Varmints in the Vaults

Wedensday, February 1, 2023

Purepurin, a white scaled kobold with a dagger sitting on their hip

“Whoa, you’re here already? Are you the Magaambya delegation or the group from the Pathfinder Society? Either way, one moment.”

The white-scaled kobold snatches a bandolier off a nearby hook and hurriedly fills its pouches with a variety of rune-covered daggers from a nearby weapons rack.

“This is the weapons vault, as I’m sure you’ve noticed. Normally I’d have greeted you before you got this far, but Ziik’s having a little bit of a rat problem and the boss says if the ratcatcher can’t deal with the rats himself, then he should probably just let the rats eat him so she can find a better ratcatcher.”

With the bandolier filled with weapons slung over her shoulder, the little kobold quickly tucks a variety of other items into her kilt pockets before thrusting one tiny hand into the air seeking a handshake.

“Name’s Purepurin. I’m the steward of the vaults, and it’s my job to keep the items clean, the inventory logs up to date, and the ratcatchers uneaten. Please follow me for the time being and, uh, stay about ten feet back and try really hard not to step in front of me if it looks like I’m pointing at something.”

Instructions complete, Purepurin quickly leads the way through a twisting series of tunnels. The farther the little kobold gets from the weapons vault, the louder and angrier a constant, chittering squeal becomes, a rising crescendo of rodent clicks and cries. Purepurin holds up a hand as she reaches a sharp corner, the dancing light of distant torches indicating a much larger room just around it.

“Ziik really is a good ratcatcher, you know.” Purepurin calmly runs her fingers across the hilts of the daggers sheathed in her bandolier until her grip settles on a ghastly blade, its hilt wrapped in what appears to be the dead gray skin of some humanoid creature. She draws it carefully. “The problem is that sometimes one of the really smart rats nibbles through the protective fulus and gets ahold of an item in the special vaults that turns it into something that’s just a little bit too much for your average kobold. Case in point…”

Purepurin’s gesture to peek around the corner leads to a truly horrific sight: hundreds of black-furred, white-tailed, red-eyed rats swarm around a large stone well with a wooden steeple. Perched atop the steeple is a lone elderly kobold, desperately fending off the occasional encroaching rodent with a gnarled walking stick. Seething through the furry hordes, a slick wet mass displaces rats like a leviathan shedding water as a rodent of unprecedented size emerges. Still-smoking scars and other remnants of recent battles indicate that the monstrous creature has mounted several unsuccessful attempts to devour the stranded ratcatcher, whose panicked expression seems to indicate that he has no more tricks sufficient to stall the beast.

With a quick wink, Purepurin hurls her dagger into the middle of the roiling mass of rats, skewering one with a single flick of her wrist. The other rats around the skewered target begin to squeal and scatter as a foul stench emanates from the slain rodent. As the smaller rats choke and disperse, Purepurin calmly walks into the relatively clear space, drawing an item from her pocket. The oversized rat turns toward the new challenger, placing its back to the old kobold and the well upon which he perches. With a wicked grin, Purepurin levels what looks to be an elaborate seashell at the rat.

“Bang.”

A geyser of twisting water suddenly erupts from the “seashell,” slamming into the rat monster with enough force to send the creature up and over the edge of the well and down into its murky depths. Wasting no time, Purepurin gestures furiously for assistance, chasing rats away from a heavy, steel-shod wooden cover clearly intended for the well. With some assistance from Ziik and the visitors, Purepurin seals the well, the rat monster apparently unable to climb up quickly enough to secure its escape. The old ratcatcher, Ziik, grumbles about needing to march all the way to vault 47 for clean water. As he places protective paper talismans around the edge of the well, Purepurin recovers her thrown dagger and smiles widely.

“Too much for the average kobold, but not for yours truly!” Purepurin calmly waves a beckoning claw as she exits the room through a different doorway than the one she used to enter. “If you think that was scary, wait’ll you meet the boss!”


Thrower’s Bandolier — Item 3

Conjuration, Invested, Magical
Price 60 gp
Usage worn; Bulk L

This bandolier is covered in straps and pouches capable of holding up to 2 Bulk of one-handed thrown weapons. A thrower's bandolier has a +1 weapon potency rune etched into it, and it can be etched with runes as though it were a one-handed thrown weapon. When you invest the thrower’s bandolier, you can attune it to all the weapons sheathed in it (this ends any previous attunements made with the bandolier). Whenever you draw a weapon from the bandolier, the bandolier's runes are replicated onto that weapon. Any runes already on the weapon are suppressed, and any runes previously replicated to a different weapon in this way are removed, returning it to normal.

Activate [two-actions] envision, Interact; Effect All weapons attuned to the bandolier, not including any weapons you're currently wielding, return to the bandolier.


Ghast Stiletto — Item 3

Magical, Necromancy
Price 60 gp
Usage held in 1 hand; Bulk L

A ghast stiletto is a +1 dagger wrapped in the still-undead skin of a ghast. While you wield the dagger, you gain a +1 status bonus to all saves against paralysis.

Activate [one-action] command, Interact (divine, necromancy, olfactory); Frequency once per hour; Effect The ghast stiletto afflicts the next living target struck by the dagger with a terrible wound that emits the foul stench of the grave. For the next minute, the target creature, as well as any creatures within a 10-foot emanation, must succeed at a DC 16 Fortitude save or become sickened 1 (plus slowed 1 as long as it's sickened on a critical failure). While within the emanation, the creature takes a –2 circumstance penalty to saves against disease and to recover from the sickened condition. A creature that succeeds at its save is temporarily immune for 1 minute.

Craft Requirements The initial raw materials must include skin from a ghast.


Torrent Spellgun (Lesser) — Item 3

Attack, Consumable, Evocation, Magical, Spellgun, Water
Price 12 gp
Usage held in 1 hand; Bulk L
Activate [two-actions] Interact, Strike

Carved of seashell, a torrent spellgun is damp to the touch, and seaweed wraps around its grip. You Activate the spellgun by aiming it at one creature and making your choice of a spell attack roll or a firearm attack roll against the target’s AC. This spellgun has a range increment of 30 feet. The spellgun blasts a powerful jet of water that deals 2d6 bludgeoning damage, then disintegrates into sand.

Critical Success The target takes double damage and is knocked back 10 feet.

Success The target takes full damage and is knocked back 5 feet.

Michael Sayre
Design Manager

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition
51 to 69 of 69 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Director of Marketing

2 people marked this as a favorite.

We forgot to link to the Treasure Vault product page! But you all seem to get it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tea4Goblins wrote:

Am I the only one that now wants a 3-6 repeatable based on cleaning varmints out of the vaults? Should probably be a Vigilant Seal scenario.

The concept is absolutely amazing and I can see a lot of fun being had with such a story line. Something light-hearted but challenging.

Possibly with a few optional bonus bosses like "There's a horrible rat thing trapped in this well behind a steel-shod wooden cover and a bunch of paper talismans. If you don't want to face it we totally understand, but it would be really nice to have the well back."

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Purepurin is precious and awesome and I can't wait to see her in action in the book! She's a smol dragon friend who is doing her best!


DemonicDem wrote:
Alchemic_Genius wrote:
Not to be a party pooper here, but bombs techically don't have the thrown trait, which means rules as intended might not have them them work with the bandolier. I hope they do, but, well yeah

It says they are thrown weapons here:

https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=703

"Bombs are martial thrown weapons with a range increment of 20 feet."

And this fulfills all the requirements of the Thrower's Bandolier.

Bombs do not have the Thrown trait though. While they are descriptively thrown weapons, mechanically they are different.

Descriptive text is not always an indicator for mechanics. That it has been this long since release with many MANY debates across the internet, and Paizo hasn't clarified their intentions here is a bother.

Perhaps it is intentionally vague to allow GM's enough wiggle room to decide for themselves. But by Raw, since they do not have the thrown trait, they would not benefit from anything that references thrown specifically (feats or runes or equipment) though they are clearly ranged.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wizard Level 1 wrote:
Bombs do not have the Thrown trait though.

But the item doesn't ask for a trait. It asks for "one-handed thrown weapons". Note the lack of capitalization on thrown. As such, it uses thrown in the general sense [which bombs qualify] as opposed to saying 'weapons with the Thrown trait'.


Weapon traits (and traits in general, if I recall correctly) aren't stylized with capitalization in rules text. You can see this in monk stance feats, as well as feats like Double Slice or Swipe.

THAT SAID, I believe you do not need the thrown trait to be considered a thrown weapon, as all the Reload -- ranged weapons are thrown without having the thrown trait listed in their traits section.

Liberty's Edge

graystone wrote:
Alchemic_Genius wrote:
Every other rune transferring item requires the target item be be a viable candidate to have the rune etched on it; so that's a pretty big reach to play the "it *technically* doesn't use this exact verbiage, so it works!" card

IMO, it's the opposite: because every other item has that verbiage, it seems a reach to say it a complete accident that this one doesn't mention anything about it. When the boilerplate is missing, it's a jump to assume that there isn't a reason for it not to be there and say 'of course it should be there' or "bombs technically don't have the thrown trait" when they are called "martial thrown weapons" [which is you trying to use a technicality on the other side of the argument but then you turn around and complaining about others using technicalities :P]. As such, all we can to is judge it on what it actually says.

Myself, I figure they didn't add anything because there is a restriction on what weapons the item can empower [one-handed thrown weapons] and can only be etched with runes for [one-handed thrown weapons] so it'll be redundant to say that the for most options: now even if bombs might be an unintended combination, we have no idea if/when it'll be altered/errata'd especially as it doesn't seem overly powerful [item bonuses don't stack]. Seems better to debate an item on what if actually does as opposed to what we think it might have been intended to do.

With all respect, this line of thinking, that does not take into account the Too good to be true caveat, has caused many bouts of nerdrage in the past when things have been clarified / errataed as not working like many people hoped.

For PFS, for example, I might play a bomb user that uses the current wording but I should be fully prepared for the day the powers that be clarify that No, it does not work the way you hoped.

PFS additional rules/restrictions on this item, if any, will be interesting to see.

Shadow Lodge

The only nitpick I have with this is that the water from the magic squirt gun would be better off "instantly evaporating" rather than "turning to sand".
Still, I want one, not to mention that bandolier. That poor ratchatcher should level up from this.


egindar wrote:
Weapon traits (and traits in general, if I recall correctly) aren't stylized with capitalization in rules text. You can see this in monk stance feats, as well as feats like Double Slice or Swipe.

If you look a those feats, you'll notice that they SAY trait after those: as such, it's doing the same as capitalizing it. That's not done here and the context of the sentence works as common language one [you are throwing a weapon] without any indicators it's referencing the trait [adding str damage when thrown].

The Raven Black wrote:
With all respect, this line of thinking, that does not take into account the Too good to be true caveat, has caused many bouts of nerdrage in the past when things have been clarified / errataed as not working like many people hoped.

With the same respect, my post had NOTHING to do with the merits of which way it should be: that post was on someone saying 'it can't work because of Throwing', and I don't think that argument works. As to 'too good to be true', I really haven't seen an example that seems that way: it's mostly overlapping with what the bomb already gives for weapon dice and bonuses. If there is such an example, I'd be happy to look it over.

The Raven Black wrote:
For PFS, for example, I might play a bomb user that uses the current wording but I should be fully prepared for the day the powers that be clarify that No, it does not work the way you hoped.

Sure, makes sense. However there are things like Recall checks that might not work as you expect already in the game [like adding that unique bonus and +2/roll or disagreements on 'useful']: the only difference is the bandoleer might actually get a FAQ/errata.

The Raven Black wrote:
PFS additional rules/restrictions on this item, if any, will be interesting to see.

Agreed.


graystone wrote:
egindar wrote:
Weapon traits (and traits in general, if I recall correctly) aren't stylized with capitalization in rules text. You can see this in monk stance feats, as well as feats like Double Slice or Swipe.
If you look a those feats, you'll notice that they SAY trait after those: as such, it's doing the same as capitalizing it. That's not done here and the context of the sentence works as common language one [you are throwing a weapon] without any indicators it's referencing the trait [adding str damage when thrown.

And class features like sneak attack that refer to agile or finesse weapons?


egindar wrote:
graystone wrote:
egindar wrote:
Weapon traits (and traits in general, if I recall correctly) aren't stylized with capitalization in rules text. You can see this in monk stance feats, as well as feats like Double Slice or Swipe.
If you look a those feats, you'll notice that they SAY trait after those: as such, it's doing the same as capitalizing it. That's not done here and the context of the sentence works as common language one [you are throwing a weapon] without any indicators it's referencing the trait [adding str damage when thrown.
And class features like sneak attack that refer to agile or finesse weapons?

Well #1 the way it's worded isn't in a natural form for it to mean anything else and #2 the game is sometimes lax/lazy with these things.

For #1, agile as an adjective doesn't make sense in natural language for an inanimate object, as it's saying the object can move quickly and easily: the wielder of a weapon could be agile but not the weapon. Finesse isn't an adjective at all, being either a noun or verb.

As to #2, the game says in Format of Rules Elements, Core Rulebook pg. 17: "The names of specific statistics, skills, feats, actions, and some other mechanical elements in Pathfinder are capitalized. This way, when you see the statement “a Strike targets Armor Class,” you know that both Strike and Armor Class are referring to rules." It just causes confusion when they don't follow their own guidelines.

Bottom line, if it's not capitalized, it's down to looking at the context of the sentence: if it's not clearly about a rules element there is no way to prove it involves one. In this case, nothing is capitalized and nothing in the context precludes a reading in natural language or makes reading it as a rules element make more sense. Hence, an argument that Throwing is a requirement isn't backed up by any proof/RAW. Now if you wan to argue it SHOULD read that way, then an RAI argument can be made.


I wasn't arguing that way, if you'll read my initial message, just pointing out that traits are not capitalized.

I'll put it this way: Do you have any examples of weapon traits being capitalized in the text of features?

As far as I'm aware there's a deliberate style guide involving which rules elements are and aren't capitalized (or italicized, as is the case for spells). You'll note your quote says "some other mechanical elements in Pathfinder," as in it's not every possible rules element. Rules text would get somewhat cumbersome to read if that were the case - you can look at some of OneD&D's playtest documents to see what I mean there.


Ah, on second look it seems like they do put the thrown trait on Reload -- weapons automatically. What I get for not doing full due diligence, I suppose. In that case I'd say it's an oversight that bombs are missing the trait.


graystone wrote:
Wizard Level 1 wrote:
Bombs do not have the Thrown trait though.
But the item doesn't ask for a trait. It asks for "one-handed thrown weapons". Note the lack of capitalization on thrown. As such, it uses thrown in the general sense [which bombs qualify] as opposed to saying 'weapons with the Thrown trait'.

By that logic you can put rocks in there since you can throw them as improvised weapons. Good luck convincing a DM of that though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wizard Level 1 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Wizard Level 1 wrote:
Bombs do not have the Thrown trait though.
But the item doesn't ask for a trait. It asks for "one-handed thrown weapons". Note the lack of capitalization on thrown. As such, it uses thrown in the general sense [which bombs qualify] as opposed to saying 'weapons with the Thrown trait'.
By that logic you can put rocks in there since you can throw them as improvised weapons. Good luck convincing a DM of that though.

Why would a GM object to that? I mean, if I'm your GM, and you want to fill up your bandolier with rocks, I'm certainly not going to be the one to stop you. Congratulations! You've managed to find a way to throw improvised weapons with runes on them. They're still terrible. You have fun with that.


Wizard Level 1 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Wizard Level 1 wrote:
Bombs do not have the Thrown trait though.
But the item doesn't ask for a trait. It asks for "one-handed thrown weapons". Note the lack of capitalization on thrown. As such, it uses thrown in the general sense [which bombs qualify] as opposed to saying 'weapons with the Thrown trait'.
By that logic you can put rocks in there since you can throw them as improvised weapons. Good luck convincing a DM of that though.

Improvised Weapons, Core Rulebook pg. 278: "The GM determines the amount and type of damage the attack deals, if any, as well as any weapon traits the improvised weapon should have." As you can see, there is no reason an improvised weapon couldn't have the Thrown trait. IMO, a rock having Thrown is a pretty simple ask. Second, there is a whole archetype for improvised weapons, Weapon Improviser. This item sounds like a good addition to their arsenal.

egindar: my whole point is that the rules say it SHOULD to avoid things like this argument. On Reload -, I'd argue that it doesn't get Thrown there: who's adding Str damage to bombs? "A thrown weapon adds your Strength modifier to damage just like a melee weapon does." As to traits in other places, normally they add the word "trait" so there isn't an issue: finesse and agile are the places where they don't add trait for some reason but as I pointed out, the sentences only work if read as traits so it's not an issue. Just using thrown is like using 'a crossbow' in a rule and trying to argue it means the crossbow group [like used in the gunslinger] instead of the specific weapon he crossbow. Without some context, it can be either and that was kind of he point of capitalizing rules elements that are common use words.


graystone wrote:
egindar: my whole point is that the rules say it SHOULD to avoid things like this argument. On Reload -, I'd argue that it doesn't get Thrown there: who's adding Str damage to bombs? "A thrown weapon adds your Strength modifier to damage just like a melee weapon does."

Not actually a factor. The splash trait of bombs explicitly removes/replaces the str bonus to damage.


Sanityfaerie wrote:
graystone wrote:
egindar: my whole point is that the rules say it SHOULD to avoid things like this argument. On Reload -, I'd argue that it doesn't get Thrown there: who's adding Str damage to bombs? "A thrown weapon adds your Strength modifier to damage just like a melee weapon does."
Not actually a factor. The splash trait of bombs explicitly removes/replaces the str bonus to damage.

Ah, yes that is there. I'll retract that part then.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Trying to find the right pronunciation for Purepurin and failing.

Someone have a link to where it was mentioned?

51 to 69 of 69 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: Varmints in the Vaults All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.