If someone pulled this in my game, I'd just ad-hoc it to be an area effect attack that does 20d6 damage to all creatures in the area of effect. Not to reduce the damage, but to speed things up.
JAMES!
How can you be so thoughtless in posting something like this? Don't you realize there are at least a dozen posters on this forum that are going to go into apoplectic shock that someone advocated not following the rules as written to the painful letter of the rule? And my god, it was a developer on top of that!
I'm quite certain at least a half-dozen funerals are now going to have to be arranged for the people who had cerebral aneurisms after reading that post!
:)
Creative Director
|
The whole "hurl missile weapons by telekinesis" idea needs to be dragged out and shot in the head, repeatedly.
I agree.
I'd rather see the "hurl a bunch of things at a foe" handled as a simple area effect attack. Basically, a "fireball" that does bludgeoning and piercing and slashing damage, but otherwise just does 1d6/level (max 20d6) in a 20 foot burst.
Again... not to nerf damage NEARLY as much as to reduce the ridiculous amount of die rolls this tactic uses.
Hmm, looking at the description it doesn't specify damage is taken once per spell but instead states that they must be considered flat footed to take the sneak attack damage. At the same time it states you can add sneak attack damage to any spell that deals damage. By that wording spells add sneak attack damage once per casting against flat footed targets. This means you could cast a fireball and if 3 of 5 targets are flat footed then 3 targets take the same damage plus a pool of sneak attack damage. ie 25 damage from fireball plus 10 damage from sneak attack divided amongst the flat footed targets.
Personally i think it's a bit of a ridiculous interpretation that adds far too much math.
I think that the more reasonable interpretation would be that the targets would take sneak attack damage from when they are damaged while flat footed from a single spell. Sure magic missile is a single spell but it is doing damage over multiple attacks, much like scorching ray.
In order for this to work you would need to be a minimum of level 16 and would potentially deal 1d4 + 1 + 7d6 sneak attack to 5 targets and that is assuming the targets are all flat footed. Nevermind the fact that there are several items and spells that can completely negate the effectiveness of this targeted spell including the level 1 shield spell... A greater invis'd rogue with a pair of daggers and improved two weapon fighting tree could have 6 attacks with 1d4 + (weapon enhance, str and buffs) and 8d6 sneak attack on any target within reach.
I don't see where the huge concern is.
COMBINE WITH SURPRISE ATTACH ROGUE TALENT
Is that a grapple?
where do you keep all those gargantuan arrows??
|
The whole "hurl missile weapons by telekinesis" idea needs to be dragged out and shot in the head, repeatedly.Not so much that as toned down. The 'throwing things with the power of your mind' trope SHOULD be represented.
Yeah, but something ought to be done about the Telekinesis Colossal Javelin Gatling Syndrome.
I'm all for throwing things at things - heck, aqueous orb is rapidly becoming my fave spell.
The whole "hurl missile weapons by telekinesis" idea needs to be dragged out and shot in the head, repeatedly.I agree.
I'd rather see the "hurl a bunch of things at a foe" handled as a simple area effect attack. Basically, a "fireball" that does bludgeoning and piercing and slashing damage, but otherwise just does 1d6/level (max 20d6) in a 20 foot burst.
Again... not to nerf damage NEARLY as much as to reduce the ridiculous amount of die rolls this tactic uses.
If speed is the only concern then don't roll dice. Use an app that rolls for you. I have one that I can see all of the rolls. I would just have to count how many hit such as any roll above X hits.
That's how I roll high level fireballs anyway. it takes about 4 seconds to roll and calculate the damage.
|
I may be late on this one, but this would be my interpretation.
Magic Missile can target up to 5 creatures, no two of which can be more than 15 feet apart. By 9th level it deals 5d4+5. With Intensify Spell, it becomes 10d4+10. If it gets Empowered as well, then it becomes 10d4+10 + 1/2(5d4+5) (or 1/2(10d4+10) if you're going for really powerful magic). Add on a 10th level Arcane Trickster SA of +5d6 with the Surprise Spell ability, and this nets you 10d4+10 + 1/2(5d4+5) + +5d6 SA total either delivered to a single target or dispersed to up to 5 targets each receiving a single magic missile from the same SINGLE SPELL, dealing a minimum of 2d4+2 + 1/2(1d4+1) + however many SA dice the triskster wishes on a single magic missile 1d6 to 5d6 with no more than a total of 5d6 SA damage being dispersed throughout. The kicker being that the Surprise Spell is used for a SINGLE SPELL that deals damage to a FLAT-FOOTED opponent. I hesitate to use powergamery and munchkin as descriptives for the OPs original question, particularly with what those terms imply and evoke form gamers, but it is how it feels to me. Not that I am any kind of authority, especially with the item I submitted for this years Superstar contest.
Here's the thing. As written, Intensify increases the dice damage dealt by a spell. However, Magic Missile adds MISSILES as it increases, not dice. As such I would say that one cannot Intensify Magic Missile. Also, a 10th level Arcane Trickster would have 7d6 Sneak Attack dice, due to the 2d6 prerequisite.
Also, I can't think of a circumstance where Sneak Attack is ever "spread" amongst enemies, and I don't think adding such a rule makes sense in the context of multi-targetted opponents, let alone Magic Missile as a singular case.
(If I come across as rude, I'm not trying to be, hehe :P)
Also says arrows and bolts are treated as daggers of the respective size..so i believe that's 2d6 per arrow instead of 3d6 ins't it?
|
Creative Director
|
ALSO James please read above post and confirm that was your thought. " on surprise spells" and flat footed.
ALSO.. imagine all this with greater invisibility + mind blank or 1 level of shadow dancer.
again.. theory craft... trust me this stuff rarely makes it into games.
Your GM should be the one you're worried about confirming rules, not me.
|
I'd rather see the "hurl a bunch of things at a foe" handled as a simple area effect attack. Basically, a "fireball" that does bludgeoning and piercing and slashing damage, but otherwise just does 1d6/level (max 20d6) in a 20 foot burst.
Again... not to nerf damage NEARLY as much as to reduce the ridiculous amount of die rolls this tactic uses.
I'm TriOmegaZero and I approve of this message.
|
|
I'd rather see the "hurl a bunch of things at a foe" handled as a simple area effect attack. Basically, a "fireball" that does bludgeoning and piercing and slashing damage, but otherwise just does 1d6/level (max 20d6) in a 20 foot burst.Again... not to nerf damage NEARLY as much as to reduce the ridiculous amount of die rolls this tactic uses.
I'm TriOmegaZero and I approve of this message.
How can you be so thoughtless in posting something like this? Don't you realize there are at least a dozen posters on this forum that are going to go into apoplectic shock that someone advocated not following the rules as written to the painful letter of the rule? And my god, it was a developer on top of that!
Did I just blow your mind?
I'd rather see the "hurl a bunch of things at a foe" handled as a simple area effect attack. Basically, a "fireball" that does bludgeoning and piercing and slashing damage, but otherwise just does 1d6/level (max 20d6) in a 20 foot burst.Again... not to nerf damage NEARLY as much as to reduce the ridiculous amount of die rolls this tactic uses.
I'm TriOmegaZero and I approve of this message.
How can you be so thoughtless in posting something like this? Don't you realize there are at least a dozen posters on this forum that are going to go into apoplectic shock that someone advocated not following the rules as written to the painful letter of the rule? And my god, it was a developer on top of that!Did I just blow your mind?
No, I wasn't thinking of you when I posted that. I think you can guess a couple of names that popped into my head, but I won't post them to avoid violating forum rules.
floating disk isn't big enough to carry Colossal arrows... each one by encumbrance is not the problem (individually they're about 3 or 4 pounds as the rules read), it's their length (about 24 feet or so at that size). The arrows simply won't fit atop the disk, they'll roll off.
Encumbrance rules are all fine and well ... but tell me how you're carrying arrows of that size - and an efficient quiver won't cut the mustard. As a "clothing" item such a quiver is sized to its wearer, NOT to the contents. They're too big to fit in any bag of holding or portable hole, so you're left with a train of followers each hefting one on a shoulder, two if you're really stretching it. Or something very similar.
If you have a Gargantuan or Collosal pet/beast of burden, you're good to go. I suggest a 15 HD anykolsaurus or a brachiosaurus, although a 16 HD elephant will do just as well. :P
Your GM should be the one you're worried about confirming rules, not me.
Amen. It's all well and good to ask for an official clarification on some area of the rules in dispute, but in the end it comes down to GM discretion.
I thought you needed an attack roll to sneak with a spell? That would leave magic missle and fireball out, but 3 for scorching ray(provided conditions for sneaking apply to all three attacks).
An arrow would have to be longer to use in a huge bow...
It'd be like trying to shoot a pencil out of a bow
In any case, since you're at minimum a 20th level character (rogue 3/wizard 7/arcane trickster 10) in order to pull this off... I'd be fine with that. What would annoy me isn't the damage you're doing, but the fact that you'd be forcing the game to a halt in order to roll that many dice. 30 attack rolls in a round is kinda lame.
If someone pulled this in my game, I'd just ad-hoc it to be an area effect attack that does 20d6 damage to all creatures in the area of effect. Not to reduce the damage, but to speed things up.
For the sneak attack specifically, I like the 3.5 Rules of the Game answer. It has no bearing on Pathfinder obviously, but it makes sense with the 3.X ruleset which PF inherited.
With spell effects that allow you to make multiple attack rolls, such as the energy orb spells or the Split Ray feat from Tome and Blood, you must treat the effect like a volley -- only the first attack can be a sneak attack.
In the case of massive attack roll overflow (like above), I think this is an extension of the "summon overlord = boring" problem I've seen in games. Someone plays a character that summons ~18 things. Each creature gets its own attack, it's own spell, blah blah blah. The game slows down to a ridiculously boring level. I can see one to four summoned monsters -- but 18? Really?
I think most players would want to at least get the average damage from the spell effect -- which is easy enough to calculate. The good news is that strategies like this are often trivial to counter -- like contingency wind wall. Also, stoneskin/protection from arrows can be a passable counter. . .
My interpretation is you can not use surprise spells to deal Sneak Attack damage more than once on a target per spell UNLESS that spell already allowed to add Sneak Attack damage in which case the ability doesn't matter.
Magic Missile allows to deal sneak attack damage on each creature damaged, but counting it as separate attacks is ludicrous since the usual Sneak Attack rules do not apply here, either the spells follows the usual rules and can deal Sneak Attack multiple times (with attack rolls) or you deal sneak attack once on each creature receiving damage(treating it as a damaging spell).
In the case of telekinesis and scorching ray and other spells that disregard itterative attack rules, I treat like many shot, you only get to deal sneak attack / precision damage once on a single target, but possible multiple times when you target multiple creatures.
|
Creative Director
|
"If you're popping out of stealth, you'd only get the sneak attack damage on the first ray of multiple rays on a single target, since he's only flat footed against your first attack; after that, even a split second later, he sees you and can react and isn't flat footed."
why would only the "first ray count" when popping out of stealth?? On surprise spells I would say yes. But why only the first when he would clearly be "flat footed" vs ALL rays.
Because the rays created by this spell don't all fire at the same time. At least, I don't see them as firing all at the same time. They fire in rapid succession, one after the other.
If your GM instead says they all fire at once... then sure... they would all gain the sneak attack in that situation. I've just always envisioned them as going one after the other because they increase in number as you get higher level, just like how your iterative attacks increase as you get higher level.
(shrug)
Both interpretations are legit. Only the GM gets to pick which one is legit at any one time.
And honestly... that goes for PFS play too. No two GMs are alike, and as a result, no two games will ever be alike. That's kinda the neat part.
The obsession with "all GMs must rule every single possible ruling exactly the same in PFS play" is a waste of energy. It'll never happen. Hasn't yet, for sure, and the PFS is still going strong. So it's not that big of a deal.
(end unexpected rant)
For the sneak attack specifically, I like the 3.5 Rules of the Game answer. It has no bearing on Pathfinder obviously, but it makes sense with the 3.X ruleset which PF inherited.
With spell effects that allow you to make multiple attack rolls, such as the energy orb spells or the Split Ray feat from Tome and Blood, you must treat the effect like a volley -- only the first attack can be a sneak attack.
+1...and I still use that rule in Pathfinder.
Because the rays created by this spell don't all fire at the same time. At least, I don't see them as firing all at the same time. They fire in rapid succession, one after the other.
If your GM instead says they all fire at once... then sure... they would all gain the sneak attack in that situation. I've just always envisioned them as going one after the other because they increase in number as you get higher level, just like how your iterative attacks increase as you get higher level.
(shrug)
Both interpretations are legit. Only the GM gets to pick which one is legit at any one time.
And honestly... that goes for PFS play too. No two GMs are alike, and as a result, no two games will ever be alike. That's kinda the neat part.
The obsession with "all GMs must rule every single possible ruling exactly the same in PFS play" is a waste of energy. It'll never happen. Hasn't yet, for sure, and the PFS is still going strong. So it's not that big of a deal.
(end unexpected rant)
+1000.
But than again...that mentality....is a problem of organized play which breeds a feel of competion...which would require DMs to rule the same. But all that means is organized play...should just be reoraganized to drop that feeling. But that is another topic completely.
|
Creative Director
|
+1000.
But than again...that mentality....is a problem of organized play which breeds a feel of competion...which would require DMs to rule the same. But all that means is organized play...should just be reoraganized to drop that feeling. But that is another topic completely.
I'd rather have GMs making their own calls on case by case basis as the need comes up and being able to feel that they can do so without backlash and thus keep the game running at a smooth, fun clip than have a GM feel that he can't progress until he verifies the EXACT RIGHT WAY to run a corner-case rule by looking it up in a vast FAQ or errata sheet or whatever, thus derailing the game and lessening the fun all around.
|
Creative Director
|
What competition? There is no prize for the highest exp, or the highest about of prestige points. Last I heard PFS and rpgs in general was all about cooperative play.
But than again...that mentality....is a problem of organized play which breeds a feel of competion...which would require DMs to rule the same. But all that means is organized play...should just be reoraganized to drop that feeling. But that is another topic completely.
The competition of "building the best character." AKA: Character optimization. The PFS itself doesn't have a built-in competitive element at all, and it DOES encourage cooperative play. It's just a simple fact that org play attracts the kind of player that likes to "win" by building the most optimized character. It's the same type of personality that dominates MMORPGs, honestly.
It's not a BAD thing, mind you. It's not for everyone, though, that's for sure.
I'd rather have GMs making their own calls on case by case basis as the need comes up and being able to feel that they can do so without backlash and thus keep the game running at a smooth, fun clip than have a GM feel that he can't progress until he verifies the EXACT RIGHT WAY to run a corner-case rule by looking it up in a vast FAQ or errata sheet or whatever, thus derailing the game and lessening the fun all around.+1000.
But than again...that mentality....is a problem of organized play which breeds a feel of competion...which would require DMs to rule the same. But all that means is organized play...should just be reoraganized to drop that feeling. But that is another topic completely.
Please don't shut down or minimize the FAQ system anymore than it already is minimized please.
Just because you don't want GMs in PFS stopping games to look up FAQ entries doesn't mean your customer base doesn't want those FAQs to look up after the game in question is done, so the GMs can make informed decisions on what they houserule. It's much easier to figure out if you want to house rule something if you see the DEVs ruling and the thought process on it.
floating disk isn't big enough to carry Colossal arrows... each one by encumbrance is not the problem (individually they're about 3 or 4 pounds as the rules read), it's their length (about 24 feet or so at that size). The arrows simply won't fit atop the disk, they'll roll off.
Encumbrance rules are all fine and well ... but tell me how you're carrying arrows of that size - and an efficient quiver won't cut the mustard. As a "clothing" item such a quiver is sized to its wearer, NOT to the contents. They're too big to fit in any bag of holding or portable hole, so you're left with a train of followers each hefting one on a shoulder, two if you're really stretching it. Or something very similar.
If you have a Gargantuan or Collosal pet/beast of burden, you're good to go. I suggest a 15 HD anykolsaurus or a brachiosaurus, although a 16 HD elephant will do just as well. :P
How do you get 24 feet? I don't think the length of a weapon doubles just the weight, when increasing size categories.
A large bastard sword isn't 2x the length of a medium bastard sword.
Length doubles each time - weight goes up by 8 per doubling of length, so I was mistaken. Four doublings (2, 4, 8, 16) should result in 48' arrows weighing (8, 64, 512, 4096) 614.4 pounds.
As a matter of fact, a Large bastard sword should be double the length of a Medium bastard sword. Large critters are considered twice the height of Medium creatures, on average, so weapon size increases the same way.
I would not allow MM to utilize precision damage.
You can't be precise if you don't aim the spell, ie. roll an attack roll.
Magic Missiles just hit, they dont hit specific areas.
This.
And every post like it.
