Zehnpai's page

So here's an interesting interaction of rules that I'd like help sorting out.

---

Question 1: Would multiple sources of detonate stack? The spell duration is 1 round, but the damage is instantaneous when it goes off. My reading is instantaneous damage always stacks.

---

Question 2: Syringe spear is a thrown weapon. As a baseline it's a two handed weapon, but from what I'm reading throwing a thrown weapon is typically considered, baseline, to be a one handed affair. With quick draw you're allowed to make full iterative attacks.

So if say you have a 2 regular attacks from bab, haste and TWF you'd be able to throw 4 of these things in a single full round attack, correct? Or can you not TWF a thrown weapon that's 2 handed when used in melee?

---

Extra credit question 3: From what I understand when infusions are used and how weirdly they interact with personal range spells, generally we change the word 'you' in personal spells to 'the target' as you would for a touch range spell.

Because of how detonate works and is worded, this means that the target would be able to decide, when it explodes, what type of damage it does since that is determined not when the spell is made but when it detonates. But if you have no idea what you were just hit with...how would you know what element to explode with?

I'm thinking allow a knowledge:arcana and if they succeed they can pick, but if they fail just randomize?

---

Situation:

Party has someone who is built for throwing weapons. Alchemist has more spell slots than he knows what to do with. They plan on buying a handful of syringe spears and filling them with infusions of detonate.

I immediately said no to Skinsend. No save CC would make balancing encounters a nightmare. However, Detonate I see no problem with in limited fashion provided it doesn't break any rules.

Thanks in advance!

I'm looking for help in preparing myself in advance for counter-arguments.

The table has 2 people who are pretty open to whatever, but 2 pretty hefty rules lawyers. They're good peoples just, y'know. We do try to play RAW as closely as we can to avoid things spiraling and arguments coming up.

Parties alchemist just hit 14 and took Greater Alchemical Simulacrum with my blessing that he doesn't try to abuse it to break the game open.

His plan is to grow a succubus (for the usual profane gift cheese) and I'm okay with it. +2 int at level 14 isn't going to break the game and honestly it kinda fits his character.

However, he asked me if the rule for monster advancement is DM only. Basically, he would like me to allow him to treat GAS like it's weird science and not a magical effect which...I'm also inclined to allow. He wants to create a simulacrum of a Succubus who just happens to dabble in alchemy and stick her with a necklace of adaptation in his portable hole where she can sit there with crafting feats cranking out preserving flasks (and occasionally take her out to dinner to creep out the rest of the party).

Given that he could just take leadership and accomplish basically the same thing, and that as vague and abuseable as simulacrum can be, I'm again...inclined to allow it. In fact, I was thinking of 'soft house ruling' that at 14 he gets GAS but can't really use it as he wants but if he takes leadership at 15, then I'd let him build his Frankenuccubus.

A 3 feat tax (alchemical simulacrum, greater alchemical simulacrum, leadership) for some roleplay potential and half off preserving flasks seems pretty reasonable to me.

However, I also don't want to upset the more rules lawyery people at the table and am hoping to get ahead of any problems they may point out with all of this at our next session. Obviously "I'm the DM, what I say goes" along with the "It's my house, my materials and my pizza" are strong arguments but I want to avoid going that route.

Is there anything -obviously- against the rules I'm missing?