ARCHIVE: CLOK BBS

Why does pyromancy do "fire" damage instead of "heat" damage like the damage from other hot sources? Could this change be considered for the sake of consistency or is there a mechanic reason for the difference?

Unless it has been changed, heat damage cannot set the scarecrows on fire, while fire damage could. I don't think this mechanic has been spread to other mobs that have fur though.

Is the fire actually dependent on having the word fire there? I'd think the fire would be from the spell itself and not related to the word used for the damage type.

It is based on the fire damage type itself as you can use lit arrows to gain the same effect, because lit arrows also do fire damage in addition to their normal damage.

This gets back to the discussion of whether it's the fire that's doing the damage or the heat from the fire that's doing the damage. Technically it's the heat. Why make the distinction?

If the only things able to be set on fire are scarecrows, maybe this should just be removed. I don't see fur catching on fire in a meaningful way (ever lit hair on fire?) so maybe this could use an update and be integrated to use the same damage type as other heat damage sources.

It might use an update. I have long asked to be able to use lamp oil and something you can throw or splash onto a target then set them on fire(which you cannot do with heat damage attacks such as boiling water jets). I don't know how true 'fire' damage is even used high end now after my higher levels of pyromancy were removed. The most I use pyromancy for is to gain the 'heat' type of damage anyways.

Btw, will you also agree that Nether beings should have increased damage from heat based damage to the same degree that they are currently vulnerable to fire? I really miss one shotting higher end Nether creatures with Master channeled Pyromancy.

Nether is weak against fire and light. This hasn't changed.

So, if Pyromancy is changed to heat and not fire, will Nether then be weak to heat to keep consistent that Pyromancy is ++ against nether?

Why would it need to be changed to heat damage? Fire is heat.

Acarin seemed pretty adamant on it. Most likely in response to my thread about cryomancy.

We don't necessarily go and change things solely based on the semantics that Nootau and Acarin debate endlessly on the BBS. Just saying.

Anyhow, to add a bit of light on this subject: From looking in the code, it appears that "Fire" damage is coded to be stronger than "Heat" damage against stuff like the Nether.

This makes sense to me, since Fire is made up of a lot of concentrated heat, and as such would be more damaging.

Fire damage is separate from heat damage because fire is different than straight up heat (at least in my limited scientific mind), and fire damage is coded to cause specific effects in certain situations that heat wouldn't necessarily cause. For instance, using steam agaist a scarecrow is going to do some heat damage, but it isn't going to light it on fire like a bolt of fire would.

Similarly, we could have all weapons do "physical" damage or "impact" damage, but the different types of physical impacts have different results in different situations. That's why we have hack, crush, bludgeon, slash, and pierce differentiated.

And by the way, nether is weak against heat as well as fire and light damage, in case that was't clear.

Light damage also damages things via heat, but is separated from heat or fire damage because it has certain special effects in certain situations that heat or fire would not.