burn on flame immunity

[Shifthappens]

I've been discussing the issue with some others and i'm not yet convinced about it. Can burn markers be placed on flame immune objects? It can't be placed on a burnproof object since the wording is very specific about it, but not that much about flame immune:

Burnproof
(Object Trait)
Cannot have the Burn condition. May be vulnerable to flame damage, but cannot “burn”. All Incorporeal objects are Burnproof.

Immunity
(Object Trait)
This object is immune to all attacks, damage, conditions, and effects of the specified damage type, including critical damage and direct damage. It cannot be targeted or affected by spells or attacks of the specified type.

I've seen that it is okay here ( http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=14204.0 ) and no one denied it, but no official answer truly agreed that it's okay. So, can burn be placed with flame attack (like lash of hellfire with effect roll)? Can Fireweaving or Adramelech's Torment put a burn on a Flame Immune object to buff the warlock's demon yet not doing any fire damage with it?

[Wildhorn]

No it cant. Read the codex instead to create a subject about somethig people answered and pointed answer already in the subject you linked.

Immunity prevent condition of the immune type to be put on the object.

So Burn (which is a Flame condition) can't be put on a Flame Immunr object.

[silverclawgrizzly]

Shift Flame Immunity prevents Burn. Burn is a Flame condition I believe so it's not viable on a Flame Immune object.

[Shifthappens]

the codex says, that one who is flame immune can't be affected by a condition, but it doesn't say it prevents the condition to be applied, which is why i'm asking these questions. From my point of view, having the condition on yet not being affected simply means that the condition does nothing even if it's there.

If id does say it somewhere in the codex, i'd appreciate if you could point it out since i may have bypassed it. I've seen in the FiF big list of question that it can be done and i didn't see anyone saying it can't, and suddenly in other posts it's the opposite and it can't be done, so if you have found an official answer somewhere i'd be glad if you could point it out.

I tried searching for this one and have not found it yet.

I know that for most this seem evident, but what i'm unsure of is more of the interpretation about words than anything else. "Immune" for me is about targeting and damage, also effect of the condition, but having the condition on is something i consider unclear by itself. A flame immune creature can be attacked with the lash for exemple, but it won't do a thing. The same may be true for conditions. Have the condition yet does nothing. Same about what "affected" truly means. is it the condition itself or the effect of the condition?

What gives me reasons to believe there might be a chance for that is that the wording of burnproof says the condition can't be there at all, which is a little bit different

Also, i'm not sure who in this forum is an official about rules, i think that Shadow is one, but thats about it.

[Lord0fWinter]

If you are immune to something you cannot have that condition on you. So If you are flame immune, you cannot have burn tokens on you. It doesn't matter how they were moved their.

Burnproof has an odd wording, that is different than this.

From the man himself. Shad0w is a moderator for the forums, Laddin is the creative director of the company. He says it cannot be, so thus it cannot be.

[Shifthappens]

thus i shall stop my pointless questioning about abusing burn and thank you for pointing it out. I'll ask the one who started the "FiF big list of question" to uptade his faqs too, i've actually got the idea there :S.

well, thanks a lot for the answer.

Another question then. Can a burn marker be moved at all to a flame immune, thus making it disapear? for exemple, an oponent fire mage burn you, yet the only creature you can get to is fire immune, and you try moving the burn there to get rid of it.

[baronzaltor]

To the best of my knowledge an immune creature cannot gain the token in the first place.  He is simply a non-option for it.

[sIKE]

My only question is the Burn Condition from the Priest Flame or Light?

[baronzaltor]

My only question is the Burn Condition from the Priest Flame or Light?

Its still a flame condition.

The attack is light.. and his ability says if he attacks and damages with a light attack..he may pay mana to place a Burn condition on the target.

So, its more or less disconnected from the light attack needed to enable the ability to place it, and there is no text anywhere that would change the nature of the burn condition itself, so it would just be flame still.

[Sailor Vulcan]

Thematically, I wonder why burns deal damage more than one round. I mean, real life burns continue to hurt after you get them, but I'm fairly sure that they don't get worse unless the burned body part is still on fire. Or maybe coffee burns work differently then fire burns, idk.

[sIKE]

Thematically, I wonder why burns deal damage more than one round. I mean, real life burns continue to hurt after you get them, but I'm fairly sure that they don't get worse unless the burned body part is still on fire. Or maybe coffee burns work differently then fire burns, idk.

You literally are on fire still...clothes flesh whatever.....burning up!

[Shad0w]

If a if an object has a trait that gives immunity to that object,  it can not gain something it is immune to in any way. 

For example burnproof can not have burn makers attached / moved on to it.