|
| 16 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a few PFS games, in which involved swarms, there was much confusion.
So, I ask:
1) When attacking a swarm with a Splash Weapon(such as Acid), must one target the square the swarm occupies, or do they target the swarm directly, against their touch AC?
2) Does a swarm take direct damage from a splash weapon, or splash only?
3) Do swarms take damage for each square the splash damage would effect, that the swarm occupies?
4) Does the vulnerability to area effects, such as splash weapons, of +50%, add a minimum of +1, effectively increasing the splash damage to at least 2 damage?
5) In 3.5, you could use a Torch to damage swarms, but I can't seem to be able to find said rules in Pathfinder. Do they still exist, and where?
|
1) When attacking a swarm with a Splash Weapon (such as Acid), must one target the square the swarm occupies, or do they target the swarm directly, against their touch AC?
Either.
Targeting their touch AC is difficult, whereas targeting a square is easier.
2) Does a swarm take direct damage from a splash weapon, or splash only?
Neither.
It takes direct damage + 50% upon a successful hit, or splash damage if the attack is unsuccessful.
3) Do swarms take damage for each square the splash damage would effect, that the swarm occupies?
No.
Much as when tossing an Alchemist Fire at a larger-than-medium creature, it only takes splash damage once.
4) Does the vulnerability to area effects, such as splash weapons, of +50%, add a minimum of +1, effectively increasing the splash damage to at least 2 damage?
No.
But, you can throw Artokus's Fire at a swarm if you want higher splash damage.
5) In 3.5, you could use a Torch to damage swarms, but I can't seem to be able to find said rules in Pathfinder. Do they still exist, and where?
Not that I've seen, though, as a PFS GM, I've allowed such things to affect swarms when parties seem ill prepared for them. It really livens up the experience with everyone waving around a torch and oil.
|
|
2) Does a swarm take direct damage from a splash weapon, or splash only?2: splash only. Swarms are immune to single target target effects.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
There is a period between the sentences regarding 1) single target effects and 2) splash weapons.
For some reason, many people get these mixed up, and I believe this is probably the crucial question that BBT wants answered.
Edit: added link
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It could matter if the swarm was vulnerable to fire
How many swarms were vulnerable to fire when that rule was printed?
Zero.
or if you used some of the other splash weapons
How many splash weapons dealt more than one damage on a splash when that rule was printed?
Zero.
Swarms are immune to the direct hit damage, but not to the splash damage and take an extra 50% from the splash damage (which sadly does not matter for many splash weapons).Does the part I've bolded make any logical sense to you?
It's a lament about how little damage is actually done by splash weapons. Alch's fire, for example, deals one damage from splash. Without fire vulnerability, that half-again does literally nothing.
Ordinary acid... same story, different elemental damage.
2: splash only. Swarms are immune to single target target effects.
So you're saying if I throw a flask of alchemist fire at the ground next to a swarm it deals 1 damage. But if I bullseye the vial into the center of the swarm it explodes there for...1 damage.
That seems wrong.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh god it's happening again MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP
A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
Honestly, besides DM's that want to TPK their players every time they meet a swarm, I have no idea who would read it as that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Logical: The reading doesn't work. Logically, a splash weapon would be very effective, since it splatters its contents all over no fewer than nine squares. It doesn't take much damage to kill a bug. You're basically dealing at least 1 damage to every living creature in that nine-block radius. There will be no survivors.
RAW: Splash weapons are explicitly called out as dealing +50% damage. Not splash damage. Splash weapons. Moreover, this rule is completely ineffective in a Core-only campaign by the proposed reading, since there is no such thing as splash damage higher than 1.
RAI: Paizo obviously didn't intend this. Erik Mona has stated in interviews that he thinks every party should be prepared to handle swarms with alchemist's fire. Before alchemists became a thing, splash weapons were the #1 way to handle an unruly swarm at low levels. There is no reasonable reason to assume Paizo wanted to change this.
Balance: Yeah, because acid and alchemist's fire usage was just so out of control, we really needed a nerf. And non-mages really needed a low-level type monster that they are effectively incapable of harming. Sounds fair to me. Hey, would any of the people using this ruling like to play in my Whispering Cairn game? No arcane casters or alchemists. Just for fun.
So in conclusion, when I say this reading fails on every level...that is exactly what I mean.
Oh, also, all swarms have a listed Armor Class.
Jus' sayin'.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, hey, neat item from Ultimate Equipment that did not exist at the time the rules and monsters we are discussing were written.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RAW seems pretty clear.This is as perfect a time as any to point out that the term "rules-as-written" is a farce.
We really need to stop using it as a community.
You're interpreting what you want from the words that are written.
Use whatever terminology you like, but explain how this:
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creaturesdoesn't mean what it says it means.
Specific trumps general. The rule literally calls out that splash weapons work.
|
|
explain how this:
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creaturesdoesn't mean what it says it means.
Happily!
A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons
As Kobold Cleaver points out, the weapon itself does +50% damage.
Not just the splash.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Specific trumps general. The rule literally calls out that splash weapons work.They don't. Nowhere in the rules do they call out that splash weapons work on swarms, though they do literally call out that the direct hit damage does not work here:A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures
Swarms of Tiny creatures take half-damage from slashing and piercing weapons (implied to be full damage from bludgeoning). Wouldn't that be the equivalent of what you keep calling direct hit damage?
Also they do call out that splash weapons work on swarms, you need to read the sentence following the one you continually quote.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
emphasis mine.
Swarms of Tiny creatures take half-damage from slashing and piercing weapons (implied to be full damage from bludgeoning). Wouldn't that be the equivalent of what you keep calling direct hit damage?
This is yet another good point (yes, I just complimented myself; go me). Attacks are clearly able to be an exception to the standard rule, and as we keep saying, splash weapons are called out.
So, with splash weapons, do you have to target the swarm or just the square they are in? What if the swarm is flying?
You target the swarm's touch AC. It's not that nonlinear.
There'd be a good way to avert the confusion, and make splash weapons as good as they should be against these pest clouds:
Splash weapons and swarms:
Splash weapons are especially effective against swarms. Make your attack roll as usual.
-If the roll indicates a hit: The swarm takes damage equal to the weapon's direct hit damage.
-If the roll indicates a miss, and the scatter indicates a square occupied by the swarm: The swarm takes damage equal to the weapon's direct hit damage.
-If the roll indicates a miss (except as above), and the swarm occupies a square within the splash radius: The swarm takes damage equal to the weapon's splash damage.
Note that swarms take +50% damage from all area effects, including splash weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Area of effect weapons don't need to hit an AC. Furthermore, if the swarm is flying, are you trying to imply that you're throwing a flask into a cloud of wasps, and somehow it 'self-detonates' in the middle of the cloud? Or does it detonate because it happens to hit a wasp or 2 during its flight path?
Yes. If you don't think you can, explain why you can attack a single fine sized wasp with it as that's perfectly allowable by the rules.
|
|
Area of effect weapons don't need to hit an AC. Furthermore, if the swarm is flying, are you trying to imply that you're throwing a flask into a cloud of wasps, and somehow it 'self-detonates' in the middle of the cloud? Or does it detonate because it happens to hit a wasp or 2 during its flight path?
A flying swarm has no special defense against a direct hit by a splash weapon. The only difference between a flying swarm and a non-flying swarm is having a Fly speed.
Missing a flying swarm with a direct hit from a splash weapon will (likely) result in no splash damage, as there is (likely) no surface for the container to break against, but then that's really no different from tossing a splash weapon at any other flying enemy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm trying to figure out why the fact that a splash weapon "detonates" in a flying swarm is being questioned as unreasonable.
Or that a vial of acid that splashes over the swarm
When characters can literally stop time for up to 30 seconds at a time, how can we legitimately question such a simple rule as this?
It's just another discrepancy between casters and martials.
Casters have burning hands, martials have....1 point of splash damage using your interpretation?
I don't think so.
You keep asking "why would this happen", or "what makes us think such-and-such". Should I take this to indicate you want me to repost my list of reasons?
Well, okay...here, I'll add one to make this a bit more fresh.
Realistic: The reading doesn't work. Realistically, a splash weapon would be very effective, since it splatters its contents all over no fewer than nine squares. It doesn't take much damage to kill a bug. You're basically dealing at least 1 damage to every living creature in that nine-block radius. There will be no survivors.
Contradictory: All swarms have a listed AC. There is no Core effect save a splash weapon that can target their AC. Moreover, the rule allowing swarms to be injured +50% by splash weapons rule is completely ineffective in a Core-only campaign by the proposed reading, since there is no such thing as splash damage higher than 1. Your reading causes rules oversights that do not have to exist.
RAW: Splash weapons are explicitly called out as dealing +50% damage. Not splash damage. Splash weapons.
RAI: Paizo obviously didn't intend this. Erik Mona has stated in interviews that he thinks every party should be prepared to handle swarms with alchemist's fire. Before alchemists became a thing, splash weapons were the #1 way to handle an unruly swarm at low levels. There is no reasonable reason to assume Paizo wanted to change this.
Balance: Yeah, because acid and alchemist's fire usage was just so out of control, we really needed a nerf. And non-mages really needed a low-level type monster that they are effectively incapable of harming. Sounds fair to me. Hey, would any of the people using this ruling like to play in my Whispering Cairn game? No arcane casters or alchemists. Just for fun.
So in conclusion, when I say this reading fails on every level...that is exactly what I mean.
I'm trying to figure out why the fact that a splash weapon "detonates" in a flying swarm is being questioned as unreasonable.
Or that a vial of acid that splashes over the swarm
When characters can literally stop time for up to 30 seconds at a time, how can we legitimately question such a simple rule as this?
It's just another discrepancy between casters and martials.
Casters have burning hands, martials have....1 point of splash damage using your interpretation?
I don't think so.
And if we're seriously going to have to argue this, it's like what has already been said:
A flask of acid does not operate differently when targeting Fine enemies, flying enemies, or enemies made out of pillows. The argument, "It wouldn't blow up in midair so all swarms are immune" is inconsistent on so many levels. Like, y'know, every single other argument I've heard against splash weapons being effective.
Exactly.
Besides, flying swarms?
Have to enter your space to attack you.
If you're on the ground, so are they.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you're on the ground, so are they.That's why I used the word "likely" in my last post. Twice.
Oh no, I understand.
I'm on the 1d6x1.5 group here.
Those are some pretty fragile vials! ;)Area of effect weapons don't need to hit an AC. Furthermore, if the swarm is flying, are you trying to imply that you're throwing a flask into a cloud of wasps, and somehow it 'self-detonates' in the middle of the cloud? Or does it detonate because it happens to hit a wasp or 2 during its flight path?Yes. If you don't think you can, explain why you can attack a single fine sized wasp with it as that's perfectly allowable by the rules.
So are arrows. Fire one at that same fine wasp and it breaks... That's pathfinder physics for you.
Then again, a direct hit on a single fine sized wasp will only cause splash damage to his buddy flying a few inches away.
That's where the nature of the weapon comes into play. In this case it's hitting lots of those wasps because paizo says it's one creature. Hitting one wasp is like hitting a single part of any creature, like a gnomes pinky finger. That gnomes is going it take a full hit just like the swarm, except the swarm gets an extra 50% because those kind of attacks are more damaging on a creature composed of tiny little creatures.
|
|
So, just to be sure here, swarms, including those immune to weapon damage, can take a direct hit from Splash Weapons?
I understand a general consensus that some wording would imply such a conclusion.
What I desire, is a way to easily show the evidence, that allows judges/DMs, to come to the same conclusion.
There seems to be more than what is written in the Bestiary section, under the swarm subtype description.
You may not be able to get that without an FAQ. The one thing both sides can agree on is that the wording is a tad confusing.
I think you've got as much as you can get right now.