TheFinish's page

So I was discussing character ideas with a friend and I mentioned the idea (especially with the new Remastered Alchemist) of a Ruffian Rogue with Alchemist Dedication. But we did run into a conundrum regarding Sneak Attack and bombs.

Sneak Attack states: When your enemy can't properly defend itself, you take advantage to deal extra damage. If you Strike a creature that has the off-guard condition with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, a ranged weapon attack, or a ranged unarmed attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage. For a ranged attack with a thrown melee weapon, that weapon must also be agile or finesse.

Alchemical Bombs meanwhile, states: Bombs are martial thrown weapons with a range increment of 20 feet.

So, by default, Alchemical Bombs do not qualify for Sneak Attack because they are thrown weapons, but not agile or finesse.

But Ruffian Racket states: You can deal sneak attack damage with any weapon, not just the weapons listed in the sneak attack class feature. This benefit doesn't apply to a simple weapon with a damage die greater than d8 or a martial or advanced weapon with a damage die greater than d6. (Apply any abilities that alter the damage die size first.)

So bombs, which are martial thrown weapons would qualify for a Ruffian's Sneak Attack, if their damage die is d6 or lower.

This seems pretty easy at first glance: bombs like bottled lightning or frost vial (d6 electricity and d6 cold, respectively) would qualify, but alchemist's fire (d8 fire) would not.

But what about bombs like Acid Flask, Tallow Bomb or Blood Bomb, which only deal Persistent damage and splash damage. They have the correct die type (d6, d4, d6, respectively) but it's not technically a damage die?

I'm inclined to say on a hit against an off-guard opponent they would deal [Sneak Attack]+[Splash] and apply the corresponding persistent damage (without Sneak Attack damage, needless to say), but I'm not sure this is supported by the rules.

Any input would be appreciated.

Right so, I had this conundrum ever since we got the ENWorld previews, and I thought the wording in the playtest CRB would help, but it hasn't.

So, the Shield Block reaction states:

"You snap your shield in place to ward off a blow. Your shield prevents you from taking an amount of damage up to the shield’s Hardness—the shield takes this damage instead, possibly becoming dented or broken. See the Item Damage section on page 175 for rules on dented and broken items."

And then, Page 175 states:

"An item can be destroyed if it takes damage enough times. An item reduces any damage dealt to it by its Hardness. The Hardness of various materials is explained in the Materials section on page 354. If an item takes damage equal to or exceeding the item’s Hardness, the item takes a Dent. If the item takes damage equal to or greater than twice its Hardness in one hit, it takes 2 Dents. For instance, a wooden shield (Hardness 3) that takes 10 damage would take 2 Dents. A typical item can take only 1 Dent without becoming broken. A second Dent causes it to become broken, though it can still be repaired. An item that would take a Dent or become broken while already broken is destroyed beyond salvage. Some magical or especially sturdy items can take more than 1 Dent before becoming broken, as noted in their descriptions."

This is also pretty clear, but the problem I have comes from the combination of both sections.

Lets say I have a Light Wooden Shield, which is Hardness 3. I get hit by an attack that does 15 damage. What happens?

Per Shield Block, the Shield would block 3 Damage, because that's the Hardness, and it can't block more than that. But then it also says:

"[...]-up to the shield’s Hardness—the shield takes this damage instead, possibly becoming dented or broken."

But...if an object reduces all damage taken by it's Hardness, how is the shield ever getting dented?

I get hit for 15. I block. The shield takes 3 Damage, which Hardness reduces to 0 damage. I myself would take the remaining 12, is that not correct?

Is the damage the shield takes not supposed to be reduced by Hardness?

Is the shield supposed to suffer the remaining 12 damage as well? And then I too take 12 damage?

I feel this could use some serious revision, but maybe I just can't wrap my head around it. Opinions?

I apologize in advance if this has been answered before; I'm new to the boards and while I used the search function I was unable to find an answer.

To the point, one of my players, while looking for an Archetype for his Barbarian brought the following ability from the Brutal Pugilist to my attention:

Improved Savage Grapple (Ex): At 5th level, the brutal
pugilist takes no penalties to Dexterity, attack rolls, and
combat maneuver checks when she has the grappled
condition. She also is treated as one size larger than her
actual size when determining whether she can grapple
or be grappled by another creature. This ability replaces
improved uncanny dodge.

Emphasis mine. From the APG, page 78.

My question concerns the bolded part. For the life of me, I've been unable to find any mention of size restrictions for grapple. Checking these boards, it seems that the consensus is there isn't. How does this ability work then? Should a Brutal Pugilist get CMB/CMD bonuses as if he was one size larger?

Any help is appreciated