|
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So what happens when an Alchemist throws a Bomb at a character (direct hit) that has the Deflect Arred and/or Snatch Arrows Feat.
Deflect Arrows says "when you wuld normally be hit by an attack from a ranged weapon, you may deflect it so that you may take no damage from it", but at the end also adds that "ranged attacks generated by natural weapons or spell effects can't be deflected"?
Bombs use "magical reserves" but unlike Infusions do not use spells and do count as weapons, (though it specifies they become inert when used by anyone else). They are treated as Splash weapons on page 202 of the Core book.
RAW, Deflect Arrows' text only seems to indicate that the ability can't deflect attacks like rays and other ranged touch attacks, for obvious reasons. While the alchemist's bombs are magical in nature, they aren't produced by a spell effect, so I'd say that it's perfectly possible to deflect them.
Try asking Mr. Ogre here
Given it doesn´t state any distance that you are able to toss the snatched weapon, I think treating it as landing in your square (just not a direct attack on you personally) is the best interpretation here... i.e. you would still be effected by the Splash damage, and Splash damage apply to everybody else nearby as if it hit your square (for determining center of radius). Still, very nice effect.
RAW, Deflect Arrows' text only seems to indicate that the ability can't deflect attacks like rays and other ranged touch attacks, for obvious reasons. While the alchemist's bombs are magical in nature, they aren't produced by a spell effect, so I'd say that it's perfectly possible to deflect them.
Isn't an alchemist's bomb a splash weapon, and therefore a touch attack?
Okay, so quoting from the feat description:
Unusually massive ranged weapons (such as boulders or ballista bolts) and ranged attacks generated by natural attacks or spell effects can't be deflected.
It appears the feat description doesn't say anything about ranged touch attacks (other than those granted by spell effects). Bombs are a supernatural ability, so it looks like it might work here, at least in negating a direct hit.
pg. 27 APG lists bombs as explosive splash weapons. So I would say that the feats work on them. However since Deflect Arrows gives no indication of how far away the weapon in question flies after deflection I think it would be fair to have it deal splash damage to the Monk as the vial lands within 5 feet of him. If he has Snatch Arrows then he could catch and then throw the vial back rendering it inert. So with the lesser feat the Alchemist at least gets splash damage on the Monk but with the greater feat the Monk renders the Alchemist's Bomb inert.
Oh and the if the Alchemist has Quick Bombs then he can throw another so the Monk doesn't get to completely negate his ability as Snatch Arrows can only be used once a round.
pg. 27 APG lists bombs as explosive splash weapons. So I would say that the feats work on them. However since Deflect Arrows gives no indication of how far away the weapon in question flies after deflection I think it would be fair to have it deal splash damage to the Monk as the vial lands within 5 feet of him. If he has Snatch Arrows then he could catch and then throw the vial back rendering it inert. So with the lesser feat the Alchemist at least gets splash damage on the Monk but with the greater feat the Monk renders the Alchemist's Bomb inert.
Hmm, one idea on how what happens with Deflect Arrows vs. a thrown splash weapon might be to treat it as a missed ranged touch attack roll and roll randomly on 1d8 as detailed on pg. 202.
pg. 27 APG lists bombs as explosive splash weapons. So I would say that the feats work on them. However since Deflect Arrows gives no indication of how far away the weapon in question flies after deflection I think it would be fair to have it deal splash damage to the Monk as the vial lands within 5 feet of him. If he has Snatch Arrows then he could catch and then throw the vial back rendering it inert. So with the lesser feat the Alchemist at least gets splash damage on the Monk but with the greater feat the Monk renders the Alchemist's Bomb inert.Hmm, one idea on how what happens with Deflect Arrows vs. a thrown splash weapon might be to treat it as a missed ranged touch attack roll and roll randomly on 1d8 as detailed on pg. 202.
OOOoooo....I like it!
It's actually funny this is being brought up. In a weekly game I run there is an Alchemist who keeps missing by cover and hitting the Druid (using the 3.X providing cover / hitting cover system - haven't looked to see if it carried over to PF or not, but the group likes it, and it generally aids them more than hinders them). The Druid asked if Gloves of Arrow Snaring would work to save himself a bunch of damage and either toss it back (there has already been retaliation in the form of Call Lightning after the Druid was dropped into negatives by a poor shot) or redirect it when their mad bomber's attacks go wrong. My logic was that if Snatch Arrows will let someone catch little shuriken, why not bomb - it certainly wasn't a ray. Made the next villian have a deadly trick as well since they just happened to have Snatch Arrows anyway.
|
|
Given it doesn´t state any distance that you are able to toss the snatched weapon, I think treating it as landing in your square (just not a direct attack on you personally) is the best interpretation here... i.e. you would still be effected by the Splash damage, and Splash damage apply to everybody else nearby as if it hit your square (for determining center of radius). Still, very nice effect.
Apologies, I misunderstood what you meant. I was thinking you meant that the Alchemist should just go for area attacks so you wouldn't have to worry about it.
No prob :-)
|
|
There is one part of the alchemist's bombs that you're missing out on that would ruin the ol' snatch and throw...
An alchemist’s bomb, like an extract, becomes inert if used or carried by anyone else.
So even if you do allow a character to snatch a bomb instead of it hitting them, it becomes inert as soon as they do.
In my games I wouldn't let them be deflected or snatched. As soon as they hit the character, whether normal hit, deflected, or snatched, they'd break, since thats what they're supposed to do. Plus being supernatural abilities makes them close enough to a spell effect that I would rule it not snatchable.
Maybe not RAW, but how it works in my game.
They have a fight, Alchemist wins.
Alchemist man.
I would totally allow a character to knock bombs away from them. I'm now imagining the movie scenes where people toss the grenade back at the enemy.
ELH had this combo for monks (and, with a web enhancement, high wis fighters). You were able to deflect disintegrate and orb spells too, an infinite number of times per round.
I hope they make it come back in a non-epic version like other feats lke the rend nad similar stuff.
About splash damage: the monk has evasion (generally) after a while, so is "mostly harmless" deflect the bomb on our feet to, IIRC.
Snatch Arrows would certainly be useful for repelling bombs, especially since you can throw them back for free. That is, if grabbing Alchemist bombs is allowed at all. For some reason I'm seeing pictures of the Green Goblin and Spiderman in my head now.
It would seem to me that the very actions involved in Deflecting Arrows would set the bomb off. a bomb explodes on contact, unlike an arrow it does not have to penetrate hard AC to do its job.
The act of handing a charged bomb to someone else does not cause it to explode. It causes it to become inert instead.
I think the idea of splash damage for tDeflect Arrows feat is good (the bomb is batted away as it explodes, dealing less damage). At the same time, I would say that the Snatch Arrows feat lets the bomb be caught in such a manner as to render it inert (as if it was handed to them).
It would seem to me that the very actions involved in Deflecting Arrows would set the bomb off. a bomb explodes on contact, unlike an arrow it does not have to penetrate hard AC to do its job.
+1, good point
The act of handing a charged bomb to someone else does not cause it to explode. It causes it to become inert instead.
How polite of the alchemist to simply hand his bombs to his enemies instead of throwing them!
I kid, but seriously. The flask or container is thrown with enough force to break the container, thus violently expelling the contents.
A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact, splashing or scattering its contents over its target and nearby creatures or objects.
I might allow Snatch Arrows to catch the bomb though (like catching an egg)
|
You could always house rule it so that Snatch arrows would catch it, but still they would need to make a reflex save to keep it from breaking.
When not looking at it from an alchemists point of view, do you allow the monk with snatch arrows to catch a flask of alchemist fire, flash of acid, or a tanglefoot bag?
|
|
So this has been debated a few times in the past. In the first referenced thread Ravenot makes an Excellent Point. I'm not sure I agree 100% but it's the best answer I've seen.
Essentially bombs do full damage on a direct hit and the monks ability to deflect ranged projectiles would prevent a direct hit. The monk would almost certainly be in the splash radius regardless.
Just to muddy the waters a bit Josh Frost (who was the PFS coordinator for Paizo at the time) suggested that a monks could not only deflect the bombs but could throw them back. Now Josh isn't one of the rules developers and I I disagree with this due to the wording in the alchemist class but I certainly respect his judgement and if another GM let a monk player or NPC do this I wouldn't argue.
All that said... neither point is super clear and if I'm playing an alchemist I wouldn't complain if the GM ran it either way. As a GM I allow Deflect but don't allow using Snatch to return fire. (Though I respect Josh's judgement when I'm GMing PFS games).
|
|
Just to muddy the waters a bit Josh Frost (who was the PFS coordinator for Paizo at the time) suggested that a monks could not only deflect the bombs but could throw them back. Now Josh isn't one of the rules developers and I I disagree with this due to the wording in the alchemist class but I certainly respect his judgement and if another GM let a monk player or NPC do this I wouldn't argue.
This might go back to the 3.5 days when with Snatch Arrows you actualy did use all the bonus of th projectile, with your own attack bonus. I believe it was in the errata or the FAQ. So if a class got made all magic rocks that they threw +1 (but only for them), and someone with Snatch Arrow shot it right back at them, it was still a +1 Rock, but justbecase they had every archery feat in the book and a +400 Dex, yo still used your Dex and did not get any of those feats. PF has not really clarified how that works.
So let me get this strait, its a small, breakable vial filled with chemicals that explode with magical energy on impact, possibly releasing sonic energy or catching you on fire, and you want to hit it with your hand instead of trying to get out of the way?
What were the rules for regenerating fingers again?
|
|
So let me get this strait, its a small, breakable vial filled with chemicals that explode with magical energy on impact, possibly releasing sonic energy or catching you on fire, and you want to hit it with your hand instead of trying to get out of the way?
Yeah it's an incredible 'feat' of super human skill. Thus it's called a 'feat'. Ultimately this is where the name 'feat' came from.
Second, deflect arrows already allows a monk to deflect a flaming axe spinning at him without losing fingers which is pretty wild.
Nothing in the bombs description says they are hair triggers that explode at the slightest touch, they rely on a "direct hit". The main damage is largely based on the idea that they hit their target squarely and it explodes directly on them. On a 'glancing blow' such as when someone pushes it aside using a feat they would only take splash damage.
I agree that it's not completely clear, I can only tell you how I would run it and what my search fu reveals.
Id say the monk gets to deflect the bomb, and I am sure the alchemist would be impressed. That said, normally a Alchemist shouldn't be able to hit the monk in the first place. if the bomb gets deflected, it should go off in an adjacent square then the monk just uses his evasion. Problem solved. Of course, now the monk has used his deflect arrow for the turn against that one bomb.
And what is it with alchemists and friendly fire anyway? o.0