| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
On a direct hit, an alchemist’s bomb inflicts 1d6 points of fire damage + additional damage equal to the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier
Do they really intend to use the INT Modifier, as opposed to the INT Bonus?
Using the Modifier would permit negative Damage... I.e. an 1st level Alchemist, with a -2 penalty to INT (7 Int) would do 1d6-2 fire damage...
I'll assume they mean BONUS and not MODIFIER!
(Perhaps this is a bug in the text??)
|
On a direct hit, an alchemist’s bomb inflicts 1d6 points of fire damage + additional damage equal to the alchemist’s Intelligence modifierDo they really intend to use the INT Modifier, as opposed to the INT Bonus?
Using the Modifier would permit negative Damage... I.e. an 1st level Alchemist, with a -2 penalty to INT (7 Int) would do 1d6-2 fire damage...
I'll assume they mean BONUS and not MODIFIER!
(Perhaps this is a bug in the text??)
... An alchemist with NEGATIVE int modifier? Who would do such a thing!?
Yeah, it probably should be bonus.
|
On a direct hit, an alchemist’s bomb inflicts 1d6 points of fire damage + additional damage equal to the alchemist’s Intelligence modifierDo they really intend to use the INT Modifier, as opposed to the INT Bonus?
Using the Modifier would permit negative Damage... I.e. an 1st level Alchemist, with a -2 penalty to INT (7 Int) would do 1d6-2 fire damage...
I'll assume they mean BONUS and not MODIFIER!
(Perhaps this is a bug in the text??)
No, I think they meant modifier. Alchemists ccan produce extracts, bombs and mutagens. Extracts specifically require an Intelligence score of 10 + extract level. There are no Intelligence requirements for bombs or mutagens, so the RAW allow for an Alchemist with a negative Intelligence modifier.
My suggestion? Avoid Int Penalties, Int Damage, and Int Drain.
It is easy to Fail a Saving Throw...
... An alchemist with NEGATIVE int modifier? Who would do such a thing!? Yeah, it probably should be bonus.
Who? Your enemy, of course!
Feeble Mind: Target creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1
Touch of Idiocy: Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target's Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores.
|
My suggestion? Avoid Int Penalties, Int Damage, and Int Drain.It is easy to Fail a Saving Throw...
... An alchemist with NEGATIVE int modifier? Who would do such a thing!? Yeah, it probably should be bonus.Who? Your enemy, of course!
Feeble Mind: Target creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1
Touch of Idiocy: Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target's Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores.
Eh, not any different than a fighter getting strength drain.
|
My suggestion? Avoid Int Penalties, Int Damage, and Int Drain.It is easy to Fail a Saving Throw...
... An alchemist with NEGATIVE int modifier? Who would do such a thing!? Yeah, it probably should be bonus.Who? Your enemy, of course!
Feeble Mind: Target creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1
Touch of Idiocy: Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target's Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores.
Oh I know it's plenty easy to fail a saving throw... but why should alchemists be special? Fighters who take str damage or a str penalty lose damage. When a caster takes ability damage in their casting stat their DC decreases. And Yes! their write-outs say ability modifier as well (caster with a 2 int will be casting spells at a DC 10 + spell level + modifier (-4 in this case).)
|
|
Feeble Mind: Target creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores each drop to 1.
At which point you're a blithering idiot and aren't going to be tossing bombs anyway. Which is after all, the point of the spell.
Touch of Idiocy: Your successful melee touch attack applies a 1d6 penalty to the target's Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores.
Again, the point of the spell. As Strength drain takes out the Fighter or Dexterity drain ruins the Rogue, so Intelligence drain wrecks the Wizard and, yes the Alchemist too.
So either they correct this to use "INT Bonus" instead of "INT Modifier"
-OR-
they should specify a minimum damage of 1.
Or else, if a 1st level Alchemist with a -2 modifier to INT [due to an external factors] rolls a '1' on the d6 for his bomb, will be sending out Healing Fire! (1-2 = -1 damage!). So this seems wrong to me. Not you?
As for comparing this to Strength or other attributes, this is an incorrect comparison IMHO. In any case, there is a rule of minimum damage:
Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.
So either they correct this to use "INT Bonus" instead of "INT Modifier"
-OR-
they should specify a minimum damage of 1.Or else, if a 1st level Alchemist with a -2 modifier to INT [due to an external factors] rolls a '1' on the d6 for his bomb, will be sending out Healing Fire! (1-2 = -1 damage!). So this seems wrong to me. Not you?
As for comparing this to Strength or other attributes, this is an incorrect comparison IMHO. In any case, there is a rule of minimum damage:
Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.http://TheOnlySheet.com
As you point out, there's already a global minimum damage rule. There's no need to add one for the Alchemist. Note that Wizards have it worse; if their Int is reduced (has to be ability drain or a penalty to the stat, not ability damage) below 10, they basically lose all of their class features.
|
|
So either they correct this to use "INT Bonus" instead of "INT Modifier"
-OR-
they should specify a minimum damage of 1.Or else, if a 1st level Alchemist with a -2 modifier to INT [due to an external factors] rolls a '1' on the d6 for his bomb, will be sending out Healing Fire! (1-2 = -1 damage!). So this seems wrong to me. Not you?
As for comparing this to Strength or other attributes, this is an incorrect comparison IMHO. In any case, there is a rule of minimum damage:
Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.http://TheOnlySheet.com
I am tempted to call blatant trolling because I am having a hard time believing anyone is really that ret.... dim.
If you are rolling an alchemist with a base int score of less than 11-12 then you need to reevaluate how good a grasp you have on RPGs.
A fighter who rolls with 7 strength will roll damage and then subtract 2 damage just like an alchemist would subtract 2 if he had the same score in his INT.
Or else, if a 1st level Alchemist with a -2 modifier to INT [due to an external factors] rolls a '1' on the d6 for his bomb, will be sending out Healing Fire! (1-2 = -1 damage!). So this seems wrong to me. Not you?
I am tempted to call blatant trolling because I am having a hard time believing anyone is really that ret.... dim.
If you are rolling an alchemist with a base int score of less than 11-12 then you need to reevaluate how good a grasp you have on RPGs.
This was not necessary - as he said, external factors (like int damage).
|
|
As for comparing this to Strength or other attributes, this is an incorrect comparison IMHO. In any case, there is a rule of minimum damage:Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.
Seems like applying the minimum damage rule works or failing that zero damage doesn't bother me either. You have been effectively neutralized, it happens sometimes.
This was not necessary - as he said, external factors (like int damage).
Remember that ability damage does not actually reduce your ability scores in The Pathfinder RPG.