Kjatan's page

Organized Play Member. 24 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 Organized Play characters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As the OP, I'll just go ahead and say that I felt no insult as a result of Andrew's contribution. Gaining excess power through certain uninhibited mechanics, even if entirely justifiable, is contrary to the PFS goals of providing a relatively balanced and reasonably consistent gameplay.

Items like the Hybridization Funnel and Focusing Funnel fortunately provide a legitimate Avenue for combining splash weapons, but even without them, adhering multiple vials together opens up a door to infinitely abusable damage. Quite simply, it should be banned under the context of an unspoken rule, like casters holding back with certain spells.

However, there is definitely reasonable concern from players in the case of GMs taking personal liberties when faced with unfamiliar mechanics. I've had plenty of perfectly legitimate characters made irrelevant because single attacks were deemed too powerful compared to other players, despite only ever being able to land a small number of hits in any given session.

I suppose what it may boil down to is, do you trust the players to help regulate the quality of gameplay, or do you expect the GM to be judge and jury? Obviously conventions need to be more strict because you get lots of people who aren't inclined to be team players or outright abuse the system for personal gratification and there is more at stake. At local games, the GMs should probably encourage and trust the players to actively engage with the community to ensure fair and enjoyable play. Let players keep a few tricks up their sleeves with the understanding that it is intended to be an exception, rather than a style. If there is repeat abuse, simply tell them that they risk missing out on gold, prestige, or experience by making the encounter too easy to qualify. (If GMs have that kind of control.)

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The most common scenario for throwing multiple splash weapons might be in the case of a bandolier, which can hold 8 flasks at a time. A player may choose to throw the entire bandolier as a Hail Mary against a bbeg. No glue, no rope, no last minute modifications, or a caster might target a bandolier with Shatter and destroy all of the flasks simultaneously. Either way, all 8 flask are going to break, and a DM has to figure out the damage.

Actually... with a spell like shatter, carrying a large number of splash weapons suddenly becomes a very dangerous proposition. Alchemists have a very poor will save against such an effect.

Another question that could come up would be, can a medium or smaller creature, which can consume minerals, such as dragons, simply eat a potion, vial and all? Simply popping it in like candy. They can eat rocks, metals, and gemstones, so glass should be no problem.

Then again... Pathfinder seems to only impose a Concentration check on spellcasting underwater, and makes no mention of drowning related consequences, so ignore my previous speculation. I'm surprised it doesn't have anything to say about potions, but it would be less laborious than casting a spell with verbal components, so I must assume it wouldn't be a problem. (Other than the description of Potion Sponge, that is.)

Aquatic Terrain:
Spellcasting Underwater: Casting spells while submerged can be difficult for those who cannot breathe underwater. A creature that cannot breathe water must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) to cast a spell underwater (this is in addition to the caster level check to successfully cast a fire spell underwater). Creatures that can breathe water are unaffected and can cast spells normally. Some spells might function differently underwater, subject to GM discretion.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

The air in ones gullet does not have similar density to the surrounding water.

Hah, good point. I got a little overly technical and missed the obvious. Yeah, if they are holding their breath, they can do it (IRL). If they are breathing water, they can't. However, if someone stops holding their breath to drink a potion or cast a spell, they may immediately start drowning, so that had better be a very important potion.


On the subject of circumventing spells or items through mundane means, a lot of spells and items simply ease a number of basic activities, like prestidigitation being used to make clothes wet, or light torches, obviously that can be done by anyone.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

For the potion sponge, there is no rule that you can't drink under water. Its possible to infer that from the potion sponge, or you can rely on a pool and an old coke bottle to see if its possible can do it. Its very annoying to have a rule come in from an alternate source that people may not have access to and have no way of knowing about.

For the underwater potion, at least, it's definitely not possible without investing in custom equipment. In a rigid vessel, the contents can only be evacuated by displacing it with another substance. In the case of potions on land, air does the displacing without causing problems, and gravity provides a clear means of separating the two substances.

Under water, the surrounding material is of similar density, and composition. This would cause, at best, a ruinous dilution as the water and potion mix within the vessel and pathway between mouth and vial. Worse yet, the potion will be at lower pressure than the surrounding water, so the aquatic environment will actually force a bit of fluid back into the container. Quite a pain in the rear.

A sponge is a reasonable fix, however, a better solution would simply be to put the potion in a flexible container like a waterskin, so that the action is to suck, rather than pour.

Would it be possible to add a feature to the forums to Update the original post in a thread?

My other thread, 'Gluing Splash Weapons together', has reached a resolution and has devolved into light exchanges, banter, and repetition. I'd like to be able to update the first post with a TL;DR section with a brief summary of the following conversations, so that people who have similar questions or opinions don't have to dig, or post without reading.

If a feature won't be added for regular users, could a moderator take a pre-written statement, and add it on my behalf?

nosig wrote:

Heck, by this logic I could just tie two (or more) maces together to increase damage output. Or heck, why stop at 2? The new terror weapon becomes 6 clubs roped together.

I (as a player) do not want to have my PCs face this sort of thing from authors. Goblin ties 47 flasks of acid together and drops them on a group of PCs in a 15'x15' room. 47d6 on the center guy and 47hp splash on the others... Really?

Shush... Time for me to go back to bed.

You seem to forget that this is actually already a thing players can do by attempting to wield oversized weapons. With melee weapons, weight becomes the primary limiter. Tying two maces together would be the equivalent of carrying an improvized large mace.

The reason why splash weapon logic doesn't apply to melee weapons is because they function entirely differently. And, as has already been indicated within this thread, a Focusing Flask already achieves 'attaching 2+ flasks together' with both taking full effect, so it seems to simply be a matter of price.

Maximum damage from flasks in a single round would necessarily be 10d6 for full immersion. A goblin would have a heck of a time lifting 47 pounds of flasks. They'd be better off tipping over a vat. The mechanic I proposed for this was that the max damage a player should be able to do with unmodified splash weapons is 5d6, to indicate 50% immersion, since only half of the body is exposed when wielding a ranged touch weapon.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Buy a bigger bottle, cheapskate.

That would be the easiest alternative by far! Albeit, it wouldn't provide the same flexibility of throwing a dozen different types of splash weapons.

I'm surprised this doesn't have any mechanics defined. The Focus Flask, 'essentially' serves this purpose, but a bigger flask is a far better mundane option.

N N 959 wrote:
Based on what rational or logic? Please go toss four beer bottles glued together and tell me how many times out of one hundred you can break one bottle and not the others.

Glue enough together and it might cause problems, but by the time that many are connected, we'd probably run into other problems. Toss a carton of eggs 50 feet, and the odds of them all breaking are high enough to not bother checking, and that's with the insulating packaging. Give them something solid, like rocks or armor, and they're goners.

Max damage any unenhanced splash weapon can achieve is 10d6, which is total submersion. It might even be kosher to tell a player that max splash damage from a single source is 5d6, to account from only being able to coat one side of the target.

No idea how to get, trade, or use boons.
Eternal gratitude.

Some kind person to PM me with a brief explanation.

Otagian wrote:
The glue might also do a pretty good job of holding the bottles together in the first place. Covering your flimsy glass vials in a rubbery flexible coating is probably not a good way to guarantee they break when thrown.

That, it might. To which, I suppose, the solution would be to only use small amounts of glue, not entire doses. Coating the entire flask with glue would be pretty darn wasteful when only a single point or line on either flask is going to be in contact.

RealAlchemy wrote:
At the very least, I would expect the awkwardness to effect the range increment of the combined weapon. Probably the hit roll as well.

The awkwardness is accounted for in the Improvised Ranged Weapon penalty of -4 to hit and max increment of Range 10'. However, this is already the range of splash weapons, and Alchemists have the Throw Anything class ability, which mitigates the penalty.

For anyone who wants 'proficiency' with splash weapons, (meant differently than traditional weapon proficiency), then the Splash Weapon Mastery feat is available to halve the range penalty and provide a bonus to hit.


It's too bad that the OP can't be edited. It would be nice to add UPDATE tags, so that anyone who finds this thread later might be able to get the TL;DR.

WiseWolfOfYoitsu wrote:

No, you cannot combine these...they specifically work opposite of each other. Bolded sections for emphasis. A focusing flask counts as a single thrown splash weapon and gets INT to damage only once. You cannot combine mixtures from Hybridization Funnels (Which must be different liquids). You cannot put a mixture from a Hybridization Funnel into a Focusing Flask (Which can only be one type of liquid).

That is not necessarily true. Yes, they perform different functions, but they also function differently on a fundamental level. Example:

I have a pint of cherry grenadine, and a pint of Sprite, but I really want a Shirley Temple (Mixture of Sprite and grenadine).

The Hybridization funnel allows you to safely mix the grenadine and sprite into a 1 pint container which contains 0.5 pints of grenadine and 0.5 pints of sprite.

You now have 1 pint of Shirley Temple. A new Hybridized splash weapon.

Now you want to have a pitcher of Shirley Temple, so you make two more pints, and pour them into the Focusing Flask.(Placing Whiskey, beer, and Shirley temple all in a pitcher would ruin all three, but three of the same drink would be the same in the end.)

Since the Flask 'Compresses' (It's based on Shrink Item), the container may only be 1 pint in volume, but contains 3 pints of Shirley temple. It may even have 3 separate reservoirs, keeping them separate if necessary.

The initial mixture of Firey Acid would only get one bonus from Int, since it's a single pint sized splash weapon, but the final flask would get x3, because it physically has x3 pints of splash weapon.

Alchemists don't finesse their throws. it's not precision damage which would require concentration, splash weapons don't have finesse. They must augment the splash weapons magically at the time of throwing, or mundanely, and three times the volume provides three times as much material to augment. I suppose you could say they only have enough juice to augment a single pint of splash weapon at a time, but that isn't based in anything.


Or if you want to get picky about it, you just said that the final product of the Focus Funnel is a single splash weapon, right?

Then simply reverse the process, take a Focusing Flask of Acid, and a Focusing Flask of Alchemists fire, and use the Hybridization Funnel to fill a third focusing flask with the new concentrated Firey Acid for exactly the same result..

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
If you're using glue or knots, I'd definitely require two hands—you need a secure grip so one of the flasks doesn't come off mid-throw. Just good sense. ;P

For poorly constructed knots or shoddy glue, that would be reasonable. On the other hand, Sovereign Glue requires magic just to keep it from permanently binding to its own bottle. A single bottle of Sovereign Glue could securely attach dozens of flasks, with no risk of separating.

Andrew Christian wrote:
You look at roughly the size of the improvised item. Compare it to Dagger, Club, or Two-handed sword. Alternatively, if you double the size of an item,change to next category.

A heavy mace is an 8lb one-handed weapon, so we could probably get away with throwing 8 bound flasks with one hand, assuming they are arranged in moderately ideal configurations. Most two handed weapons are such because of their unusual length to weight ratio.

Though really, it's a bit of a non-issue. Whether it takes two hands, one hand, standard action, or full action, if a low level character is dealing 10d6+ damage in a given round, the fight is probably over.

Dorothy Lindman wrote:

Throwing melee weapons requires the same number of hands they require to wield them (one hand for light and one-handed, two hands for two handed). Throwing a weapon with two hands is also a full-round action.

Good catch. Any thoughts on how that applies to improvised weapons?

N N 959 wrote:
Kevin Willis wrote:
This is doing something unusual, flavorful, and not the most optimized choice. It's what I like to see players doing.
I see GMs say that until a player trivializes an encounter, then suddenly they start calling things an "exploit."

Like using Shrink Item and Telekinesis to carry and launch 15 Collosal++++ dark wood bolts for 180d6 damage?

That's a PC's version of "Rock Falls, Everyone Dies".

N N 959 wrote:
It's not what I think, it's the arbitrary ways in which GMs will decide whether your conduct is considered an "exploit." You've already seen people accusing the rather logical and sensible idea of glueing two flasks together as an "exploit." Good thing someone already invented the raft, because tying two logs together might also be called an exploit.

Hah, then it's fortunate that my original intention for playing the alchemist was for the giggles and not the combat power. I'll just have to draw up a very clear and concise diagram explaining the steps and be content if it gets hand waved away.

N N 959 wrote:
Even if the rules totally allowed, you can bet your sweet bippy that most GMs are going to tell you no way. You'd need an official FAQ allowing it, you'd need to have that in your hand, and even then you'd have to be prepared for an occasional GM to refuse to allow it.

Let's see... 800gp for 6d6 damage plus 5 foot splash.

A necklace of Fireball charges 150gp per d6 of damage, so for 750gp you could do 5d6 damage in a 20 foot radius.

The undisputed beads do comparable damage over 5 times the area.

Do you still think it's unreasonable?

This combination would only have any value to an alchemist since anyone else would be better off purchasing the existing fireball beads.

Mike Bramnik wrote:

Not quite what the OP is looking for, but...

Look up an item called the Focusing Flask.

You're welcome :)

Nice! For 700gp + the cost of 3 splash weapons, it feels a bit pricy, but with alchemist +Int to damage bonus and the fact that it doesn't have a 24 hour expiration, it may just have some value... now... can you mix three concoctions with the Hybridization Funnel, then place them within a Focusing Flask for a total of 6 splash weapons being released at once? Looks like it. :)

Edit: It looks like the issue of +Int bonuses came up for this particular combination in another thread without any real resolution. High end suggest it would be 6× int damage, some say 1×int. However, since hybridization produces a single new splash weapon and the focus flask 'compresses' three doses which are then released simultaneously, it seems like it should allow for 3xint. Mechanically, it should boil down to whether the alchemist is enhancing the product as he throws, or is he adding finesse to the throw. There really isn't any finesse to touch attacks, so it must be augmentation per dose. Three physical doses, three times the augmentation.

ZenithTN wrote:

Throwing an acid? Fine.

Throwing two acids duct taped together? Improvised weapon (which Throw Anything should mitigate) and you made it bigger, so -2 to hit, and now technically takes two hands. I would only allow Intelligence modifier to damage once.

Which makes it similar to Rapid Shot.

Size shouldn't matter, since it'll still be smaller than a 14lb thrown melee weapon by several size categories, which can be thrown without additional problem beyond normal penalties. I don't think it is ever mentioned whether throwing melee weapons require more hands.

The Fox wrote:
It's available when you have 5 Fame.

Ohhhh! That's how that table works! That makes so much more sense. Thanks!

Tamec wrote:
With the Hybridization Funnel there is an in game way to accomplish it without having to come up with rules on the fly, which is what the "gluing two flasks together" causes.

It definitely makes sense to lean on the funnel considering that combining any more than two splash weapons strains credulity. For the sake of streamlining gameplay, there really shouldn't be any other answer.

Since I'm new to PFS a more relevant question may be, as a 200gp magic item, is the funnel available for purchase or must it be found in a scenario? I can't imagine it ever showing up naturally, so that would make glue far more appealing, if not the only option within PFS.

Andrew Christian wrote:
These weapons were balanced with the intention that you throw one at a time. Doing this smacks of gaining extra power without actually paying for it.

That seems to be the essence of using an ability to its fullest. Classes are balanced on the premise that the players aren't more clever than than the designers, which is a losing battle. Asking a caster or other player 'not' to use their abilities effectively means they'll be in a continuous state of self-restraint.

Shrink Item and Telekinesis are great examples of spells that can achieve ridiculous results without ever pushing the rules.

Chess Pwn wrote:
Yes, you need a Hybridization Funnel to do this.

To achieve 'what', specifically? Gluing two items together is a given. Who would they not both break on impact?

N N 959 wrote:
Logically this should work. But I'll bet the percentage of PFS GMs that would allows this will be in the single digits. If you were tying them together, I am certain GMs would concoct all kinds of reasons why it failed.

I agree that it would likely be vetoed by the GMs, since there is no clear ruling. People wouldn't normally throw more than one, but since it mechanically makes sense, and Alchemists do have an ability called 'Throw Anything', it's kind of implied that they will be throwing uncommon objects.


It would be particularly appealing if you could get +Int to splash damage on 5+ glued Acid flasks. It would be extremely dangerous.

In light of the Alchemist's Throw Anything ability, is there anything preventing simply gluing or tying two splash weapons together for the purpose of throwing simultaneously?

I presume that it would suffer from an Improvised Weapon Penalty, which an Alchemist could safely ignore, but would it otherwise work?

Would it be treated as a single alchemical item, or two, for the purpose of applying Int based damage?

Assuming there is nothing technically stopping this from happening, what would prevent anyone from simply attaching as many as they can lift and throwing the lot? The heaviest standard weapon is 14lbs, and can be thrown as a full round action.

The only reference that comes close to addressing this issue is the Hybridization funnel, which allows for physically mixing two different splash weapons, which would seem to be an unnecessary step except where penalties for improvisation and encumbrance might be incurred.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.