Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game

Starfinder


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

It is possible to trample a swarm?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 187 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PRD wrote:


In order to attack, it (a swarm) moves into an opponent's space, which provokes an attack of opportunity. It can occupy the same space as a creature of any size, since it crawls all over its prey. A swarm can move through squares occupied by enemies and vice versa without impediment, although the swarm provokes an attack of opportunity if it does so. A swarm can move through cracks or holes large enough for its component creatures.
PRD wrote:
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
PRD wrote:


Trample (Ex) As a full-round action, a creature with the trample ability can attempt to overrun any creature that is at least one size category smaller than itself. This works just like the overrun combat maneuver, but the trampling creature does not need to make a check, it merely has to move over opponents in its path. Targets of a trample take an amount of damage equal to the trampling creature's slam damage + 1-1/2 times its Str modifier. Targets of a trample can make an attack of opportunity, but at a –4 penalty. If targets forgo an attack of opportunity, they can attempt to avoid the trampling creature and receive a Reflex save to take half damage. The save DC against a creature's trample attack is 10 + 1/2 creature's HD + creature's Str modifier (the exact DC is given in the creature's descriptive text). A trampling creature can only deal trampling damage to each target once per round, no matter how many times its movement takes it over a target creature.

1) Trample refer overrun that target a single creature, but it affect every creature along the trampling creature path;

2) It is a Ex ability, not a weapon or natural weapon, but it refer the slam damage of the creature, and that is a natural weapon;

3) It deal the trample damage to a creature only once, and the swarm should count as a creature for that.

From the above point I think that a trample attack would damage a swarm, dealing normal damage one for turn to the swarm and the swarm will always try the reflex save as it can't make attacks of opportunity.

Thoughts?


I would say yes swarms are a valid target for it. I would personally rule that trample counts as a bludgeoning weapon regarding swarms immunities and that if the swarm consists of flying creatures they are not a valid target. Most isn't RAW just how I would do it based on what makes sense to me.


It never really defines trample as an area of effect attack, but rather an effect that targets a specific number of creatures, i.e. the creatures in its path.

Not sure.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
_Ozy_ wrote:

It never really defines trample as an area of effect attack, but rather an effect that targets a specific number of creatures, i.e. the creatures in its path.

Not sure.

The number of creatures in the path isn't a specific number of creatures. It is all the creatures in the path.

On the other hand it isn't an area effect, so it don't get the extra damage.


Diego Rossi wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

It never really defines trample as an area of effect attack, but rather an effect that targets a specific number of creatures, i.e. the creatures in its path.

Not sure.

The number of creatures in the path isn't a specific number of creatures. It is all the creatures in the path.

On the other hand it isn't an area effect, so it don't get the extra damage.

If you had a spell called arrow storm that sent a single arrow at every creature within 30' of you, that would not be an area of effect spell, and would be an effect that targeted a specific number of creatures, that being the number that were within 30' of you. I wouldn't think such a spell would or should have any effect on a swarm, as a single hit from an arrow via that spell shouldn't by any more effective than a single hit from an arrow via a bow. Likewise, being trampled as one of N creatures along a movement path shouldn't be any more effective than a single stomp attack.

A 'specific number' of creatures does not have to be a number based on your level, or fixed to a certain number to fall under that definition.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Technically, fuzzy, maybe not.

In practice: hell yeah. If you look at the reasons why a swarm is hard to hurt (many critters in the same area), and what trampling is supposed to be (damage everything in its path), it's clear that it should work. I would consider trample to be an area attack because it affects everything in the path of the trample. So that means you get the +50% damage.

I consider this one of the cases where the rules are vague and the GM makes the most reasonable rules call.


Ascalaphus wrote:

Technically, fuzzy, maybe not.

In practice: hell yeah. If you look at the reasons why a swarm is hard to hurt (many critters in the same area), and what trampling is supposed to be (damage everything in its path), it's clear that it should work. I would consider trample to be an area attack because it affects everything in the path of the trample. So that means you get the +50% damage.

I consider this one of the cases where the rules are vague and the GM makes the most reasonable rules call.

Is using the Whirlwind feat an area of effect attack?


''When you use the full-attack action, you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your highest base attack bonus against each opponent within reach. You must make a separate attack roll against each opponent.

When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.''

you must make an attack roll against every enemies so no its not an AoE

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
_Ozy_ wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

It never really defines trample as an area of effect attack, but rather an effect that targets a specific number of creatures, i.e. the creatures in its path.

Not sure.

The number of creatures in the path isn't a specific number of creatures. It is all the creatures in the path.

On the other hand it isn't an area effect, so it don't get the extra damage.

If you had a spell called arrow storm that sent a single arrow at every creature within 30' of you, that would not be an area of effect spell, and would be an effect that targeted a specific number of creatures, that being the number that were within 30' of you. I wouldn't think such a spell would or should have any effect on a swarm, as a single hit from an arrow via that spell shouldn't by any more effective than a single hit from an arrow via a bow. Likewise, being trampled as one of N creatures along a movement path shouldn't be any more effective than a single stomp attack.

A 'specific number' of creatures does not have to be a number based on your level, or fixed to a certain number to fall under that definition.

Then a fireball hit a specific number of creatures: those in its area of effect and nothing outside it.

Note that a spell having a AoE isn't a requirement for it to be able to damage a swarm.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
If you had a spell called arrow storm that sent a single arrow at every creature within 30' of you, that would not be an area of effect spell, and would be an effect that targeted a specific number of creatures, that being the number that were within 30' of you. I wouldn't think such a spell would or should have any effect on a swarm, as a single hit from an arrow via that spell shouldn't by any more effective than a single hit from an arrow via a bow.

A spell that hits every single living thing in the area with its own personally targeted arrow and no specified numerical limit sounds like it would be extremely effective against swarms. After all, it's a spell that would presumably be highly effective if there were a hundred individual diminutive creatures in that area. Why should it stop being effective just because they've formed a swarm?

The point of the 'specific number of creatures' clause is that if you have an attack that kills/incapacitates up to 1 creature per caster level, it's not going to do anything meaningful to a swarm that is made of hundreds of creatures.

However, going by RAW, the swarms we're talking about would be immune to arrows, and they'd be immune to whirlwind strike as well. Not because whirlwind strike targets a specific number of creatures - it doesn't - but because both those things are weapon damage.


Diego Rossi wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

It never really defines trample as an area of effect attack, but rather an effect that targets a specific number of creatures, i.e. the creatures in its path.

Not sure.

The number of creatures in the path isn't a specific number of creatures. It is all the creatures in the path.

On the other hand it isn't an area effect, so it don't get the extra damage.

If you had a spell called arrow storm that sent a single arrow at every creature within 30' of you, that would not be an area of effect spell, and would be an effect that targeted a specific number of creatures, that being the number that were within 30' of you. I wouldn't think such a spell would or should have any effect on a swarm, as a single hit from an arrow via that spell shouldn't by any more effective than a single hit from an arrow via a bow. Likewise, being trampled as one of N creatures along a movement path shouldn't be any more effective than a single stomp attack.

A 'specific number' of creatures does not have to be a number based on your level, or fixed to a certain number to fall under that definition.

Then a fireball hit a specific number of creatures: those in its area of effect and nothing outside it.

Note that a spell having a AoE isn't a requirement for it to be able to damage a swarm.

Yep, since spells are not required to affect all of their targets, and a maximum always exists (the number of Fine swarms that fit in the range/area), swarms are immune to all effects.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I believe trample will effect swarms and get the +50% damage. My reasoning is clear if you compare it to the lightning bolt spell.

Neither require an attack roll
Both effect all creatures/objects in thier path
Both allow a reflex save for half damage

Trample is more like an AoE then anything else. It is easier to avoid hurting your allies, but not always possible. Want to kill the 7 stirges on your cleric with trample, your going to have to but him too.


_Ozy_ wrote:

It never really defines trample as an area of effect attack, but rather an effect that targets a specific number of creatures, i.e. the creatures in its path.

Not sure.

"the creatures in its path" is not a specific number, it is a specific location relative to the trampler.


I would never equate a physical attack to an energy attack (lightning bolt is in no way like a trample at the core function of the attack) Further I would favor the swarm's idea of being multiple targets over a trample's attack of "a path" because the swarm likely exists outside the path as well as on it. I would resolve the trample as a bludgeoning attack most of the time.

But here is where I WOULD get a little crunchy. The Trample should be more effective to swarms that are confined to the ground, lacking flight, limited by space. A horse trampling a swarm of hornets - BS. But a swarm of snakes - well, that's different.

Agree -- this is GM turf, so my opinions are only worth 2 cents.


@2bz2p - I Like it. Swarms with fly speeds are not affected, but swarms without fly speeds are affected as if its an AoE.

Trample is, by the mechanics of it, basically pushing a giant rolling pin, the size of the creature across the entire path. unless you have evasion, reflex isn't avoiding the damage, its just positioning yourself so when the damage happens, it doesn't hurt as much.


2bz2p wrote:

I would never equate a physical attack to an energy attack (lightning bolt is in no way like a trample at the core function of the attack) Further I would favor the swarm's idea of being multiple targets over a trample's attack of "a path" because the swarm likely exists outside the path as well as on it. I would resolve the trample as a bludgeoning attack most of the time.

But here is where I WOULD get a little crunchy. The Trample should be more effective to swarms that are confined to the ground, lacking flight, limited by space. A horse trampling a swarm of hornets - BS. But a swarm of snakes - well, that's different.

Agree -- this is GM turf, so my opinions are only worth 2 cents.

if you throw a fireball and it do not touch all of the swarm then it do no damage to the swarm since it was not all the swarm since you consider it being multiple target? ok good for you if that's the case, but alas a fireball that touch one square of the swarm is enough to deal dmg to it because a swarm is one creature for AoE or similar effect, so trample would also deal dmg to the swarm even if not all the square are hit by trample, or else colossal creature should have less damage by AoE because not all of their square are hit?


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Th example arrow spell, as described, is an area of effect if it attacks everything in its area indiscriminately. Something like horrid wilting on the other hand, is a target spell, since the caster can direct the spell to affect some targets, but not others.

The presence or absence of an "area" line or "target" line in the spell are also powerful determining factors.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Quote:
Even the weakest kinetic blast involves a sizable mass of elemental matter, so kinetic blasts always deal full damage to swarms of any size (though only area blasts deal extra damage to swarms)

Physical effects can affect deal full damage to swarms, regardless of size.

I would consider trample to be an area of effect for flightless swarms. An elephant trampling a swarm of spiders should end up with a mess of spider guts on its feet and few remaining spiders.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

2 tons of swiftly moving object do significant damage to clouds of flying insects, as the grill of my car can attest to during love bug mating season. Let the elephant run into hornets.


toastedamphibian wrote:
2 tons of swiftly moving object do significant damage to clouds of flying insects, as the grill of my car can attest to during love bug mating season. Let the elephant run into hornets.

Most large animals aren't charging at 60mph. How many squashed flies do you see on the front of elephants?


Most bugs are not tightly packing themselves into several thousand member 5ft cubes either. You really want to argue that the only way a charging elephant could harm a gnat is if it steps on it?


toastedamphibian wrote:
Most bugs are not tightly packing themselves into several thousand member 5ft cubes either. You really want to argue that the only way a charging elephant could harm a gnat is if it steps on it?

Actually, yeah. I would love to see your explanation how a trunk slam or tusk gore would do anything, unless specifically splatting the gnat against a hard surface.

Just charging through a flying gnat swarm would do exactly bupkis.


Bug sized creatures are inherently immune to bludgeoning damage in your games. Make sure you make a point to inform your players of that.

"I bat the wasp from the air with my club"

"Oh, so sorry, it is immune to impact, its tiny legs, delicate wings, and nanometers of chitin render it immune to your immense size and strength. You will need to pin and step on it first."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
toastedamphibian wrote:

Bug sized creatures are inherently immune to bludgeoning damage in your games. Make sure you make a point to inform your players of that.

"I bat the wasp from the air with my club"

"Oh, so sorry, it is immune to impact, its tiny legs, delicate wings, and nanometers of chitin render it immune to your immense size and strength. You will need to pin and step on it first."

Uh, yeah, swarms of a certain size are inherently immune to weapon damage, bludgeoning or otherwise.

Welcome to Pathfinder.


Eh.. okay, less snarky attempt.

You can kill a mosquito with a backhand. Or break its wing, or blind it. At that scale ratio the difference between dead and injured is not particularly relevant. Even if you miss, the turbulence of your attempt will frequently cause it to fall.

Even if only 1% of the creatures impacted by a trampling elephant are killed, many more will fall under its feet, and others will be knocked from the swarm and scattered. Plenty of justification for narratively allowing a trampler to contribute to the dissolution of a swarm, fkying or otherwise.


_Ozy_ wrote:
toastedamphibian wrote:

Bug sized creatures are inherently immune to bludgeoning damage in your games. Make sure you make a point to inform your players of that.

"I bat the wasp from the air with my club"

"Oh, so sorry, it is immune to impact, its tiny legs, delicate wings, and nanometers of chitin render it immune to your immense size and strength. You will need to pin and step on it first."

Uh, yeah, swarms of a certain size are inherently immune to weapon damage, bludgeoning or otherwise.

Welcome to Pathfinder.

Okay, so trample is not weapon damage, unless you are trampling a flying swarm?

Pick one. I don't see the argument why RAW being a number of inches higher off the ground renders a swarm immune vs one that is not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
toastedamphibian wrote:

Eh.. okay, less snarky attempt.

You can kill a mosquito with a backhand. Or break its wing, or blind it. At that scale ratio the difference between dead and injured is not particularly relevant. Even if you miss, the turbulence of your attempt will frequently cause it to fall.

Even if only 1% of the creatures impacted by a trampling elephant are killed, many more will fall under its feet, and others will be knocked from the swarm and scattered. Plenty of justification for narratively allowing a trampler to contribute to the dissolution of a swarm, fkying or otherwise.

I have a mosquito in my room right now. I've hit it several times with my hand. It does nothing. I need to smash it against something hard to actually kill it. They are quite adept at dealing with air turbulence.

The smaller the creature, the less you will be able to injure it by swinging around a blunt instrument. Go find a cloud of gnats and start swinging around a baseball bat. I would be seriously surprised if you actually knocked any of them out of the air.


Do you want a RAW argument, or a realism one? Your anecdotal experience of mosquito / man combat differs from my own. So? It is still a good enough explanation to maintain verisimilitude of a game mechanic. Trample makes no exception for flying creatures, and unless I am mistaken, swarm rules do not offer flying swarms defensive abilities that non flyers lack.

It works, or it does not. Flying should not be a factor in the decision.

(The trick is to keep your fingers turned in and hit them sharply with the back of your knuckles. The sucess rate is fairly low, but definitely not zero. Open palm slap creates too big an air cushion.)


Years ago, I was carrying the pole of a beach umbrella. A wasp started flying around me so I tried swinging hard that thing I had in my hands, not expecting to actually hit it.
The wasp was slammed to the ground, bounced, and flew away with no apparent harm.
I cannot know if it happened to die soon to internal damage, but that episode convinced me that flying insects are quite resistant to bludgeoning damage - unless you squash them against something.

(Or maybe it's just that wasps are tough... one of them got fried by an electric device meants for mosquitos, and seemed dead. Fifteen minutes later, it was no longer inside that box. That thing is still a mystery to me!)

On the other hand, I knew a girl whose tactic against wasps was: slap them down from the air and crush them underfoot when they are on the ground.
It worked remarkably well when she did it, maybe because she was very fast to stomp them.

That said, I'd totally allow trampling swarms in Pathfinder, because realism really isn't that important :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
_Ozy_ wrote:
toastedamphibian wrote:

Eh.. okay, less snarky attempt.

You can kill a mosquito with a backhand. Or break its wing, or blind it. At that scale ratio the difference between dead and injured is not particularly relevant. Even if you miss, the turbulence of your attempt will frequently cause it to fall.

Even if only 1% of the creatures impacted by a trampling elephant are killed, many more will fall under its feet, and others will be knocked from the swarm and scattered. Plenty of justification for narratively allowing a trampler to contribute to the dissolution of a swarm, fkying or otherwise.

I have a mosquito in my room right now. I've hit it several times with my hand. It does nothing. .

Mosquitos hard to kill

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
toastedamphibian wrote:
It works, or it does not. Flying should not be a factor in the decision.

I don't think that is necessarily true. Anyone can run through a swarm. But, trample requires that you move over a creature. You can't run over a flying swarm.


The point of swarms is that even if you kill one bug there's thousands maybe tens of thousands.

So it doesn't matter what happened to the mosquito in your room. Dead or not the swarm lives on.

Past that I've no honest clue what would happen. Not every creature with trample gets massive elephant feet.


Yeah. It's a numbers game. When you swing a sword through a swarm, you probably hurt a creature or two in that swarm. But the swarm itself isn't considered damaged.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Melkiador wrote:
Yeah. It's a numbers game. When you swing a sword through a swarm, you probably hurt a creature or two in that swarm. But the swarm itself isn't considered damaged.

But when you trample the bugs with feet that have a diameter of 50 cm (about 1' and 2/3) you are killing a bit more that 1 or 2 mosquitoes.

PRD wrote:


A swarm of Tiny creatures consists of 300 nonflying creatures or 1,000 flying creatures. A swarm of Diminutive creatures consists of 1,500 nonflying creatures or 5,000 flying creatures. A swarm of Fine creatures consists of 10,000 creatures, whether they are flying or not.

So 10,000 creatures in a 10' * 10' square. About 100 in each square feet.

An elephant feet is about 2 square feet. 200 dead gnats every time it step. 4-5 steps to pass through the swarm area, so about 1,000 death vermin.

Trampling animals don't have small feet (note that, rule wise, a horse can't trample). So when something that is decidedly larger and more powerful than a fly-swatter pass over them it should have some effect.


Except that it still is weapon damage, no? Can the elephant use a regular stomp (slam) attack to do damage to a swarm? If not, what makes trampling more effective?

If I make a massive hammer with a 2' diameter head, will it do damage to a swarm that is immune to weapon damage?


I don't know the intent, but I would allow it.


There are flying creatures that trample. There are rage powers that give any creature you are riding trample. In the proper circumstances, a dog can trample. Or a shark.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

TRAMPLESHARK


John Murdock wrote:
2bz2p wrote:

I would never equate a physical attack to an energy attack (lightning bolt is in no way like a trample at the core function of the attack) Further I would favor the swarm's idea of being multiple targets over a trample's attack of "a path" because the swarm likely exists outside the path as well as on it. I would resolve the trample as a bludgeoning attack most of the time.

But here is where I WOULD get a little crunchy. The Trample should be more effective to swarms that are confined to the ground, lacking flight, limited by space. A horse trampling a swarm of hornets - BS. But a swarm of snakes - well, that's different.

Agree -- this is GM turf, so my opinions are only worth 2 cents.

if you throw a fireball and it do not touch all of the swarm then it do no damage to the swarm since it was not all the swarm since you consider it being multiple target? ok good for you if that's the case, but alas a fireball that touch one square of the swarm is enough to deal dmg to it because a swarm is one creature for AoE or similar effect, so trample would also deal dmg to the swarm even if not all the square are hit by trample, or else colossal creature should have less damage by AoE because not all of their square are hit?

No - because that is an energy attack with an area of effect and would have the effect that energy (Fire) has on the swarm. This desire to equate energy attacks with physical ones is disturbingly common on these threads.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
2bz2p wrote:
John Murdock wrote:
2bz2p wrote:

I would never equate a physical attack to an energy attack (lightning bolt is in no way like a trample at the core function of the attack) Further I would favor the swarm's idea of being multiple targets over a trample's attack of "a path" because the swarm likely exists outside the path as well as on it. I would resolve the trample as a bludgeoning attack most of the time.

But here is where I WOULD get a little crunchy. The Trample should be more effective to swarms that are confined to the ground, lacking flight, limited by space. A horse trampling a swarm of hornets - BS. But a swarm of snakes - well, that's different.

Agree -- this is GM turf, so my opinions are only worth 2 cents.

if you throw a fireball and it do not touch all of the swarm then it do no damage to the swarm since it was not all the swarm since you consider it being multiple target? ok good for you if that's the case, but alas a fireball that touch one square of the swarm is enough to deal dmg to it because a swarm is one creature for AoE or similar effect, so trample would also deal dmg to the swarm even if not all the square are hit by trample, or else colossal creature should have less damage by AoE because not all of their square are hit?
No - because that is an energy attack with an area of effect and would have the effect that energy (Fire) has on the swarm. This desire to equate energy attacks with physical ones is disturbingly common on these threads.

The problem is that you are inventing a rule and misreading another.

Misread rule:

PRD wrote:
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.

A swarm is immune to weapon damage, not physical damage. A trample attack is an attack that deal physical damage but isn't a weapon.

Stone call do physical, bludgeoning damage, but it work perfectly on swarm, as it isn't weapon damage. Stone call even get the +50% for being an area effect spell.

Invented rule: "physical damage should cover the whole area of the swarm to damage it". Totally bogus.


For those trying to invent 'realism' house rules - remember you don't have to kill every creature in the swarm, you just have to disperse them. A charging elephant might disperse a swarm even if it doesn't step on too many of the creatures in it.

Also we don't tend to apply realism to fireballs - you still get a reflex check to jump out the way even if you're in the middle of it in a 5' wide corridor.


Diego Rossi wrote:

The problem is that you are inventing a rule and misreading another.

Misread rule:

PRD wrote:
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
A swarm is immune to weapon damage, not physical damage. A trample attack is an attack that deal physical damage but isn't a weapon.

What is the difference between damage done from a trample, and damage done from a slam?

How on earth does trample include STR damage if it isn't weapon damage?


Matthew Downie wrote:

For those trying to invent 'realism' house rules - remember you don't have to kill every creature in the swarm, you just have to disperse them. A charging elephant might disperse a swarm even if it doesn't step on too many of the creatures in it.

Also we don't tend to apply realism to fireballs - you still get a reflex check to jump out the way even if you're in the middle of it in a 5' wide corridor.

So, an elephant should be able to stomp (slam) a swarm and do damage?


Diego Rossi wrote:


So 10,000 creatures in a 10' * 10' square. About 100 in each square feet.
An elephant feet is about 2 square feet. 200 dead gnats every time it step. 4-5 steps to pass through the swarm area, so about 1,000 death vermin.

Trampling animals don't have small feet (note that, rule wise, a horse can't trample). So when something that is decidedly larger and more powerful than a fly-swatter pass over them it should have some effect.

You can disrupt an entire 10'x10' swarm by applying damage to a single 5' squire.


_Ozy_ wrote:


How on earth does trample include STR damage if it isn't weapon damage?

Trample uses a natural weapon (hoof).

As such, it uses all the modifiers to damage that would apply to your mounts hoof. It is also subject to most of the limitations, with the exception that the damage is applied to an area when using trample.

The Exchange

"It is possible to trample a swarm? " - as with many things, this is up to the GM. YMMV.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
_Ozy_ wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

The problem is that you are inventing a rule and misreading another.

Misread rule:

PRD wrote:
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
A swarm is immune to weapon damage, not physical damage. A trample attack is an attack that deal physical damage but isn't a weapon.
What is the difference between damage done from a trample, and damage done from a slam?

A trample affects everything in your path, not just a single target.


Snowlilly wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:


How on earth does trample include STR damage if it isn't weapon damage?

Trample uses a natural weapon (hoof).

As such, it uses all the modifiers to damage that would apply to your mounts hoof. It is also subject to most of the limitations, with the exception that the damage is applied to an area when using trample.

Yes, it uses a weapon to do damage.

It's weapon damage.


KingOfAnything wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

The problem is that you are inventing a rule and misreading another.

Misread rule:

PRD wrote:
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
A swarm is immune to weapon damage, not physical damage. A trample attack is an attack that deal physical damage but isn't a weapon.
What is the difference between damage done from a trample, and damage done from a slam?
A trample affects everything in your path, not just a single target.

How does that make it not weapon damage? If an elephant stomps on me I take its slam damage. If an elephant tramples me, I take the same slam damage. Whether it goes on to stomp other people with a trample is irrelevant to me, as I'm taking the exact same damage from the exact same body part, including the exact same strength damage. And yet one is considered weapon damage and the other is not.


_Ozy_ wrote:
Snowlilly wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:


How on earth does trample include STR damage if it isn't weapon damage?

Trample uses a natural weapon (hoof).

As such, it uses all the modifiers to damage that would apply to your mounts hoof. It is also subject to most of the limitations, with the exception that the damage is applied to an area when using trample.

Yes, it uses a weapon to do damage.

It's weapon damage.

its not a weapon damage

''targets of a trample take an amount of damage equal to the trampling creature’s slam damage + 1-1/2 times its str modifier''

that's what the trample universal monster rule say so its not a weapon damage it use the natural weapon of the creature as a base to say how much damage it does

1 to 50 of 187 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / It is possible to trample a swarm? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.