Bang Bag Theory,
We kind of need a ruling on this.....
If a player gets an Alchemist’s Fire, and puts it in a small bag with, let’s say 4 flasks of oil… and throws it at someone… are we looking at 5d6 fire damage with 5 points of splash? (or 5d6 damage with no spash due to the bag)
OurGM said the character would suffer -4 to hit (because it’s an improvised weapon) and have a range of 10’ (like other thrown weapons) while the event coordinator started wondering if each vile would get a saving throw, which brought up the question… if you throw a Alchemist’s Fire at someone, would the vile get a saving throw?
Now, What if they put caltrops in the bag to make sure the vales pop?
Lastly, if you say that the oil could not be ignited from the Alchemist’s Fire (some chemical reaction reason), what would happen if it was a bag of 5 Alchemist’s Fire instead?
This can get crazy one an Alchemist gets his bombs in the mix.
Help.... :o)
|
Bang Bag Theory,
We kind of need a ruling on this.....
You are posting on the Pathfinder Society discussion forum. A question of this nature should be on the Pathfinder RPG discussion forum. Or better yet, under the homebrew rules forum.
Honestly I think you are spinning your wheels asking a question like this. You are not going to see a ruling on this from Bulmahn or anyone else at Paizo. You are going to get a wide range of answers from players and GMs on how they would rule it at their table. But at the end of the day, your GM is going to have to decide if he wants to open this Pandora's box of cheese. Just remember, the bad guys can do the same thing to you.
I think it wouldn't be very effective. It is a in a bag so I don't think you would get very much splash and direct contact with the target. It would probably go like this you toss the bag into target x and the vials break inside and then the bag an vials slide off target x and ignite as it falls. The bag drops to the floor causing a large fire on the ground and target x takes very little damage. Probably less then a normal alchemist fire.
|
|
Bang Bag Theory,
We kind of need a ruling on this.....You are posting on the Pathfinder Society discussion forum. A question of this nature should be on the Pathfinder RPG discussion forum. Or better yet, under the homebrew rules forum.
Honestly I think you are spinning your wheels asking a question like this. You are not going to see a ruling on this from Bulmahn or anyone else at Paizo. You are going to get a wide range of answers from players and GMs on how they would rule it at their table. But at the end of the day, your GM is going to have to decide if he wants to open this Pandora's box of cheese. Just remember, the bad guys can do the same thing to you.
He said in his post "Coordinator", I assume he meant event coordinator and is talking about a Society issue.
|
I think it wouldn't be very effective. It is a in a bag so I don't think you would get very much splash and direct contact with the target. It would probably go like this you toss the bag into target x and the vials break inside and then the bag an vials slide off target x and ignite as it falls. The bag drops to the floor causing a large fire on the ground and target x takes very little damage. Probably less then a normal alchemist fire.
Partly agree with you. The bag would eliminate splash damage.
I do not agree that the vials break then slide off target x and ignite. Since Alchemist Fire does not exactly just "ignite and slide off."
Instead I can see the vials rupturing and each doing damage separately (for DR and such). But if all it needs to disrupt the damage from Alchemist Fire is a bag, then any armor of any kind, and even just plain robes, would already render Alchemist Fire harmless. Since we know that armor does NOT render it harmless we can assume that something as insignificant as a bag will not either.
So I would have the player roll damage for each vial. If no DR, then just roll all your dice. If, DR, then roll separately so I can reduce the damage per vial. Depending upon circumstances if a REF roll is allowed to reduce damage I would allow one for each vial- or if I don't feel like rolling several times allow one roll for all vials and suck it up if I roll bad- either way works for me.
Regardless, there would be 5d6 worth of damage potential in the bag of five Alchemist Fires.
The disadvantage of this? One roll to hit. You roll bad, you miss, or worse hit an ally. You waste a lot of money with a miss and more if you hit an ally- healing potions to heal yourself after your ally beats the $h%t out of you later will eat away even more cash. lol
Remember, the game is about fun and rewarding good ideas is fun... having a GM kill a good idea because he doesn't want the fight to end too soon is NOT fun! Reward those good ideas, and be ready to have fun! Also remember the game is NOT GM vs Players... ultimately we ALL want the Players to succeed- even the GM...
Moved this to the appropriate forum.
I have a few suggestions about this. Some would be official based upon RAW and some would be house rules.
1 - If everything is in one bag you would make one attack to hit the target and hit hard enough to both rupture the bag and the alchemist fire. Based upon how much oil you added to the bag I would have a penalty of -1 to -4 to the to hit roll. (See house rule below)
2 - I would allow the splash damage just like normal for Alchemist fire if you hit. A miss means the bag did not break so no splash.
3 - The volume of oil on a target does not modify the amount of damage as far as I am aware per RAW. They are either "On Fire" or "Not on Fire” However I would allow that the more oil on the target the higher the DC to make a reflex save to put out the fire. (See house rule below)
Here is the house rule stuff-
For every flask of oil added to "The Bag" the attack roll would get a -1 to hit with a max of -4 with four flasks. For every flask of oil the save DC would go up by the same amount as the penalty to attack.
So that is how I would work it, but in all honesty I would encourage the player to take some crafting professions and make advanced or special versions of Alchemist Fire. They could then work with the DM to write up the rules for their new creation and make them in the down time of the game. It would prevent cheese for cheese alone and reward the player who spent the skill points to try and make something better then basic alchemist fire as they advance in level and skill.
I think it wouldn't be very effective. It is a in a bag so I don't think you would get very much splash and direct contact with the target. It would probably go like this you toss the bag into target x and the vials break inside and then the bag an vials slide off target x and ignite as it falls. The bag drops to the floor causing a large fire on the ground and target x takes very little damage. Probably less then a normal alchemist fire.Partly agree with you. The bag would eliminate splash damage.
I do not agree that the vials break then slide off target x and ignite. Since Alchemist Fire does not exactly just "ignite and slide off."
Instead I can see the vials rupturing and each doing damage separately (for DR and such). But if all it needs to disrupt the damage from Alchemist Fire is a bag, then any armor of any kind, and even just plain robes, would already render Alchemist Fire harmless. Since we know that armor does NOT render it harmless we can assume that something as insignificant as a bag will not either.
So I would have the player roll damage for each vial. If no DR, then just roll all your dice. If, DR, then roll separately so I can reduce the damage per vial. Depending upon circumstances if a REF roll is allowed to reduce damage I would allow one for each vial- or if I don't feel like rolling several times allow one roll for all vials and suck it up if I roll bad- either way works for me.
Regardless, there would be 5d6 worth of damage potential in the bag of five Alchemist Fires.
The disadvantage of this? One roll to hit. You roll bad, you miss, or worse hit an ally. You waste a lot of money with a miss and more if you hit an ally- healing potions to heal yourself after your ally beats the $h%t out of you later will eat away even more cash. lol
Remember, the game is about fun and rewarding good ideas is fun... having a GM kill a good idea because he doesn't want the fight to end too soon is NOT fun! Reward those good ideas, and be ready...
When you throw an alchemist fire at a target the bottle shatters and the liquid splatters and ignites. So if the target is wearing robes it doesn't matter because you have a large amount of the liquid all over burning. By putting the vials in a bag you are greatly reducing the area for which the alchemist fire can spread over the target. Oil and alchemist fire does not explode or com-bust like gasoline so a bag like a sack you carry gold in or a backpack would greatly confine the area. I would still stand by my ruling. If the player could somehow tape 5 vials together and then toss it would be more effective but I think I would use some diminishing returns and cap the amount of extra d6 damage at some point.
I am all for players finding creative uses for items within reason. If a player really wanted to get creative he could just hire an alchemist to create jumbo alchemist fires the size of jugs and toss those around at -4 to hit.
See I originaly put this in the PFS section because it came up at a game day (last night)
in my 3.5 home game I justed used the Arcanis rules for advanced alchamy...(which had rules for improving alchemical equipent such as raising the DC or damage)
But can't make up home rules in offical PFS play
I have a few suggestions about this. Some would be official based upon RAW and some would be house rules.
1 - If everything is in one bag you would make one attack to hit the target and hit hard enough to both rupture the bag and the alchemist fire. Based upon how much oil you added to the bag I would have a penalty of -1 to -4 to the to hit roll. (See house rule below)
2 - I would allow the splash damage just like normal for Alchemist fire if you hit. A miss means the bag did not break so no splash.
3 - The volume of oil on a target does not modify the amount of damage as far as I am aware per RAW. They are either "On Fire" or "Not on Fire” However I would allow that the more oil on the target the higher the DC to make a reflex save to put out the fire. (See house rule below)
Here is the house rule stuff-
For every flask of oil added to "The Bag" the attack roll would get a -1 to hit with a max of -4 with four flasks. For every flask of oil the save DC would go up by the same amount as the penalty to attack.
So that is how I would work it, but in all honesty I would encourage the player to take some crafting professions and make advanced or special versions of Alchemist Fire. They could then work with the DM to write up the rules for their new creation and make them in the down time of the game. It would prevent cheese for cheese alone and reward the player who spent the skill points to try and make something better then basic alchemist fire as they advance in level and skill.
I think your ruling is pretty fair but I still think the bags that a character could have would be sacks for carrying loot so I don't think they would be very flimsy.
You could also just make the amount of time the alchemist fire burns longer.
I also agree that the players and DM should agree to rules before use and pathfinder society I would say you can't do it. Work withing the normal rules.
I also agree that the players and DM should agree to rules before use and pathfinder society I would say you can't do it. Work withing the normal rules.
Umm it’s an RPG, there are no limited “normal rules” if we wanted to play a game with set rules for everything and no ability to “think outside the box” we would all be playing 4e
The rules we were looking at dealt with the oil, it states, if prepared (full round action) can be used like Alchemist Fire. So what would happen if you toss it oil into an open fire, or a target already on fire? What if they were all thrown with an Alchemist Fire? And then what happens if multiple Alchemist Fires are thrown at the same time? (They would have to stack, if they don’t the two-weapon throwing character with quick draw would not be able to use more than one per target per round.)
The GM also mentioned that carrying a lot of Alchemist Fire can be very dangerous, especially if you have them ready to be retrieved and thrown.
As the rules are written there is nothing that gives us the smallest hint that it can’t be done. Hell if under Alchemist Fire there was a line that stated that multiple Alchemist Fire only extend the fires duration, then the argument would be moot.
I also agree that the players and DM should agree to rules before use and pathfinder society I would say you can't do it. Work withing the normal rules.
Umm it’s an RPG, there are no limited “normal rules” if we wanted to play a game with set rules for everything and no ability to “think outside the box” we would all be playing 4e
The rules we were looking at dealt with the oil, it states, if prepared (full round action) can be used like Alchemist Fire. So what would happen if you toss it oil into an open fire, or a target already on fire? What if they were all thrown with an Alchemist Fire? And then what happens if multiple Alchemist Fires are thrown at the same time? (They would have to stack, if they don’t the two-weapon throwing character with quick draw would not be able to use more than one per target per round.)
The GM also mentioned that carrying a lot of Alchemist Fire can be very dangerous, especially if you have them ready to be retrieved and thrown.
As the rules are written there is nothing that gives us the smallest hint that it can’t be done. Hell if under Alchemist Fire there was a line that stated that multiple Alchemist Fire only extend the fires duration, then the argument would be moot.
Living campaigns like Pathfinder Society run under different rules then normal home games because you have so many DMs running games with varying abilities. DMs are limited on their creativity to counter players by what is written in the adventure. If no one here at paizo rules on this then it is open to interpretation as the DM sees it. If I was running a pathfinder society game I would ask the players to try a different tactic(no harm no foul) as there is no defined rules and it is very subjective and possibly argumentative.
|
|
Nunspa, Marhdol is completely on the mark when he said that your suggested use of alchemist fire will lead to arguments. Each GM is going to have their own idea of what might happen when you dump a bunch of napalm in a bag and throw it at someone. The safe thing is to stick with the rules as written, which is what most GMs will do. If that's not a satisfactory answer then I suggest that 30 minutes before the game starts you approach your GM and tell him/her about your idea. Let them mull it over and decide how they might adjudicate it before everyone is at the table and piping up with their ideas.
Here's my opinion; I'm against it (big surprise) but it really depends on the circumstances. If you and your party are playing at an appropriate tier and are having success in the combats, I'm going to be disinclined to allow you to do it since you shouldn't need such a ridiculous tactic to win a fight. However, if you and your party are playing up, struggling to win the combats and are getting desperate and try something radical to turn the tide of the battle, then I'll work with you. I'll come up with a rule on the fly and let the dice decide if your gamble pays off.
But if you want to use this tactic on a regular basis you are going to discover that many GMs are different and unless you discuss it with them ahead of time, you are asking to start an argument at the table and the game might grind to a halt. That's not a lot of fun, unless you like arguing. You might see it as a creative idea that adds to the fun of the game, but the GMs sees it as a wildcard begging to be abused by players.
|
|
...I think it wouldn't be very effective. It is a in a bag so I don't think you would get very much splash and direct contact with the target. It would probably go like this you toss the bag into target x and the vials break inside and then the bag an vials slide off target x and ignite as it falls. The bag drops to the floor causing a large fire on the ground and target x takes very little damage. Probably less then a normal alchemist fire.Partly agree with you. The bag would eliminate splash damage.
I do not agree that the vials break then slide off target x and ignite. Since Alchemist Fire does not exactly just "ignite and slide off."
Instead I can see the vials rupturing and each doing damage separately (for DR and such). But if all it needs to disrupt the damage from Alchemist Fire is a bag, then any armor of any kind, and even just plain robes, would already render Alchemist Fire harmless. Since we know that armor does NOT render it harmless we can assume that something as insignificant as a bag will not either.
So I would have the player roll damage for each vial. If no DR, then just roll all your dice. If, DR, then roll separately so I can reduce the damage per vial. Depending upon circumstances if a REF roll is allowed to reduce damage I would allow one for each vial- or if I don't feel like rolling several times allow one roll for all vials and suck it up if I roll bad- either way works for me.
Regardless, there would be 5d6 worth of damage potential in the bag of five Alchemist Fires.
The disadvantage of this? One roll to hit. You roll bad, you miss, or worse hit an ally. You waste a lot of money with a miss and more if you hit an ally- healing potions to heal yourself after your ally beats the $h%t out of you later will eat away even more cash. lol
Remember, the game is about fun and rewarding good ideas is fun... having a GM kill a good idea because he doesn't want the fight to end too soon is NOT fun! Reward those good
yep okay :)
in my 3.5 home game I justed used the Arcanis rules for advanced alchamy...(which had rules for improving alchemical equipent such as raising the DC or damage)First don't use rules from other game systems(epic fail there).
second, I told you that it wouldn't work like you said.
The only thing we have for sure is... its up to the GM at the table..
last time I checked, there is no real concencus above...
But if you want to get nit-picky
Mahrdol - it would do very little damage
Krome - No slash damage but each die would be subject to DR
Joshua - Moved the thread :oP
Thazar - Would do damage, with spash, but one die roll.. you miss.. STBU
Doug Doug - Talk to the GM before the game starts, may allow it if the table is having issues with an adventure (last ditch OMFG we are going to die!! TOSS THE BAG!!)
Morganwolf - fails at noticing this forum is the Rules Questions forum and a lot of people posted house rules, sly comment falls flat on its face.
:o)
|
|
Well, I would have allowed the concept to work, simply because the idea is a good one.
As far as I know the rules have damage from objects stack unless otherwise stated. So if there were four Alchemist Fires, then 4d6. Just like if you shoot four arrows at once (for example Manyshot Feat).
Now, as to the idea that since this was a Society game they shouldn't try creative ideas, I say BS. If that is the case, just kill the Society now. If all they want is boring hack and slash then count me out and probably 90% of other gamers out there. The game is about fun and it ENCOURAGES creative thinking. If Society discourages creative thinking and just wants boring games, then really it will die a long slow painful death eventually.
If I ever hear an official Society answer say "We don't want creative thinking at our games." I will burn my membership card and forget the Society ever existed.
One time the party Psion (Shaper) had a backpack full of Alchemist's fire. He walked through a Shatter trap. He lost nearly everything he owned and nearly died.
That was an amazing freaking night. LOL
Well, I would have allowed the concept to work, simply because the idea is a good one.
As far as I know the rules have damage from objects stack unless otherwise stated. So if there were four Alchemist Fires, then 4d6. Just like if you shoot four arrows at once (for example Manyshot Feat).
Now, as to the idea that since this was a Society game they shouldn't try creative ideas, I say BS. If that is the case, just kill the Society now. If all they want is boring hack and slash then count me out and probably 90% of other gamers out there. The game is about fun and it ENCOURAGES creative thinking. If Society discourages creative thinking and just wants boring games, then really it will die a long slow painful death eventually.
If I ever hear an official Society answer say "We don't want creative thinking at our games." I will burn my membership card and forget the Society ever existed.
It's not about creativity it is about time and breaking the scenarios. You have a finite amount of time to run a slot I don't need to spend 30 minutes arguing about the merits of cheesing out alchemist fire and how it changes scenario difficulty. Where does it stop? 1st level group of 6 players each pools 1 alchemist fire into a bag and one shots the main encounters boss with a 6d6 touch attack. Why not just cast shrink items on barrels of alchemist fire and have your Barbarian friend toss them around for 200d6 worth of damage at tier 9? That is why I say no for pathfinder society. In a home game cool go ahead I will just make the encounter more difficult and prepare for that tactic next game session.
|
Why put them in a bag at all, if you really want them to be effective just tie them together. It gets rid of the bag issue altogether. As for increased damage with oil, this only works up to a point, only so much can hit a target; and being on fire means being on fire, so once the oil has flash burned its still the same old on fire as ever.
One time the party Psion (Shaper) had a backpack full of Alchemist's fire. He walked through a Shatter trap. He lost nearly everything he owned and nearly died.
That was an amazing freaking night. LOL
CLASSIC!!!
It's not about creativity it is about time and breaking the scenarios. You have a finite amount of time to run a slot I don't need to spend 30 minutes arguing about the merits of cheesing out alchemist fire and how it changes scenario difficulty. Where does it stop? 1st level group of 6 players each pools 1 alchemist fire into a bag and one shots the main encounters boss with a 6d6 touch attack. Why not just cast shrink items on barrels of alchemist fire and have your Barbarian friend toss them around for 200d6 worth of damage at tier 9? That is why I say no for pathfinder society. In a home game cool go ahead I will just make the encounter more difficult and prepare for that tactic next game session.
I complety understand you..
I saw this happen a lot in living arcanis (people would put an AlFire in a bag with blast powder)
/sarcasm on
just when you see a 2 monsters with an in box text surprize (no chance of seeing them) kicking 3 attacks each before characters get to act.. then and a dominate person spell going off at level one.. tossing a 6d6 touch attack seems all well and good sometimes.
/sarcasm off
It's not about creativity it is about time and breaking the scenarios. You have a finite amount of time to run a slot I don't need to spend 30 minutes arguing about the merits of cheesing out alchemist fire and how it changes scenario difficulty. Where does it stop? 1st level group of 6 players each pools 1 alchemist fire into a bag and one shots the main encounters boss with a 6d6 touch attack. Why not just cast shrink items on barrels of alchemist fire and have your Barbarian friend toss them around for 200d6 worth of damage at tier 9? That is why I say no for pathfinder society. In a home game cool go ahead I will just make the encounter more difficult and prepare for that tactic next game session.
I complety understand you..
I saw this happen a lot in living arcanis (people would put an AlFire in a bag with blast powder)
/sarcasm on
just when you see a 2 monsters with an in box text surprize (no chance of seeing them) kicking 3 attacks each before characters get to act.. then and a dominate person spell going off at level one.. tossing a 6d6 touch attack seems all well and good sometimes.
/sarcasm off
People don't realize it is a compounding problem because 6 alchemist fires throw singularly from a 6 player group is only 1d6x6 damage. So you pool your alchemist fires and you have one guy doing 1d6x6(basically a 1 target fireball) and 5 others still doing their normal attacks. Why not just take it to its ultimate conclusion 6 players with bang bags all doing 6d6x6 damage with very little cost. 1 or 2 pathfinder scenarios and a player could easily afford 120 gp worth of alchemist fire and you and your buddies are running around every scenario basically owning it.
I like your GMs ruling. Decent attack penalty, full damage. I would allow 1 save and probably max the damage at 10d6.
It's not about creativity it is about time and breaking the scenarios. You have a finite amount of time to run a slot I don't need to spend 30 minutes arguing about the merits of cheesing out alchemist fire and how it changes scenario difficulty. Where does it stop? 1st level group of 6 players each pools 1 alchemist fire into a bag and one shots the main encounters boss with a 6d6 touch attack. Why not just cast shrink items on barrels of alchemist fire and have your Barbarian friend toss them around for 200d6 worth of damage at tier 9? That is why I say no for pathfinder society. In a home game cool go ahead I will just make the encounter more difficult and prepare for that tactic next game session.
I complety understand you..
I saw this happen a lot in living arcanis (people would put an AlFire in a bag with blast powder)
/sarcasm on
just when you see a 2 monsters with an in box text surprize (no chance of seeing them) kicking 3 attacks each before characters get to act.. then and a dominate person spell going off at level one.. tossing a 6d6 touch attack seems all well and good sometimes.
/sarcasm offPeople don't realize it is a compounding problem because 6 alchemist fires throw singularly from a 6 player group is only 1d6x6 damage. So you pool your alchemist fires and you have one guy doing 1d6x6(basically a 1 target fireball) and 5 others still doing their normal attacks. Why not just take it to its ultimate conclusion 6 players with bang bags all doing 6d6x6 damage with very little cost. 1 or 2 pathfinder scenarios and a player could easily afford 120 gp worth of alchemist fire and you and your buddies are running around every scenario basically owning it.
So?
So?
It's not about creativity it is about time and breaking the scenarios. You have a finite amount of time to run a slot I don't need to spend 30 minutes arguing about the merits of cheesing out alchemist fire and how it changes scenario difficulty. Where does it stop? 1st level group of 6 players each pools 1 alchemist fire into a bag and one shots the main encounters boss with a 6d6 touch attack. Why not just cast shrink items on barrels of alchemist fire and have your Barbarian friend toss them around for 200d6 worth of damage at tier 9? That is why I say no for pathfinder society. In a home game cool go ahead I will just make the encounter more difficult and prepare for that tactic next game session.
I complety understand you..
I saw this happen a lot in living arcanis (people would put an AlFire in a bag with blast powder)
/sarcasm on
just when you see a 2 monsters with an in box text surprize (no chance of seeing them) kicking 3 attacks each before characters get to act.. then and a dominate person spell going off at level one.. tossing a 6d6 touch attack seems all well and good sometimes.
/sarcasm offPeople don't realize it is a compounding problem because 6 alchemist fires throw singularly from a 6 player group is only 1d6x6 damage. So you pool your alchemist fires and you have one guy doing 1d6x6(basically a 1 target fireball) and 5 others still doing their normal attacks. Why not just take it to its ultimate conclusion 6 players with bang bags all doing 6d6x6 damage with very little cost. 1 or 2 pathfinder scenarios and a player could easily afford 120 gp worth of alchemist fire and you and your buddies are running around every scenario basically owning it.
It ruins the fun?
People don't realize it is a compounding problem because 6 alchemist fires throw singularly from a 6 player group is only 1d6x6 damage. So you pool your alchemist fires and you have one guy doing 1d6x6(basically a 1 target fireball) and 5 others still doing their normal attacks. Why not just take it to its ultimate conclusion 6 players with bang bags all doing 6d6x6 damage with very little cost. 1 or 2 pathfinder scenarios and a player could easily afford 120 gp worth of alchemist fire and you and your buddies are running around every scenario basically owning it.
Again I totaly agree, but this also happens when players create stupid-powerful combo attacks which snap games into
Still remember the grayhawk party that always summon animals, someone casted animal grouth, and then someone would cast haste... at the start of every combat.
They had the monsters on stat-cards already buffed...
I played my Mystic-Theurge with them once...I remember going to the bathroom and comming back before my turn came up.
/sigh
At that point, I'd just turn the game around to involve lots of fire resistant creatures.
>.>
Mwauhhuahauhauauha
Wanna know how ya do it within reason?
Ya have some mad guy conjure magical crazy portals that pop up and pull people in at random and drop them off at random somewhere in the world, galaxy, or whatever.
lol
>.>
It ruins the fun?So?
It's not about creativity it is about time and breaking the scenarios. You have a finite amount of time to run a slot I don't need to spend 30 minutes arguing about the merits of cheesing out alchemist fire and how it changes scenario difficulty. Where does it stop? 1st level group of 6 players each pools 1 alchemist fire into a bag and one shots the main encounters boss with a 6d6 touch attack. Why not just cast shrink items on barrels of alchemist fire and have your Barbarian friend toss them around for 200d6 worth of damage at tier 9? That is why I say no for pathfinder society. In a home game cool go ahead I will just make the encounter more difficult and prepare for that tactic next game session.
I complety understand you..
I saw this happen a lot in living arcanis (people would put an AlFire in a bag with blast powder)
/sarcasm on
just when you see a 2 monsters with an in box text surprize (no chance of seeing them) kicking 3 attacks each before characters get to act.. then and a dominate person spell going off at level one.. tossing a 6d6 touch attack seems all well and good sometimes.
/sarcasm offPeople don't realize it is a compounding problem because 6 alchemist fires throw singularly from a 6 player group is only 1d6x6 damage. So you pool your alchemist fires and you have one guy doing 1d6x6(basically a 1 target fireball) and 5 others still doing their normal attacks. Why not just take it to its ultimate conclusion 6 players with bang bags all doing 6d6x6 damage with very little cost. 1 or 2 pathfinder scenarios and a player could easily afford 120 gp worth of alchemist fire and you and your buddies are running around every scenario basically owning it.
There are plenty of ways to deal with this. For one thing, you could sunder the flasks while they are still on them. Suddendly that 6d6 they want to do to the BBEG isn't so fun for them.
Besides, they could always pick up some scrolls of higher level spells and do the same thing. You can get lvl 2 scrolls for 150, with a nice 4d6 scorching ray with no save. A lvl 7 version costs you 350 and gets you 2 rays, 550 for 12d6 damage. A lvl 9 magic missile scroll is only 225gp. Sure you have to make caster level checks, and alchemists fire are more cost effective and versatile (usable by anyone), but they're a lot more dangerous to have arround.