Saruman's fireball

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by alatar

And in regards to Saruman vs the Ents, he could have at least attempted to torch the Ent (or was it Ents?) that was undamming the river.

It is many years since I last played Dungeons and Dragons but, if my memory serves, I don't believe that the fireball spell has sufficient range.

[Snorri Swifthammer]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

It is many years since I last played Dungeons and Dragons but, if my memory serves, I don't believe that the fireball spell has sufficient range.

[geek on]

text from fireball from newest version of D&D (important part bolded)

Fireball
Evocation [Fire]
Level: Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Area: 20-ft.-radius spread
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Reflex half
Spell Resistance: Yes
A fireball spell is an explosion of flame that detonates with a low roar and deals 1d6 points of fire damage per caster level (maximum 10d6) to every creature within the area. Unattended objects also take this damage. The explosion creates almost no pressure.
You point your finger and determine the range (distance and height) at which the fireball is to burst. A glowing, pea-sized bead streaks from the pointing digit and, unless it impacts upon a material body or solid barrier prior to attaining the prescribed range, blossoms into the fireball at that point. (An early impact results in an early detonation.) If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely.
The fireball sets fire to combustibles and damages objects in the area. It can melt metals with low melting points, such as lead, gold, copper, silver, and bronze. If the damage caused to an interposing barrier shatters or breaks through it, the fireball may continue beyond the barrier if the area permits; otherwise it stops at the barrier just as any other spell effect does.
Material Component: A tiny ball of bat guano and sulfur.

So if we assume that Saruman is high level (maybe 17th) you have a range of 400 * (40*17) ft. ( 1080 ft.) Not bad, apparently PJ didn't do his research!!!!


[geek off]

[alatar]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

It is many years since I last played Dungeons and Dragons but, if my memory serves, I don't believe that the fireball spell has sufficient range.

LOL - that's pretty funny. Played the same way way back in the day. Surely someone is geeked out enough to have run the calculation.

And it was from his staff, which shortens the distance at least a few feet.

And wasn't this the same Saruman who caused snow many miles away (he was at it again this weekend), then even caused a lightening bolt to hit Caradhras?

Which raises the next question - if Saruman could do all of the above, couldn't he have hampered Gandalf's escape via the Eagle?

Note that I'm not that serious about all of this - it's not like it's 'Gandalf losing to Witch-King' important...

[Snorri Swifthammer]

Originally Posted by alatar

LOL - that's pretty funny. Played the same way way back in the day. Surely someone is geeked out enough to have run the calculation.

Ich bin der Ubergeek

[Lyta_Underhill]

Ich bin der Ubergeek

This also explains a lot..."Ubergeek" is a male noun auf Deutsch... I think the reason I never played D & D had much to do with the fact that it seemed too mathematical and not intuitive enough for my irreverent mind...so the question is not now "could Saruman throw a fireball?" but "how far could he throw this fireball?" And I've noticed this seems to be in keeping with those who wonder if the Balrog can fly without actually proving he has wings first!

Cheers!
Lyta

P.S. I still haven't figured out the diaphanous contribution to the Balrog flight equation, which is justifiable since I don't believe they have wings anyway!

[Essex]

And why would Legolas kill someone who was killing the 'bad guy'?

Just because Saruman was bad or not, if someone is attempting to murder him, then it would be natural for Legolas to try and save him.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Lyta_Underhill

I think the reason I never played D & D had much to do with the fact that it seemed too mathematical and not intuitive enough for my irreverent mind.

Lyta, you played D&D with the wrong people. My buddies weren't so..shall we say...exacting. And math is, well, all math to me, so to speak.

Originally Posted by Lyta_Underhill

P.S. I still haven't figured out the diaphanous contribution to the Balrog flight equation, which is justifiable since I don't believe they have wings anyway!

They have wings, but they're just for show (vestigial?).

Originally Posted by Essex

Just because Saruman was bad or not, if someone is attempting to murder him, then it would be natural for Legolas to try and save him.

Will have to review the scene, but I thought that Saruman was already stabbed, so Legolas wasn't preventing anything but just adding to his total - now if he would have shot Saruman, sending him backwards and saving him from falling...

And didn't Gandalf say something about killing needlessly? I just feel that the Wormtongue 'execution by Elf' wasn't right.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Essex, Legolas was trying to prevent a death count of 1 by intentionally killing Grima and intentionally making the death count 1?

Or am I confusing ethics with logic?

[Essex]

let's think about the 'real' world.

someone has a gun to a person's back, and you (say, as a policeman) can see that they mean to kill the person, no matter what you do. You WOULD fire to stop the person MURDERING the other, yes.

You are both confusing ethics AND logic , because you kill the muderer, hopefully saving the person being attacked.