Heat Metal

[Dead Greyhawk]

Heat Metal (Alteration) Reversible
Level: 2
Range: 4”
Duration: 7 rounds
Area of Effect: Special
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 4 segments
Saving Throw: Special
Explanation/Description: By means of the heat metal spell, the druid is able to excite the molecules of ferrous metal (iron, iron alloys, steel) and thus cause the affected metal to become hot.

On the first round following the casting of the spell, the effect is merely to cause the metal to be very warm and uncomfortable to touch. On the second round following the casting of the spell the metal becomes hot enough to cause 1d4 points of damage. On the third, fourth, and fifth rounds following the casting of the spell, the metal becomes searing hot, causing 2d4 points of damage. On the sixth round following the casting of the spell the metal cools but still causes 1d4 points of damage.

Damage from the heat metal spell may be negated by a successful save versus breath weapon.

Materials such as wood, leather, or flammable cloth will smoulder and burn if exposed to searing hot metal causing damage as appropriate. Items, including magical items, must fail the appropriate saving throw to ignite. The wearer of the ignited objects takes 2d4 damage in round following ignition. 1d4 damage in next round.

Fire resistance (potion or ring) or a protection from fire spell totally negates the effects of a heat metal spell, as will immersion in water or snow, or exposure to a cold or ice storm spell (qq.v.).

For each level of experience of the druid casting the spell, he or she is able to affect a single mass of metal equal to 100 gold pieces in weight per level. Masses of metal are cumulative only in 100 GP units. Applying insufficient heat will cause no damage to the target, as the magical heat will be distributed into unheated areas. Alternately the druid may target the armor of 1 target plus 1 target for every three levels of experience the druid possesses.

[liato]

I have a couple questions.

1) What is the effect of someone's leather/clothes igniting?

2) At what stage would it force them to drop their metal weapons?

3) Is there any sort of immobilize effect? Since you've added 5 saving throws I'd suggest that if they fail the saving throw in addition to the damage they can't take any sort of combat action that round. They could still run or try to take their armor off.

4) is there any bonus to not selecting multiple targets like with hold person? If I can cast it on 6 people but only select one person do they get saving throw penalties?

5) How much does armor weigh?

[Dead Greyhawk]

1) What is the effect of someone's leather/clothes igniting?

2d4 damage in round following ignition. 1d4 damage in next round. Save versus breath weapon each round for no damage, as spell above.

2) At what stage would it force them to drop their metal weapons?

The target of heat metal need never drop their weapons should they choose instead to take damage. By dropping the heated weapons, they would avoid receiving the 1d4 or 2d4, depending on round, damage.

3) Is there any sort of immobilize effect?

No.

4) is there any bonus to not selecting multiple targets like with hold person?

No.

If I can cast it on 6 people but only select one person do they get saving throw penalties?

You can't cast it on people. You can cast it on 100 GP weights of ferrous metal or any integer combination of 100 GP weights of ferrous metal. The metal always heats up. Whether the person wearing/holding the metal takes damage is based on their resistance to breath weapon.

5) How much does armor weigh?

From Unearthed Arcana, p. 75, weight in GP

Banded                   350
Bronze Plate Mail        450
Chain Mail               300
Elfin Chain Mail         150
Field Plate              550
Full Plate               650
Leather                  150
Padded                   100
Plate Mail               450
Ring Mail                250
Scale Mail               400
Shield, Buckler           30
Shield, Large            100
Shield, Small             50
Shield, Small, Wood       30
Splint Mail              400
Studded Leather          200

[Ginger]

So a 4th level druid could be surrounded by 10 pirates wielding scimitars and make them all drop their blades or risk damage? Sounds pretty cool!

[Ginger]

To what extent would you have to see the target? Could you target a sword in its sheath? Or arrowheads in a quiver?

[Dead Greyhawk]

So a 4th level druid could be surrounded by 10 pirates wielding scimitars and make them all drop their blades or risk damage? Sounds pretty cool!

Actually, a 4th level druid would only be able to get 4 of the scimitars because of the way the spell is written above.
For each level of experience of the druid casting the spell, he or she is able to affect a single mass of metal equal to 100 gold pieces in weight per level. Masses of metal are cumulative only in 100 GP units.
I want to avoid the ability of a medium level druid to disarm a small army. 100 GP is the weight of a bastard sword.

To what extent would you have to see the target?

Line of sight would work for armor or wielded weapon; PER check for more detail such as sheathed weapon or armor under robes.

Could you target a sword in its sheath?

This would be a reasonable PER check.

Or arrowheads in a quiver?

This would be an unreasonable PER check. Arrowheads are at the bottom of the quiver.

[Dead Greyhawk]

Basically, I have tried to convert heat metal from a certain death spell to a certain disarm spell. A druid can cause a number of weapons equal to his/her level to heat to the point of doing damage. Alternately, a druid can attempt to cook a lesser number of targets in their armor.

Thus, at second level, the druid can cook a man in studded leather. At third level, the druid can cook a man in ringmail or chainmail. At fourth level, the druid can cook a man in splintmail or banded. At fifth level, the druid can cook a man in scalemail or platemail. At sixth, two chainmail-clad men can be cooked.

Use of this spell against a single target, in the cooking manner, is less efficient, but more likely to do damage. Five rounds of damage for a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 8d4 is received. Against weapons, a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 8d4 damage can be done to a number of targets equal to the druid's level, but only if they choose not to throw away their weapons.

Damage comparisons are still favorable, though not as stark. Magic missile does 1d4+1 per missile, no save, while heat metal does 1d4 per level, save for none. The base Fireball does 5d6, save for half, over a 40' diameter. A fifth level druid does a minimum of 1d4 against five targets, save for none, and an unlikely maximum of 8d4 against five targets, save for none, or 8d4, save incrementally for none against a single target.

Conceptually, the most efficient permanent effect of this spell would be to use it against a mix of paralyzed/held and unheld targets. The unheld ones would be disarmed, the held ones would take up to 8d4 damage, save for none, from the held, heated weapons.

[liato]

"Conceptually, the most efficient permanent effect of this spell would be to use it against a mix of paralyzed/held and unheld targets. The unheld ones would be disarmed, the held ones would take up to 8d4 damage, save for none, from the held, heated weapons."

Does that sound like a spell you would ever memorize?

First of all, it only has a CHANCE at doing damage to a held person. A guy with a sword AUTOMATCIALLY does damage to a held person.

In order to do damage to a HELD person:
1) the person has to be wearing metal armor/holding a metal weapon
2) They have to fail a saving throw.

Let's just look at raw damage. I could do 8d4 damage over 6 rounds. that's an average of 20 points of damage assuming they never make a saving throw and statistically they should make at least 1 or 2 which means it's more like 13 to 17 average damage.

Instead of casting heat metal I could just hit them with my scimitar for 8 damage a round. It would take me only 1 extra round to do the same amount of damage as casting the spell and I wouldn't have to waste a spell slot.
As if someone would waste a spell slot for a spell designed to work on held people anyway.

As far as disarming people, it only disarms people if:
1) The person has a metal weapon
2) The person fails a saving throw
3) They DECIDE to drop the weapon.

Who is going to drop their weapon for 1d4 damage? Not even a 1st level fighter. Even 2d4 is probably not worth it for anyone who can wear armor (priests/fighers) higher than 2nd level.

Even so, IF they fail their saving throw AND they decide it's not worth the damage, it still won't disarm them for at least 4 rounds (they could potentially attack during the casting round if they lost initiative, unlike if they were hit with a magic missile or hold person). And all they have to do is pull out another weapon or pick one up off their dead friend to counter the spell (one round worth of action to drop sword and pick up new one).

Do you really consider that a certain disarm spell? It's not even certain when they do have metal weapons.

On our last fight the heat metal spell would have worked on exactly ZERO of the weapons we fought (spears and bows).

I think you really underestimate the limitation of metal only targets.

You can't just compare the base damage the spells like magic missile and fireball since you aren't even considering the targets they are used on.

Heat metal would have been completely useless vs. the gargoyles. It was useless vs. the giants. It's useless vs. the undead. It's useless vs. pretty much anything except for fighters and only generic fighters because magic armor gets a saving throw (of 2) vs. it.

And considering that fighters rush to the front of a battle they tend to end up dead before the spell even starts to take effect. I cast the spell on 3 separate occasions before you even realized what it did because on the first two occasions it was completely useless.

So it's really only useful in a battle when we are outnumbered by fighters wearing armor in a place where I can actually see the backline fighters. Those can be pretty dangerous situations which is exactly when we need spell support which is why I memorize it.


You're also seriously underestimating the importance of instant effects vs. effects over time.

Magic missile is such a great spell because it automatically hits ANYTHING instantly at a pretty decent range. No matter what you fight magic missile is never a wasted spell slot. And it's only a first level spell.

Sleep can knock unconcious 4 of any type of low level creature with no saving throw instantly and it's first level.

Web can immobilize a dozen creatures of pretty much any type as a second level spell.

Fireball, likewise, works on EVERYTHING instantly.

When any of those spells are cast they immediately stop attackers from doing damage to us. Each attacker gets a good 4 to 5 rounds before heat metal really starts to do anything. That's a lot of attacks, support, etc...

If we're talking about spells that affect multiple people that could be easily 20+ extra attacks on the party during a heat metal spell vs. an instant damage spell.

Combined with the fact that the attackers get to save each round our fighters can't just not attack them because they know there's a spell on them the way they could with pretty much any other spell.

There's no way any druid would memorize heat metal now over charm person or, if they wanted to do damage, even cause light wounds.

Here's how I would fix heat metal.

Anyone who holds onto their weapon after the warming phase should automatically take the 1d4 damage AND drop it the next round. 1d4 damage is as much as a cat bite. Considering it's like grabbing a poker that's been sitting in a fireplace it should cause damage and force you to drop the weapon.

If the armor is heated the person should get to make a saving throw to see if it works.

If they are affected then they automatically take damage each round and make a saving throw to take actions during rounds 3-5.

If you want to reduce the number of people it affects it should be one person's equipment per level or 1 person's armor and equipment per 2 levels. Equipment should include all their non-armor metal weapons so they can't just draw a new sword essentially canceling the spell.

As for the burning clothing and such, the effect should be destructive but non-damaging. You're clothes and possibly backbacks or sacks might take damage and be destroyed but there is no combat effect from that (other than it would be completely obvious you were under the effects of the spell).

The spell would then be useful vs. fighters in a long combat.

It does a good amount of damage for a second level spell but only to humanoind fighters/priests and only if they fail a saving throw.

It's not as useful as hold person or web for imobilizing people but it would do damage.

It does more damage than magic missile provided:
1) it has more than one target
2) The target is wearing metal
3) The target fails a saving throw

And it's a second level spell, so it should be better than magic missile.

It's never better than fireball since:
1) it does on average less damage per person
2) The damage is over 7 rounds instead of instant
3) The damage doesn't scale only the number of targets
4) You save vs. none instead of save vs. half
5) It works on significantly fewer targets

[Dell]

I read the new Heat Metal rules, and I think it's been toned down (or "nerfed" as the kids say) a little too far. I checked the 3rd edition rules, and they kept it mostly the same - with the addition of a saving throw if the metal is being worn/wielded by someone.

One complaint I have is I feel that a saving throw every round is too much rolling, and more things to keep track of in combat is not what we need.

The biggest problem is not the damage potential, I feel - it's the fire-and-forget nature of the spell. Here's my proposal:

Keep the spell as is, except for two things: Have a saving throw when the spell is cast to avoid the effects entirely, and require concentration. If the armor is magical, you would use the save indicated in the DMG - otherwise, use the save of the wearer. And the Druid would have to remain immobile and focused for the duration of the spell for it to continue to affect the targets.

That way the spell is still powerful, but the opportunity cost of using it makes it weaker. Essentially, it would be a spell that you could only use from the rear, or from behind cover. Something that the druids would realistically use to protect their woods from invaders.

[liato]

Here's how I would fix heat metal.

Anyone who holds onto their weapon after the warming phase should automatically take the 1d4 damage AND drop it the next round. 1d4 damage is as much as a cat bite. Considering it's like grabbing a poker that's been sitting in a fireplace it should cause damage and force you to drop the weapon.

If the armor is heated the person should get to make a saving throw to see if it works.

If they are affected then they automatically take damage each round and make a saving throw to take actions during rounds 3-5.

If you want to reduce the number of people it affects it should be one person's equipment per level or 1 person's armor and equipment per 2 levels. Equipment should include all their non-armor metal weapons so they can't just draw a new sword essentially canceling the spell.

As for the burning clothing and such, the effect should be destructive but non-damaging. You're clothes and possibly backbacks or sacks might take damage and be destroyed but there is no combat effect from that (other than it would be completely obvious you were under the effects of the spell).

The spell would then be useful vs. fighters in a long combat.

It does a good amount of damage for a second level spell but only to humanoind fighters/priests and only if they fail a saving throw.

It's not as useful as hold person or web for imobilizing people but it would do damage.

It does more damage than magic missile provided:
1) it has more than one target
2) The target is wearing metal
3) The target fails a saving throw

And it's a second level spell, so it should be better than magic missile.

It's never better than fireball since:
1) it does on average less damage per person
2) The damage is over 7 rounds instead of instant
3) The damage doesn't scale only the number of targets
4) You save vs. none instead of save vs. half
5) It works on significantly fewer targets

[Dead Greyhawk]

Anyone who holds onto their weapon after the warming phase should automatically take the 1d4 damage AND drop it the next round.

No. I don't require you to drop all your suddenly scorching weapons from fireball. Damage is the consequence of holding the weapon.

1d4 damage is as much as a cat bite.

1d4 is as much as a dagger thrust.

Considering it's like grabbing a poker that's been sitting in a fireplace it should cause damage and force you to drop the weapon.

No.

If the armor is heated the person should get to make a saving throw to see if it works.

If they are affected then they automatically take damage each round and make a saving throw to take actions during rounds 3-5.

No saving throws to take actions. This is not a hold person equivalent spell. Entangle is. This is a damage spell. Targets take damage or they don't.

If you want to reduce the number of people it affects it should be one person's equipment per level or 1 person's armor and equipment per 2 levels. Equipment should include all their non-armor metal weapons so they can't just draw a new sword essentially canceling the spell.

An additional 1 person's armor per three levels of the caster. Other equipment not heated. Alternately 100 GP worth of targetable equipment per level of the caster. It is either an armor target or a weapon target, not both simultaneously.

As for the burning clothing and such, the effect should be destructive but non-damaging. You're clothes and possibly backbacks or sacks might take damage and be destroyed but there is no combat effect from that (other than it would be completely obvious you were under the effects of the spell).

No. Items that catch fire and are destroyed cause damage the same way that burning you with a torch does.

It does more damage than magic missile provided:
1) it has more than one target
2) The target is wearing metal
3) The target fails a saving throw

And it's a second level spell, so it should be better than magic missile.

Just to point out. Magic missile does 3.5+3.5*level in damage. Heat metal, even as written here, does on the order of 14+14*level/3. Magic missile pales in comparison to heat metal.

To sum up, I disagree with about 80% of your points, but in the interest in having a spell for the next game, I've altered the text as above. If it's still too powerful, I'll nerf it again.

[liato]

You keep ignoring that it's damage over time and that it has such a limited target selection when you do your calcuation on how effective it is. Damage over time should do more damage than instant damage. And spells with limited target selection should be more powerful than spells with no targeting limitations. Not to metion the fact that second level spells should be more powerful than first level spells.

So far I've had the spell memorized every adventure and this is the first time you even noticed it. And when you did notice it I managed to take out exactly 3 enemies with TWO castings of the spell. One of the enemies was half dead from fighting by the time he went unconcious. The other two enemies you actually knocked out two rounds too early which means either 4 to 6 more attacks on our fighters could have happened in which they would have likely dealt the same amount of damage to us that I dealt to them. They might have even died before the spell took effect if our fighters had a swing at them.

And it's not even like I took out the most powerful enemies. I took out two medium level fighters. I'd have MUCH rather had magic missile memorized in that combat. It might have saved our asses from the wraiths or any number of creatures that heat metal is completely useless against.

[Ginger]

liato said:

You keep ignoring that it's damage over time and that it has such a limited target selection when you do your calcuation on how effective it is.

You keep ignoring/forgetting how powerful the fire and forget aspect is.
Invading a dungeon is always difficult, because the enemies have set defenses, and we have to assault them. If you can cast heat metal and do 8d4 damage to a bunch of guys, we can just hide out while they burn to death.
Once we get smarter about using the spell tactically, it becomes immensely more powerful. I would love to be able to hide around a corner while our opponents think about whether to try and kill us before they burn to death.

[Dell]

A query for the DM: How long does it take to remove a set of armor?

Realistically, someone could remove their armor in a minute or two - assuming they weren't in melee with someone. The heavier armors would logically take longer, but most people should be able to remove their armor before the end of the spell's duration - assuming they can get clear of the combat. So the damage is avoidable in that manner, as well.

[liato]

It takes a long time to remove armor.

According to the original spell description simply taking off your helmet prevents getting knocked unconcious. Dana said that it also gives you AC 6.

As for the fire and forget nature. Very few spells aren't fire and forget.

I mean what's to stop us from just popping around a corner and casting a fire and forget fireball? Or popping around a corner and casting a fire and forget web? Or sleep? Or hold person.

Of all those spells heat metal is the worst. The guys we are assaulting aren't going to come and kill us they're going to run and get help. Heat metal is the ONLY spell I listed that wouldn't have worked when we were crossing the bridge.

You tell me how strong the forget nature of the spell is.
You are fighting 6 level 4 fighters. Hold person is cast on 3 of them. Do you keep fighting the help people or do you forget about them?

Now instead of hold person heat metal is cast on the same three fighters. Do you stop fighting them now? They probably won't take enough damage to kill them in 7 rounds, but there's a good chance you'll die before that if you forget about them.

This spell is only useful if we're so outnumbered by fighters that it will be 7 rounds before you can get to them. And during those seven rounds they get to pound on us.

Yes, in the rare cases where it is useful it is EXTREMELY useful. That's why it's worth memorizing at all.

Like I said, I memorized it every adventure and this is the first time that it ever even came up and despite all the fuss it only affected 3 people.

But you tell me if you still want me to memorize it. When do you want me to try to cast it? On archers (They'll get 14 shots off before they die if they die)? On priests? (They'll get 7 spells off and if any is a cure light wounds they won't die).
Right now it only affects 2 people. At level 6 it will affect 3 people at most.

It's either heat metal, charm person, or cure light wounds.

What type of fight would you be expecting that you would pick heat metal?

[Ginger]

I think you're underestimating how effective it is to make 5 fighters drop their swords. I think that you'd have to be a pretty stupid fighter to keep holding on to something that's so hot it does as much damage as being hit with a broadsword. A rational fighter would drop his primary weapon (in which he's specialized) and pull a secondary weapon (like a dagger). That's definitely a worthwhile spell.

Where we are now, we fight very few creatures with more than 15 hit points. Guys that weak are not going to sacrifice their lives to keep fighting.

[Dell]

liato said:

On priests? (They'll get 7 spells off and if any is a cure light wounds they won't die).

For spellcasters, taking damage forces them to make a channelling roll to see if the spell goes off. Even if the priest has an 18 wisdom and constitution, he'll still have a 9.7% chance of failing his roll and flubbing the spell. If they're both 16s, the failure rate goes to 23.9%.

As far as removing the armor goes, in my opinion it should take at most five minutes to get off. Then again, I think it shouldn't take ten minutes to get on, but that's why I ask - the DM's opinion is the only one that really matters. It's just that the quicker the armor removal, the less damaging the spell is - it makes me think that when the spell was created or playtested, armor removal would only take a round or two. Admittedly, being unarmored on the battlefield is a bad situation - but with no armor on, you can run away a lot quicker.

[liato]

First of all, in the last combat NONE of the fighters we were up against had a weapon that heat metal would have worked against.

Second, I don't think a rational fighter would drop his sword for 1d4 points of damage. That means he gets to attack for 2 more rounds before he even considers droping his sword. It's an extra round for each saving throw he makes.

At the very least we should get rid of the warming and cooling rounds and make the spell only last 5 rounds. If the fighter was forced to make a decision about dropping his sword immediately after it was cast then it might be a little more useful.

[Dell]

Here's the 3.5 edition version of the spell, for comparison purposes:
www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/theraven_stephenh/spells/Heat_Metal.html

As you see, it's essentially the same, except they allow a saving throw to negate the effect. This version is even broader in application than the original - it doesn't specify ferrous metals. As read, it could affect jewelry, coins, anything metallic...

With the addition of the saving throw, and the reduction of the targets from one per level to one per two levels, it's in line with other second level spells like hold person, web, stinking cloud, or my personal favorite, invisibility.

[Ginger]

liato said:

First of all, in the last combat NONE of the fighters we were up against had a weapon that heat metal would have worked against.

Second, I don't think a rational fighter would drop his sword for 1d4 points of damage. That means he gets to attack for 2 more rounds before he even considers droping his sword. It's an extra round for each saving throw he makes.

At the very least we should get rid of the warming and cooling rounds and make the spell only last 5 rounds. If the fighter was forced to make a decision about dropping his sword immediately after it was cast then it might be a little more useful.

Part of it depends on how much the fighter knows about druid spells. If you're aware that the spell does so much damage per round over so many rounds, then maybe you'll hold onto your sword. However, the vast majority of guys we fight won't know that. They'll just feel the burn. If they drop their sword, and it cools down, they may think "Maybe it'll get hot again if I pick it back up?"

We'll face very few guys who'll have a lower roll to hit than their save against the heat. It quickly becomes a losing proposition to continue to fight.

[liato]

The 3.5 version looks good to me. It's also the same remedy I've heard from pretty much everyone who played 1st edition. If you just add a saving throw then the spell is fine.

Even with the 3.5 version there's no way I'd memorize that spell over web. I'd probably rather have hold person, too.


As is, I doubt I'll ever memorize it over charm person.

[Dell]

liato said:

As is, I doubt I'll ever memorize it over charm person.

If Dell were a druid, his favorite second level spells would be Obscurement and Trip. Obscurement would essentially eliminate spellcasting and missile fire - because underground, it would cover 80 square feet at fourth level. Most spellcasters are not going to close to 5 feet just so they can cast a spell on you. Then he'd hide in the mist and have his animal friend melee with the bad guys, while he hung back with healing and such. And Trip - people run up to attack you, and they fall, take damage and get stunned for 2-5 rounds? And it lasts for ten minutes per level? Good spell for running away or ambushing. Admittedly it's only truly effective on hard ground - but a lot of druid spells are only effective in certain places.

We deal plenty of damage already - we need ways to avoid taking damage, or heal from the damage we've taken.

[liato]

Trip stuns for 2-5 segments not rounds.

I had looked at obscurment. It looks like one of those spells that could seriously backfire on us. I mean It's not like we'd be able to see either. But if we were seriously outmanned by archers/spell casters it could be useful.

[Dell]

liato said:

Trip stuns for 2-5 segments not rounds.

PHB, page 57

Trip (Enchantment/Charm)
Level: 2
Range: Touch
Duration: 1 turn/level
Area of Effect: One 10' long obiect
Explanation/Description: The spell caster must use a length of vine, a stick, pole, rope, or similar object to cast this magic upon. The trip spell causes the obiect to rise slightly off the ground or floor it is resting on and trip creatures crossing it if they fail to make their saving throw versus magic.
Note that only as many creatures can be tripped as are actually stepping across the magicked obiect, i.e. a 3' long piece of rope could trip only 1 man-sized creature. Creatures moving at a very rapid pace (running) when tripped will take 1-6 (d6) hit points of damage and be stunned for 2-5 (d4+ 1) rounds if the surface they fall upon is very hard, but if it is turf or non-hard they will merely be stunned for 2-5 segments. Very large creatures such as elephants will not be at all affected by a trip. The obiect magicked will continue to trip all creatures passing over it, including the spell caster, for as long as the spell duration lasts. Creatures aware of the object and its potential add +4 to their saving throw when crossing it. The object is 80% undetectable without magical means of detection.

(Emphasis added)

Obscurement is a good spell for certain circumstances - if you're facing a ton of archers, or casters that need to see the target of their spells, it's quite handy. If you're running away, it's handy. If you're setting off a trap/ambush, it's handy. It'd be a lot nicer if it didn't have to be set off centered on the druid, but you take what you can get. But think of it this way - you're a druid. You live in the woods. You cast this spell and run away, and no one can follow you because you are completely untrackable.

Then you have your animal friends attack.

[liato]

That's awesome. Fall 20' into a pit with spikes and you can get right up. But land on pavement and you are out of commission for 5 minutes.

[Dell]

liato said:

That's awesome. Fall 20' into a pit with spikes and you can get right up. But land on pavement and you are out of commission for 5 minutes.

I'm coming to the conclusion that Gary Gygax made the druid class just to f**k with his players.

Gary: "You take... 3 points of damage, as your armor heats up."
Player 1: "Don't I get to save?"
G: "NO SAVE!"
P1: "Well, I chase after the guy that did it to me!"
G: "AHA! You trip on a vine and hit your head on a rock. You're out for... 3 rounds. And you take 7 points of damage from your red hot armor now. You have permanent burns, and (roll) it looks like they're infected."
Player 2: "I fire an arrow at him."
G: "You miss. He casts a spell, and... your bow twists sideways, and the string goes slack. It is now a useless hunk of misshapen wood."
P2: "Don't I get to..."
G: "NO SAVE!"
P2: Olay, I drop the bow and chase him - going around the tripping vine."
G: "Okay... you're snatched into the air by a snare, and are trapped. Take 5 points."
P2: "Can I..."
G: "NO SAVE!"

[liato]

And apparantly there's nothing more dangerous than insects.

P1: After that crafty druid kept tripping us we had better be careful.
P2: Now that we are 9th level we should be okay. We cast mass invisibility and silence 15' radius and sneak up next to the druid.
G: His dog smells you and his bat sees you both alerting him.
You are instantly surrounded by a 1000 insects. How many hp do you have?
P1: 55.
G: You take 55 hp of damage. No saving throw. How about you?
P2: 67.
G: You take 67 hp of damage. No saving throw. Anyone else?
P2: But I'm a 9th level Paladin wearing +3 platemail with a drawn holy avenger.
G: I said no saving throw!
P3: I was sneaking behind them am I caught in the insects?
G: What the heck. No, you were just outside.
P3: Whew! I cast fireball on the druid.
G: Druids get a bonus to save vs. fireballs. He shrugs it off.
P3: Then I cast lightning bolt.
G: Druids get a bonus to save vs. lightning bolts. He shrugs it off. The druid casts a spell. You are instantly surrounded by insects.
P3: I run!
G: You are too distracted by the insects to run. Take 2 hp of damage.
P3: Do I get a chance to save...
G: For the last time, NO! There are no saving throws vs. insects. Have you ever seen insects before? Vile, disgusting insects... Now stop complaining, you'll be free in 12 rounds. Meanwhile, the horde of insects is moving towards you. OK, is anyone here not surrounded by insects yet?
P1: I guess our henchmen who were guarding the mules are still free.
G: They are instantly surrounded by dense trees.
P2: Trees. I guess that's an improvement. Is there anyway through?
G: Are they druids?
P2: No.
G: Then there's no way through.
P2: It must be a spell. How long before it wears off?
G: It never wears off. While you were looking for an exit the entire area fills with insects. Everyone takes 1 hp per round for the next 2 hours and can take no action other than fleeing in terror.

[Ginger]

Here's a new angle to think about. Maybe the spell should involve a stat check to fight the instinct to drop your super-heated sword?

[Dell]

This is rapidly becoming the most complex spell ever. How about we just make up a new spell, called "You drop your sword?" Save vs. spell, or you drop your sword.

If the damage is the big issue, we can make the damage fixed instead of random. Instead of 8-32 points of unavoidable damage, we can assign a number like 10,12, 18... whatever the DM feels is a reasonable amount. So instead of 1d4, 2d4, 2d4, 2d4, 1d4, you would have something like 2, 3, 4, 3, 2, for a total of 14 points. Half damage if you're not wearing metal armor, but have a metal shield or weapon. Magic armor reduces damage by 1 for each "plus", with a minimum of 1 point. Allow a save for half damage, and the problem is solved with minimal changes to the spell.

Oh yeah, the disability portion of the spell needs to be ignored completely:

G: "The druid made your armor and weapons so cold that your fingers are frostbitten and black. They have to be amputated now."
P1: "What? But I only took 8 points of damage from that lousy spell! Do I roll a..."
G: "NO SAVE!"
P2: "Since you don't have fingers anymore, can I have your +3 sword?"
P1: (whimpers)

[Dead Greyhawk]

This is rapidly becoming the most complex spell ever.

Yes.

As far as removing the armor goes, in my opinion it should take at most five minutes to get off. Then again, I think it shouldn't take ten minutes to get on, but that's why I ask - the DM's opinion is the only one that really matters. It's just that the quicker the armor removal, the less damaging the spell is - it makes me think that when the spell was created or playtested, armor removal would only take a round or two.

Armor that has a base movement rate of 6" takes 1 turn (10 rounds) to don or doff. Armor that has a base movement rate of 9" takes 5 rounds to don or doff. Cutting your armor off you takes half the normal time but destroys the protective nature of the armor, reducing it to AC10.

Exceptions to this rule include elven chain, which takes as long as chain, and full and field plate armor, which take twice as long as platemail.