I'm confused, no save (Alchemist discovery)


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

23 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Confusion Bomb* (Su): The alchemist’s bombs twist the target’s perception of friend and foe. A creature that takes a direct hit from a confusion bomb takes damage from the bomb and is under the effect of a confusion spell for 1 round per caster level of the alchemist. Reduce the amount of normal damage dealt by the bomb by 2d6 (so a bomb that would normally deal 6d6+4 points of damage deals 4d6+4 points of damage instead). An alchemist must be at least 8th level before selecting this discovery.

I think the phrase "unless they succeed at a Will save." was omitted somewhere. This seems pretty nasty otherwise.


I'm not sure that needs a save, since it requires you to hit the target with the bomb.


Are wrote:

I'm not sure that needs a save, since it requires you to hit the target with the bomb.

Needing to succeed at a ranged touch attack, particularly at higher levels, is no substitute for a saving throw.


Are wrote:

I'm not sure that needs a save, since it requires you to hit the target with the bomb.

True, but hitting with a bomb is all but automatic. I think in two adventure path installments (parts 1 and 2 of CotCT), I've missed with a grand total of 2 alchemist bombs other than on a natural 1 (18 Dex, Dex mutagen, Point Blank Shot give a +7 to hit even at 1st-level).


DMingNicholas wrote:
Are wrote:

I'm not sure that needs a save, since it requires you to hit the target with the bomb.

Needing to succeed at a ranged touch attack, particularly at higher levels, is no substitute for a saving throw.

Yeah, I missed the part where bombs were touch attacks. I'm going to use "I haven't had an Alchemist in my games yet" as my feeble excuse, even though it isn't really an excuse :)

In light of that, I agree it should have a saving throw.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

-scribbles note to house rule this one for his party alchemist-

Sovereign Court

0gre wrote:


I think the phrase "unless they succeed at a Will save." was omitted somewhere. This seems pretty nasty otherwise.

Why? It's confusion for a single round, not for multiple rounds. There is no necessity for a will save.


Hama wrote:
0gre wrote:


I think the phrase "unless they succeed at a Will save." was omitted somewhere. This seems pretty nasty otherwise.
Why? It's confusion for a single round, not for multiple rounds. There is no necessity for a will save.

A creature that takes a direct hit from a confusion bomb takes damage from the bomb and is under the effect of a confusion spell for 1 round per caster level of the alchemist.


Hama wrote:
0gre wrote:


I think the phrase "unless they succeed at a Will save." was omitted somewhere. This seems pretty nasty otherwise.
Why? It's confusion for a single round, not for multiple rounds. There is no necessity for a will save.
0gre wrote:
Confusion Bomb* (Su): The alchemist’s bombs twist the target’s perception of friend and foe. A creature that takes a direct hit from a confusion bomb takes damage from the bomb and is under the effect of a confusion spell for 1 round per caster level of the alchemist. Reduce the amount of normal damage dealt by the bomb by 2d6 (so a bomb that would normally deal 6d6+4 points of damage deals 4d6+4 points of damage instead). An alchemist must be at least 8th level before selecting this discovery.

Emphasis mine.

EDIT: Ninja'd


If it is not a mistake, it's a great example of how "oh the wizardy guy has to *touch* something? Let's make it better" goes so horribly wrong.


Question: where is this from? I can't find it in the alchemist's description. . .


I'd say a GM is well within the bounds of the discovery to house-rule a save, because it says they're under the effect of a confusion spell, and the spell DOES allow a save. But yeah, I think it needs to be clarified, because that's almost bad-ass enough for me to change my Discovery for my just-recently acquired 8th Alch level.

Contributor

12 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm looking into this. It probably is something like "if they fail a Will save" or "if they fail to save against the bomb...."


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I'm looking into this. It probably is something like "if they fail a Will save" or "if they fail to save against the bomb...."

Awesome, you may want to look into Terrible Remorse as well. Jason Nelson and I had some ideas about the intent of the spell in another thread further down in this forum, but it currently disables the target for 1 round per level regardless of saves.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I'm looking into this. It probably is something like "if they fail a Will save" or "if they fail to save against the bomb...."

Digging up an old post, but the issue is still there. Any updates on this?


The way I read this is: "and is under the effect of a confusion spell". Now, under the Confusion spell you have an entry for Effect we have: Range, Targets, Duration, Saving Throw. Sucks for my new awesome bomb, but I defaulted to saving throw myself. It's what's intended clearly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It doesn't need fixing. Not only does it require the ranged touch, it's also only single target. The power of the Confusion spell is that it's multitarget. Because ultimately you're using it to try and get some schmuck to attack his friend and set off a chain reaction of "bad guys killing each other." Alchemist would need to lob several bombs in order to replicate that.

On a more bizzare note, strictly as written...I'm not sure Confusion Bombs actually does anything meaningful. Yeah, it confuses. But confusion says if someone attacks you, instead of rolling d%, the victim just goes after whoever attacked him. Just to use Confusion Bombs in the first place requires attacking someone...


Stream, the Alchemist I was playing with was able to toss about 6 bombs in a single attack, if this was placed on all 6 bombs that could be 6 possible targets, so a clarification "might" not be a bad idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think it needs fixed -- confusion as a penalty sucks and you are taking a penalty on your damage too. What's more you can't combine it with other asterisked discoveries either so it has to be your normal damage.


Dolanar wrote:
Stream, the Alchemist I was playing with was able to toss about 6 bombs in a single attack, if this was placed on all 6 bombs that could be 6 possible targets, so a clarification "might" not be a bad idea.

I (fortunately) avoid games where the PCs are allowed to nova all their resources in a single encounter then take a nap. *shrug*

6 attacks... so, you had fast bombs, TWF, Rapid Shot, ITWF and...ok no, that's still not enough. How were you getting 6 attacks? Hastened, or just in the mid to high teens for level? An unhastened alchemist w/ all those feats/discoveries would need to be level 15 to have that many attacks. And he'd need to be level 15 to grab GTWF, so that's not an option, either. With haste you could pull this off by level 9, I suppose.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

It doesn't really matter because with just Rapid Shot and haste you can get four bombs per round at 8th level which is enough for confusion bomb to be pretty nasty.

As for novaing... *shrug* it's not any worse or more likely than the wizard burning all his highest level spells in the first encounter. People are either good at managing resources or they aren't.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why are we arguing this again?

Yes it requires no save and does 1 level per caster level. But if you allow a save its in every way worse than the confusion spell the wizard gets at the same level.

They need a ranged touch attack to affect one creature with 1 round / caster level with an 8th level requirement to take it.

Wizards get 100 + 10 ft/level range within a 15 ft radius where their enemies get a save.

You're trading out the ability to make a save on a single target ability for the ability to affect a 30 foot diameter aoe of the same effect at multiple times the distance.

It's clearly a trade off and one I don't consider too bad seeing as how an 8th level wizard could use this spell and turn an entire encounter instead of just one monster into a cake walk


The exact number of attacks could be one less, I don't recall & it wasn't my character, so I'm not 100% sure, but I know he did have all of those feats & we were around level 12 or so.


I should have looked this up before I posted the same question earlier this week. Was there a Faq ruling on this?


Wasn't changed in the last printing of UM, so I'm leaning towards it being the intent that there's no save.


Like many here, I think the Confusion Bomb where the target cannot save versus the Confusion effect is way overpowered. A Level 8 alchemist can take down a level 20+ foe with the bomb. A ranged touch attack roll is easy for a level 8 character to make against a level 20+ mob. That's clearly overpowered.


Doug Bailey wrote:
Like many here, I think the Confusion Bomb where the target cannot save versus the Confusion effect is way overpowered. A Level 8 alchemist can take down a level 20+ foe with the bomb. A ranged touch attack roll is easy for a level 8 character to make against a level 20+ mob. That's clearly overpowered.

I don't really see any issue with this spell. If you look under the confusion text it is not as huge of a disadvantage as people think.

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently. Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused character. Any confused character who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn, as long as it is still confused when its turn comes. Note that a confused character will not make attacks of opportunity against any creature that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).

So, say the alchemist hits the level 20 creature with a bomb. Next turn the confused creature is going to attack the alchemist unless someone else attacks him. The following rounds if the creature ever gets attacked his target switches and you do not have to roll. Worst case scenario for the creature from this level 8 bomb is that he takes 7d8 + Creatures Strength in damage as the party does nothing but watch the level 20 creature hit itself like a moron. Since the first round the creature attacked the alchemist.

I fail to see how this bomb allows a level 8 alchemist to solo a level 20 creature.


TaranSF wrote:
Doug Bailey wrote:
Like many here, I think the Confusion Bomb where the target cannot save versus the Confusion effect is way overpowered. A Level 8 alchemist can take down a level 20+ foe with the bomb. A ranged touch attack roll is easy for a level 8 character to make against a level 20+ mob. That's clearly overpowered.

I don't really see any issue with this spell. If you look under the confusion text it is not as huge of a disadvantage as people think.

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently. Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused character. Any confused character who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn, as long as it is still confused when its turn comes. Note that a confused character will not make attacks of opportunity against any creature that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).

So, say the alchemist hits the level 20 creature with a bomb. Next turn the confused creature is going to attack the alchemist unless someone else attacks him. The following rounds if the creature ever gets attacked his target switches and you do not have to roll. Worst case scenario for the creature from this level 8 bomb is that he takes 7d8 + Creatures Strength in damage as the party does nothing but watch the level 20 creature hit itself like a moron. Since the first round the creature attacked the alchemist.

I fail to see how this bomb allows a level 8 alchemist to solo a level 20 creature.

I still don't think a level 8 alchemist should be trying to "solo", or even engage in a full party against an CR 20 creatures because they have this ability :P

But, I don't think you are correct about the confused creature attacking the alchemist the next turn. The creature wasn't attacked yet WHILE confused, so the text about a confused creature attacking its attackers can't yet apply. There is a chart right before the text you cited that requires a d% roll. If 76-100 is rolled, quite clearly the chart requires the confused creature to attack the nearest target, not the creature who caused it to become confused. I think the line about attacking its attackers would only come into play if there were multiple creatures in its threatened area AFTER it was confused, then it would pick the one that attacked it most recently, if any, as its target on a 76-100 roll. Otherwise, it should pick the nearest one at random to attack.


setzer9999 wrote:

I still don't think a level 8 alchemist should be trying to "solo", or even engage in a full party against an CR 20 creatures because they have this ability :P

But, I don't think you are correct about the confused creature attacking the alchemist the next turn. The creature wasn't attacked yet WHILE confused, so the text about a confused creature...

It was not really my idea to attack the CR 20 with this level 8 Alchemist, but I was going with the flow of the topic. :p

Either way, if things go terribly for the alchemists opponent I can see how this could be used to defeat and equal CR. I mean your enemy with 4d6 + 4 damage and confusion and sit back and laugh. Worst case for the enemy is that he rolls to attack himself for the next 8 rounds. Which would be hilarious. So in the absolute best situation for the alchemist his enemy takes 4d6 + 4 + 8d8 + STR * 8 damage. That sounds pretty nasty for a level 8 character, but then again you'd have to have the enemy 51-75 on a d100 for 8 rounds in a row and you would be twiddling your thumbs.

Compare that to say Phantasmal Killer, which gives the enemy two saves, but in the best case scenario for the caster is your enemy is scared to death. :/

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I'm looking into this. It probably is something like "if they fail a Will save" or "if they fail to save against the bomb...."

Hi Sean,

Did you ever decide which direction to go with this?
I have a player asking about it.


Hopefully "no where." Or he will be adding a save but letting it confuse the entire splash radius. Either would be fine, really.


Yes, an attack which deals damage and forces the target to have 50% odds of effectively losing its turn (25% chance to do nothing, 25% chance to attack self) for X rounds / level of the attacker WITH NO SAVE is broken.

If my players had a problem with this interpretation, I'm sure the next NPC's they encounter would have a bounty hunter Alchemist who would happily show them the foolishness of such a line of thinking by chain Confusing the entire party whilst his buddies focus fired on individuals. This would quickly lead to several player deaths, if not a TPK. Fortunately, I have sensible players and we trust each other, so this would never actually come up.

Even if this were a Confusion effect for ONE round with no save it would be very strong. I MIGHT be able to see someone balancing it this way. At least, if nothing else, it should allow a Will save, as you're getting the equivalent of a 3rd-level spell (yes, Confusion is 4th, but it affects a burst) on each Bomb attack you choose to apply it to.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
setzer9999 wrote:


TaranSF wrote:


Pathfinder SRD wrote:
A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently. Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused character. Any confused character who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn, as long as it is still confused when its turn comes. Note that a confused character will not make attacks of opportunity against any creature that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).
So, say the alchemist hits the level 20 creature with a bomb. Next turn the confused creature is going to attack the alchemist unless someone else attacks him.
But, I don't think you are correct about the confused creature attacking the alchemist the next turn. The creature wasn't attacked yet WHILE confused, so the text about a confused creature attacking its attackers can't yet apply. There is a chart right before the text you cited that requires a d% roll. If 76-100 is rolled, quite clearly the chart requires the confused creature to attack the nearest target, not the creature who caused it to become confused. I think the line about attacking its attackers would only come into play if there were multiple creatures in its threatened area AFTER it was confused, then it would pick the one that attacked it most recently, if any, as its target on a 76-100 roll. Otherwise, it should pick the nearest one at random to attack.
My interpretation is in between these two:
  • TaranSF = If an alchemist successfully attacks with a confusion bomb, the enemy will retaliate for one round, unless attacked by someone else.
  • setzer9999 = The subject of a confusion bomb will only retaliate against an attack that occurred while under confusion, and only if it rolls "attack" (76-100 on d100).
  • Blueluck = The subject of a confusion bomb will only retaliate against an attack that occurred while under confusion, but does not have to roll d100 that turn, as it will automatically retaliate against its assailant.

Here's why I interpret it that way:

We know from spells like Invisibility that casting an offensive spell constitutes "an attack", so casting the spell Confusion constitutes an attack just as much as throwing a bomb does. The spell would effectively read, "Everyone in the area attacks you." Would any wizard ever cast the spell Confusion on a group of enemies? Why would Paizo publish a 4th level spell, and name it "confusion", if its primary effect is to make all of the targets attack whoever cast the spell? (Although a low level spell called "Taunt" or "Provoke" might be fun.) Conclusion, the attack that causes confusion doesn't provoke automatic retaliation.

On the other hand, I don't believe that a d100 role is necessary when an already confused character is targeted by an attack. The phrase, "automatically attacks its attackers" implies that there's nothing random going on; retaliation is automatic.

So, confuse away, but unless you want retaliation, get all of your non-confusion attacks in first!


The Confusion is applied at the same point as the damage, both of which are a result of the attack. The damage and the application of the Confusion status occur simultaneously. The wording specifically states "Any confused character who is attacked..." as the condition. The attack has already occurred when the Confusion Bomb applies its effect, ergo, that attack does not trigger retaliation.

Note that 'attack' in this case is defined as the attack roll to determine success. Note that the confusion entry also specifically says that they need to be attacked, not hit, to retaliate. So even if you attack a Confused target and miss, you are now a valid target of its retaliation, otherwise it would say "any confused character who is dealt damaged by an attacker".


Arturius Fischer wrote:
The Confusion is applied at the same point as the damage, both of which are a result of the attack. The damage and the application of the Confusion status occur simultaneously. The wording specifically states "Any confused character who is attacked..." as the condition. The attack has already occurred when the Confusion Bomb applies its effect, ergo, that attack does not trigger retaliation.

I agree.

Arturius Fischer wrote:
Note that 'attack' in this case is defined as the attack roll to determine success. Note that the confusion entry also specifically says that they need to be attacked, not hit, to retaliate. So even if you attack a Confused target and miss, you are now a valid target of its retaliation, otherwise it would say "any confused character who is dealt damaged by an attacker".

Why do you think an attack roll is required in this case? An attack roll isn't required to break Invisibility or Sanctuary, so casting Magic Missile at a confused person should also cause them to retaliate.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
StreamOfTheSky wrote:

It doesn't need fixing. Not only does it require the ranged touch, it's also only single target. The power of the Confusion spell is that it's multitarget. Because ultimately you're using it to try and get some schmuck to attack his friend and set off a chain reaction of "bad guys killing each other." Alchemist would need to lob several bombs in order to replicate that.

On a more bizzare note, strictly as written...I'm not sure Confusion Bombs actually does anything meaningful. Yeah, it confuses. But confusion says if someone attacks you, instead of rolling d%, the victim just goes after whoever attacked him. Just to use Confusion Bombs in the first place requires attacking someone...

As Baron Drelev has discovered, it do some other thing:

Confusion spell wrote:


Note that a confused character will not make attacks of opportunity against any creature that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).

Ooops, no AoO if they aren't used against the last guy you attacked or the guy that is attacking you.

Depending on your reading of the text it can even be interpreted as saying that you can use a AoO only against the last guy you attacked or the last guy that attacked you, with only one guy at a time in your list of target for AoO.

Confusion condition wrote:
A confused creature cannot tell the difference between ally and foe, treating all creatures as enemies. Allies wishing to cast a beneficial spell that requires a touch on a confused creature must succeed on a melee touch attack. If a confused creature is attacked, it attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight.

You can't tell friend from foe. You know all those beneficial spells, like "I am casting dimension door, let's get out of here before the PC slaughter us?" They require a willing target. You are confused? Sorry, you can't be a willing target.

The last line in the cited piece seem to reiterate the idea that the confused character can use an AoO only against the last creature that has fulfilled the requirements to become his target.

Even more fun, as he must attack the last creature that attacked him, if the last creature is a archer or a spellcaster casting a ranged spell he should move to engage that character, eating AoO in the process if there are melee character adjacent and then switching to the new target.
Play it well and the confused character will never make a full attack.
(he start a move action to engage the character attacking at range, suffer AoO, switch target to the melee character but has used a move action, so he is left with a standard action)


Diego Rossi wrote:
Even more fun, as he must attack the last creature that attacked him, if the last creature is a archer or a spellcaster casting a ranged spell he should move to engage that character, eating AoO in the process if there are melee character adjacent and then switching to the new target.

I have to disagree with this.

If a confused character is attacking another creature either because he rolled it on the chart, or the creature attacked him, nowhere does it say it has to be a melee attack. He could pull out a ranged weapon and attack or, arguably, even attack with a spell.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
TaranSF wrote:
Doug Bailey wrote:
Like many here, I think the Confusion Bomb where the target cannot save versus the Confusion effect is way overpowered. A Level 8 alchemist can take down a level 20+ foe with the bomb. A ranged touch attack roll is easy for a level 8 character to make against a level 20+ mob. That's clearly overpowered.

I don't really see any issue with this spell. If you look under the confusion text it is not as huge of a disadvantage as people think.

Pathfinder SRD wrote:
A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently. Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused character. Any confused character who is attacked automatically attacks its attackers on its next turn, as long as it is still confused when its turn comes. Note that a confused character will not make attacks of opportunity against any creature that it is not already devoted to attacking (either because of its most recent action or because it has just been attacked).

So, say the alchemist hits the level 20 creature with a bomb. Next turn the confused creature is going to attack the alchemist unless someone else attacks him. The following rounds if the creature ever gets attacked his target switches and you do not have to roll. Worst case scenario for the creature from this level 8 bomb is that he takes 7d8 + Creatures Strength in damage as the party does nothing but watch the level 20 creature hit itself like a moron. Since the first round the creature attacked the alchemist.

I fail to see how this bomb allows a level 8 alchemist to solo a level 20 creature.

Ok, let's make a counter example:

8th level party fight a 20th level fighter with a weapon in hand.
The party place an archer 30' north and the alchemist 30' south of him.
The other guys are space around the fighter with ranged weapons or spells.
The alchemist throw his confusion bomb at him and hit. The archer ready an action to fire at the fighter as soon as he is within 10' of the alchemist.
The other guys ready an action to fire when the fighter is within 25' of the archer.

Fighter turn, he move toward the alchemist, when he is at 10' the archer fire, hit of miss he become the target, the fighter reverse his movement and start to move toward the archer.

As soon as he get within 25' from the archer the other two guys fire. The last to fire will become the target.
The fighter change his movement trying to reach the last target but he hasn't enough movement left and in the end do nothing.

Alchemist turn, the fighter should be at about 35'-40' from him, the alchemist make a range attack and move within 30'.

All his friends ave used ready actions and act before the fighter, so they can prepare a new set of ready actions.

Rinse and repeat till the fighter is dead.

In this scenario the fighter (or any melee creature) is a robot with a broken program that you can control creating targets.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quantum Steve wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Even more fun, as he must attack the last creature that attacked him, if the last creature is a archer or a spellcaster casting a ranged spell he should move to engage that character, eating AoO in the process if there are melee character adjacent and then switching to the new target.

I have to disagree with this.

If a confused character is attacking another creature either because he rolled it on the chart, or the creature attacked him, nowhere does it say it has to be a melee attack. He could pull out a ranged weapon and attack or, arguably, even attack with a spell.

Depend on what weapon he/it has in hand.

If he is a ranged combatant it don't work so well, but he is still forced to attack the last guy that attacked him, if visible.

An interesting thought, what happen if the last guy that attacked him is invisible?


It's ok. Confusion doesn't end a character the way say a hold spell does.

Confused: If a confused creature is attacked, it attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight.

Two of the four rolls each round allow the character to act normally or attack the nearest creature which could just as easily be the PCs if fighting a larger single target creature like a dragon or giant.

A single target no save confusion effect isn't very powerful.


Diego Rossi wrote:


Depend on what weapon he/it has in hand.
If he is a ranged combatant it don't work so well, but he is still forced to attack the last guy that attacked him, if visible.

Why wouldn't he be able to draw a weapon? He's confused as to who's friend or foe, he hasn't forgotten how to fight. For that matter, if the subjects chooses to attack in melee, confused doesn't say that he has to walk stupidly toward his target. He could still choose a path that would provoke a minimum amount of AoOs from potential foes (i.e. everyone)

Quote:
An interesting thought, what happen if the last guy that attacked him is invisible?

The Confused condition in the glossary states that a confused creature attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight.

Since the condition in the glossary is virtually identical to the spell, save for a few descriptive sentences, I think it's safe to assume they're the same thing.


As a DM if I had an invisible creature attack him, he would try to kill it unless the invisible creature purposely set up the attack to make it look like another creature did it. A confused creature would be trying to pinpoint the target and swinging at the air around him. If you were watching a film, you would basically be watching the crazed, confused creature chasing what looked like air as he ran around the room swinging at the invisible creature.

That's what we DMs are there for: to take a situation that doesn't have an exact rule and create an interesting and sensible scenario for resolving the situation. Everything isn't covered by the rules. You have to use some DM creativity to solve a few issues.


Raith Shadar wrote:


A single target no save confusion effect isn't very powerful.

It is if it can be spammed several times a round.

It's not the 8th level Alchemist soloing a CR 20 Fighter that worries me, it's the 8th level Alchemist TPKing a 9th level party.

An Alchemist that wins initiative (not difficult for a DEX buffed Alchemist) can confuse the entire party before they can even act. Then each PC has a 25% chance to attack their nearest ally taking two PCs out of the fight.

More likely than not, 2 or 3 PCs will be down before any of them even get to make the roll for a 25% chance to act normally (just as likely, they roll to start attacking the next nearest PC.)

Meanwhile, the Alchemist is using the free rounds to buff himself to the nines so he can easily dispatch the last man standing.

Even if the PCs get lucky, your still looking at 1-2 PC deaths minimum; something that should never happen in a EL -2 encounter

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quantum Steve wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


Depend on what weapon he/it has in hand.
If he is a ranged combatant it don't work so well, but he is still forced to attack the last guy that attacked him, if visible.
Why wouldn't he be able to draw a weapon? He's confused as to who's friend or foe, he hasn't forgotten how to fight. For that matter, if the subjects chooses to attack in melee, confused doesn't say that he has to walk stupidly toward his target. He could still choose a path that would provoke a minimum amount of AoOs from potential foes (i.e. everyone)

Unless he has quickdraw drawing a weapon is a movement action, it require dropping his melee weapon, his shield if he is using one, and cause AoO unless he has the appropriate feats.

If he don't use a bow he can't even do that ad drawing a sling or crossbow is a move action and loading it is another move action, so he wouldn't be attacking.
Unless the character is a switch hitter or a ranged build he would be using his secondary weapon, doing a noticeably less damage than with his primary weapon

If he has guys in melee and move toward the ranged attacker it cause AoO. Then he can attack the guys in melee, but he will be limited to a single attack as he has tried to move.
If he drop weapon and shield, draw a bow and fire it he cause AoO, so the guy in melee with him get to attack him and he has to switch targets.
Next round he would get to make multiple attacks with the bow, eating plenty of AoO.

Quantum Steve wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
An interesting thought, what happen if the last guy that attacked him is invisible?

The Confused condition in the glossary states that a confused creature attacks the creature that last attacked it until that creature is dead or out of sight.

Since the condition in the glossary is virtually identical to the spell, save for a few descriptive sentences, I think it's safe to assume they're the same thing.

Exactly, it attack the last creature that attacked it, until that creature is dead or out of sight.

But an invisible creature is "out of sight" (barring true seeing or see invisibility).
Both the confusion condition and the spell say that "A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently." Our guy has an indicated action (attack the last creature that attacked you) and a condition that stop that indicated action (the creature is out of sight). So what he do? Roll his action casually or he does nothing but babble incoherently?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quantum Steve wrote:
Raith Shadar wrote:


A single target no save confusion effect isn't very powerful.

It is if it can be spammed several times a round.

It's not the 8th level Alchemist soloing a CR 20 Fighter that worries me, it's the 8th level Alchemist TPKing a 9th level party.

An Alchemist that wins initiative (not difficult for a DEX buffed Alchemist) can confuse the entire party before they can even act. Then each PC has a 25% chance to attack their nearest ally taking two PCs out of the fight.

More likely than not, 2 or 3 PCs will be down before any of them even get to make the roll for a 25% chance to act normally (just as likely, they roll to start attacking the next nearest PC.)

Meanwhile, the Alchemist is using the free rounds to buff himself to the nines so he can easily dispatch the last man standing.

Even if the PCs get lucky, your still looking at 1-2 PC deaths minimum; something that should never happen in a EL -2 encounter

I would say that throwing a bomb that do damage and confuse the target is attacking someone, so they would try to attack the alchemist, unless he is "out of sight".


Diego Rossi wrote:

[

Unless he has quickdraw drawing a weapon is a movement action

So? Where does confused say the subject can't take any other actions?

One could make the arguement that if a confused creature was unable to attack his target in melee (for example, because he couldn't reach the target, as in your example above) he must use an alternate weapon if possible.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Exactly, it attack the last creature that attacked it, until that creature is dead or out of sight.

But an invisible creature is "out of sight" (barring true seeing or see invisibility).
Both the confusion condition and the spell say that "A confused character who can't carry out the indicated action does nothing but babble incoherently." Our guy has an indicated action (attack the last creature that attacked you) and a condition that stop that indicated action (the creature is out of sight). So what he do? Roll his action casually or he does nothing but babble incoherently?

Attacking the last creature isn't one of the indicated actions, it's an action that bypasses the normal means of deciding an action.

If the last creature that attacked it becomes invisible, or ducks behind a wall, or dies, it would roll again on the chart on it's turn.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quantum Steve wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


Unless he has quickdraw drawing a weapon is a movement action

So? Where does confused say the subject can't take any other actions?

One could make the arguement that if a confused creature was unable to attack his target in melee (for example, because he couldn't reach the target, as in your example above) he must use an alternate weapon if possible.

The points, that you continue to sidestep, are that:

1) if he switch weapons he trade his iterative attacks for 1 attack and is forced to drop his melee weapon (drawing a weapon is a move acion, putting it away a move action, you can't do both and attack);

2) he trade his best weapon for a secondary weapon;

3) he cause an AoO every time he fire the bow, so you can force him to switch target every time he fire the bow.

All the above if the target has a ranged weapon or a ranged attack.
If he hasn't a ranged attack his only option is to attack in melee the guy that has drawn his attention with the last attack.

How many monsters can be made totally ineffective with this tactic?
For free as the confusion bombs have no Saving Throw?

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Hmm, so it says "12 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ" above Sean's post. I assumed that meant the ruling was under the Ultimate Magic section of the FAQ but I can't find it. It could be that I'm just misunderstanding this or I'm not going to the right spot.
Any thoughts?


Quantum Steve wrote:
Raith Shadar wrote:


A single target no save confusion effect isn't very powerful.

It is if it can be spammed several times a round.

It's not the 8th level Alchemist soloing a CR 20 Fighter that worries me, it's the 8th level Alchemist TPKing a 9th level party.

An Alchemist that wins initiative (not difficult for a DEX buffed Alchemist) can confuse the entire party before they can even act. Then each PC has a 25% chance to attack their nearest ally taking two PCs out of the fight.

More likely than not, 2 or 3 PCs will be down before any of them even get to make the roll for a 25% chance to act normally (just as likely, they roll to start attacking the next nearest PC.)

Meanwhile, the Alchemist is using the free rounds to buff himself to the nines so he can easily dispatch the last man standing.

Even if the PCs get lucky, your still looking at 1-2 PC deaths minimum; something that should never happen in a EL -2 encounter

So now we're claiming a Dex buffed Alchemist is going to TPK a party by easily beating them on initiative and hitting them all with confusion bombs expending at a minimum four bombs to maybe TPK a party? That's how we're going to decide this ability?

What if the Cleric makes a single roll and casts Calm Emotion? The effect ends, the alchemist is out four bombs, his attack is rendered useless.

Balancing an ability based on an uncommon scenario doesn't change my mind. I don't think a single target no save confusion effect is very powerful. The changes of four characters all being confused missing their actions every round is fairly slim. When I play a cleric, I usually have a calm emotions memorized for such occasions.


Raith Shadar wrote:
When I play a cleric, I usually have a calm emotions memorized for such occasions.

As a cleric I almost never have it memorized for that reason.... I have it memorized in case we are attacked by a barbarian.

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / I'm confused, no save (Alchemist discovery) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.