changes is typically not good.

The game plays far better without them.