I was wondering if there has been a ruling on if you get your strength bonus to damage when throwing splash weapons (mostly the alchemist bomb damage is the important one)? Does anyone know? If yes then does this damage count when calculating splash damage? (the book says minimum damage dealt, so yes?)
Off-hand I'm going to say you don't add your Str bonus to damage. Mainly because splash weapons are a special attack that uses a touch attack rather then a thrown weapon vs. normal AC. I can't find anything that explicitly says the don't get it though...
Core Rulebook page 141:
The wielder applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown weapons (except for splash weapons).
Core Rulebook page 141:
The wielder applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown weapons (except for splash weapons).
thank you for finding that for me, i looked all over the place.... except page 141 apparently.
Yeah same here, lol.
ok so here is a follow up question, can you catch a alchemist fire and throw it back at the person with snatch arrows? If it doesn't have the substance to include strength to the damage can it be caught without exploding. (i would say it can be deflected though splash damage would still occur). and if you can catch the bombs an alchemist throws they just go dead, right?
(...) If it doesn't have the substance to include strength to the damage can it be caught without exploding. (...)
If it doesn't have the substance to apply STR damage, it probably doesn't have significant velocity either. So I'd say yes to snatch arrows.
What says you Mr. Frost?
If it doesn't have the substance to apply STR damage, it probably doesn't have significant velocity either. So I'd say yes to snatch arrows.
I think of it more like throwing an egg, unless you're throwing it softly, it's going to break. only more so because unlike an egg which is made to be durable, a bomb/alchemist fire is made to break. the reason you don't get strength damage is it breaks to easily not because you throw it lightly.
heck, I'd allow you to catch it without snatch arrows (you would have to ready an action first, and make a refkex save and have a hand free)
Batts
heck, I'd allow you to catch it without snatch arrows (you would have to ready an action first, and make a refkex save and have a hand free)
Batts
so you'd allow the same thing with daggers, too.
I think of it more like throwing an egg, unless you're throwing it softly, it's going to break. only more so because unlike an egg which is made to be durable, a bomb/alchemist fire is made to break. the reason you don't get strength damage is it breaks to easily not because you throw it lightly.
I thought of that too, but don't bombs have to be durable enough to last until combat? I don't have the pdf with me at the moment, but aren't bombs 'prepared' and then kept until used? It's likely that some alchemical 'magic' is involved to keep bombs from going off in your pocket should you miss a step, but they are still likely to be durable enough to be caught... Perhaps.
But regardless of how fragile they are, bombs are unlikely to be hurled with the strength of a dagger, never mind a mechanically propelled projectile such as an arrow. It's more a Molotov cocktail than a major-league baseball.
In the end, I'd go with the intent of the ability. Personally, I think that this ability stands halfway between 'a spell that isn't quite a spell' and a standard (if unique) alchemical projectile. If you see it more like a spell, then don't allow it to be caught, just like a magic missile shouldn't be returned toward its caster by a player holding a mirror. If you see it more like a physical object, then it should live with the consequences of *not* being a spell.
'findel
Splash weapons are thrown ranged attacks. Deflect Arrows and Snatch Arrows allow you knock aside or catch and throw back ranged attacks. I don't see any reasons in the RAW why someone with these feats couldn't grab a bomb (or acid flask, or alchemist's fire) and toss it back--they are, after all, trained to do so. The feats above only note that unusually large ranged weapons like ballistae or trebuchet stones can't be thrown back or deflected.
I also wouldn't allow just anyone to be able to do this, readied action or not. Doing so completely invalidates this entire feat chain. Should someone try, I might give them a chance to succeed, but since they lack the feats above, I'd say, "You caught it. It explodes. You take damage."
Quick Note:
"An alchemist’s bomb, like an extract, becomes inert if used or carried by anyone else."
So you could deflect it but throwing it back will do no good.
|
Quick Note:
"An alchemist’s bomb, like an extract, becomes inert if used or carried by anyone else."
So you could deflect it but throwing it back will do no good.
Which, I think, makes for a nice visual;
Pajama clad martial artist catches 'bomb,' and throws it back in the face of the surprised alchemist.
Alchemist wipes inert compound off of robe and shakes his head. "Ninja, please. I made that. It only blows up if I want it to blow up."
I thought of that too, but don't bombs have to be durable enough to last until combat? I don't have the pdf with me at the moment, but aren't bombs 'prepared' and then kept until used? It's likely that some alchemical 'magic' is involved to keep bombs from going off in your pocket should you miss a step, but they are still likely to be durable enough to be caught... Perhaps.
no the casing is "made" in the morning, but they last until used, which when used is "charged up"
But regardless of how fragile they are, bombs are unlikely to be hurled with the strength of a dagger, never mind a mechanically propelled projectile such as an arrow. It's more a Molotov cocktail than a major-league baseball.
i don't know how many glass bottles you've thrown, but you throw them like a baseball if you want them to smash.
In the end, I'd go with the intent of the ability. Personally, I think that this ability stands halfway between 'a spell that isn't quite a spell' and a standard (if unique) alchemical projectile. If you see it more like a spell, then don't allow it to be caught, just like a magic missile shouldn't be returned toward its caster by a player holding a mirror. If you see it more like a physical object, then it should live with the consequences of *not* being a spell.
'findel
I agree.
EDIT: Oh, and no way on the strength damage in my book, any more than you would get strength damage casting your fireball spell...the chemical reaction provides all the power, your attack roll (which is Dex-based to begin with, and which I see as aun upward lob more than a flat hurl) is for placement only.
1) i use my strength for my to hit roll. (mighty throw out of complete warrior i believe)
2)why would you throw anything you want to place precisely and with force with an upward lob? it's combat, not a game of law darts.
2)why would you throw anything you want to place precisely and with force with an upward lob? it's combat, not a game of law darts.
I can see a few reasons, but mainly since it is relatively fragile, one might not *need* to throw it with force for it to be effective.
Also, if you throw a missile with force and miss by 1 foot, the missile may land several feet further back. I you lob it, missing by 1 foot may result in the bomb exploding at the target's feet (and still be partially effective). Actually, the rules for throwing alchemical fire/acid/holy water and splash damage seem to assume that the vial gets lobbed more than thrown like a baseball or a hatchet.
Most Molotov Cocktails don't explode... you need to actually break the container so that the contents spread... it's generally simply an accellerant using a wick to delay the combustion long enough to throw the container (which is simply used to get the fuel from point "a" to point "b")
Most splash weapons are in a container hard enough to survive the random jostling of an adventuring day. In fact in the case of Holy water there isn't anything but the holy water and jar. A hard throw is needed to break the container (most ancient glass containers were thick so that they wouldn't break easily), after all you wouldn't want a jump or something to cause that acid flask to go off in your pouch.
Self contained chemical explosives that go off when impacted are a relatively recent invention and are precisely what led to the invention of grenades, and several new types of ammunition.
Cause the rules say so?
My thought is its a touch attack cause it doesn't really matter if you have a shield or armor in the way... if they thing gets you the stuff is going to ruin your day, armor and shields will not really help.
As to the Impact breaking it I imagine the idea is such that the bottled does the damage to itself. With a hardness depending on what the container is made of being 1 for glass and 0 for paper or cloth it and only 1 hp per inch of thickness I think the basic assumption is that it is easier to go with the object breaks than making people roll to break it at range (which could lead to odd things like ranged sundering and what not).
Basically it was easier to go with than "roll damage for the bottle... oh look you only did one damage the container doesn't break".
Just so we are all on the same page, at this point I am not arguing for rule changes, I am fine with the rules the way they are, if I want them changed I'll talk to my dm, or just put it in any of my campaigns.
Basically it was easier to go with than "roll damage for the bottle... oh look you only did one damage the container doesn't break".
But that would be soooooo great to have happen!!! i'd laugh my ass off!!!
I can see a few reasons, but mainly since it is relatively fragile, one might not *need* to throw it with force for it to be effective.
Also, if you throw a missile with force and miss by 1 foot, the missile may land several feet further back. I you lob it, missing by 1 foot may result in the bomb exploding at the target's feet (and still be partially effective).
i think i'd be ok with a increase in range and damage in exchange for less control of misses.
Actually, the rules for throwing alchemical fire/acid/holy water and splash damage seem to assume that the vial gets lobbed more than thrown like a baseball or a hatchet.
i'll agree to that.
i think i'd be ok with a increase in range and damage in exchange for less control of misses.I can see a few reasons, but mainly since it is relatively fragile, one might not *need* to throw it with force for it to be effective.
Also, if you throw a missile with force and miss by 1 foot, the missile may land several feet further back. I you lob it, missing by 1 foot may result in the bomb exploding at the target's feet (and still be partially effective).
... and with enough force, a thrown flask could even splash targets in the three squares behind! I'm still not sure for increased damage, but perhaps there's a case for adding STR modifier to damage (basically a +d0 + STR mod of physical damage in addition to the substance inside).
[edit] I think that's what you were referring to, right?
Which, I think, makes for a nice visual;
Pajama clad martial artist catches 'bomb,' and throws it back in the face of the surprised alchemist.
Alchemist wipes inert compound off of robe and shakes his head. "Ninja, please. I made that. It only blows up if I want it to blow up."
I like this.
... and with enough force, a thrown flask could even splash targets in the three squares behind! I'm still not sure for increased damage, but perhaps there's a case for adding STR modifier to damage (basically a +d0 + STR mod of physical damage in addition to the substance inside).
[edit] I think that's what you were referring to, right?
yes though i was thinking more along the lines of, if you miss the target, the bomb lands xxxx feat beyond the target, rather than in an area around the target. meaning you have even less control of where it lands because you're throwing it as hard as possible, like a baseball. but you get str added to damage against one target.
As far as the Alchemist's bombs go, they only become inert 1 round after they are activated. If it gets thrown back in his face in the same round he himself activated and threw it, then he's out of luck.
No, this is exact wording.
"An alchemist’s bomb, like an extract, becomes inert if used or carried by anyone else."If it worked the way you say than an extract can be drunk by anyone as long as they do it in the next round.
The rules state (and I paraphrase):
An alchemist creates the catalyst vials at the start of each day. The catalyst may last for years. The catalyst is used to create the bombs and the bombs last only for one round (the round they are created) because of their volitile nature.
The idea of catching a bomb made me laugh. First everyone seems to want to compare the bombs to molotov cocktails because of the fire they create.
There is no wick they don't burn or blow up because of a wick. Or everyone assumes that the vial the bomb is in needs to break.
It's magic!
No literally.
Think of a bomb as a vial of nitroglycerin. The rules do describe the bombs as very volitile. One bump and it blows. That's why they are mixed and used in one round. Watching anyone trying to catch one would be very entertaining.
Now looking at it from a rules ballance point of view:
Why do you think that supernatural ability should be counterd by a little old feat? That seems VERY unballanced to me.
But you decide
so you'd allow the same thing with daggers, too.heck, I'd allow you to catch it without snatch arrows (you would have to ready an action first, and make a refkex save and have a hand free)
Batts
If someone was only trying to lazilly lob a dagger into my square (and not my body) and if the dagger was sufficiently blunt then...yes.
Batts
|
|
However, note the 3.5 feat "grenadier" out of PHB II...+1 hit and damage with thrown, grenade-like weapons, a fighter feat.
If that feat, and, especially, the Shaped Splash feat from Races of Eberron, were adapted / borrowed for the Alchemist, it could be a pretty fun thing.
Shaped Splash, as I vaguely recall it; you can cause Splash damage to avoid squares you don't want hit (allowing you to throw Alchemist's Fire at someone in melee with one or more allies, and have no splash damage affect those allies) *and* you can cause the full damage to splash into one adjacent square, so that if two foes are standing next to each other, the target struck takes the full 1d6, and one target of your choice within 5 ft. also takes the full 1d6 damage. (But the splash is only applied to those within 5 ft. of the original target, not the secondary target.) It was a Halfling-only feat, and probably had some other requirements (like Dex 13 or something), but was sexy as all hell for someone who used Alchemical Fire / Frost / Spark a lot.
I'm not the biggest Eberron fan in the world, but the fact that alchemical splash weapons were viable in that setting made me happy, since I've always have a perverse love for the idea of a character that won battles by, essentially, throwing money at people. :)
If that feat, and, especially, the Shaped Splash feat from Races of Eberron, were adapted / borrowed for the Alchemist, it could be a pretty fun thing.
You don't need the feat.
There is a "Discovery" that the alchemist gets called "Precise Bombs" that allows the alchemist's splash to avoid as many squares as her int mod. So in other words, you need a high int.It should have been two times your int mod, but beggars and choosers and all that...
If that feat, and, especially, the Shaped Splash feat from Races of Eberron, were adapted / borrowed for the Alchemist, it could be a pretty fun thing.You don't need the feat.
There is a "Discovery" that the alchemist gets called "Precise Bombs" that allows the alchemist's splash to avoid as many squares as her int mod. So in other words, you need a high int.
It should have been two times your int mod, but beggars and choosers and all that...
At least it's a stat you are going to want to be high anyways (for bomb DC's and the extra bombs per day).
1) i use my strength for my to hit roll. (mighty throw out of complete warrior i believe)I would not object to this feat being used as it should, which is to help hitting with a ranged weapon (I don't see it in that book, but I do believe the feat exists somewhere). But as a DM, I would need to see and read the feat for sure that allowed the splash weapon thrower to do extra damage based on strength, as I've seen suggested in this thread.
However, note the 3.5 feat "grenadier" out of PHB II...+1 hit and damage with thrown, grenade-like weapons, a fighter feat.
it doesn't let them add their str to damage, it just lets them use their str instead of dex to hit..... think weapon finesse but reversed.
"A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact"
According to this sentence i take "impact" to me hitting anything or anything hitting it.
Deflect arrow just means that the monk smashes it open. Snatch arrows is what allows a monk to take something at a high velocity or low velocity and breakable and use the proper skill to catch it safely.
A lobbed dagger is easier to catch then a breakable vial. So although the speed on an arrow or bolt is more the an alchemist bomb, an arrow or bolt is no something the monk is concerned with breaking.
Either way this is not real life, the intent is for the bomb to be thrown and break open when it hits either your target or the ground. Letting a feat break a class ability, a major class ability, seems to be unfair.
Snatch arrows is a tougher feat to get and would only negate the 1st bomb. After that the alchemist would only target the intersection and not the monk. So snatch arrows is that surprise the momentarily confounds the character and forces him to change tactics and settle for less damage.