If a feat requires a weapon to deal bludeoning damage to work, and a weapon deals bludgeoning and piercing damage (namely firearms), does it still qualify (as it deals bludeoning damage) or does the dual damage supercede that? As screwball as it may seem, I'm wondering if RAW I can use Sap Adept and Sap Master with a firearm if it is a merciful weapon or if I have the Bludgeoner feat.
I'm not sure of the actual rules on that, just pointing out that you can do nonlethal gun damage with salt shot.
SunsetPsychosis wrote: I'm not sure of the actual rules on that, just pointing out that you can do nonlethal gun damage with salt shot. That can only be used with scatter weapons using a scatter attack, and a scatter attack does not allow for precision based damage, such as sneak attack.
If the feat says "a Bludgeoning weapon" or "deals Bludgeoning damage", then a "B and P" weapon works. If the feat says something like "a non-Piercing weapon" or "only Bludgeoning" then it won't.
Firearms deal Bludgeoning damage. Any feat that keys specifically off of dealing Bludgeoning damage will work with firearms as long as you can meet other requirements in the feat.
Sap Master rogue + cannon + Vital Strike + Invisibility = one hell of a headache.
Or you can custom make a +1 Merciful assault rifle XD
SunsetPsychosis wrote: Sap Master rogue + cannon + Vital Strike + Invisibility = one hell of a headache.
Or you can custom make a +1 Merciful assault rifle XD
Okay, even if it doesn't technically say it, even I would rule that you can't deal nonlethal damage with a freaking cannon (or any other siege weapon for that matter), even with the Bludeoner feat, unless it's enchnated with the Merciful weapon quality (which just sounds like all sorts of wrong, but still technically doable since it falls under "a wizard did it" clause). Heck, I already know I'm stretching it with a firearm, since under normal conditions you can't deal nonlethal damage with ranged attacks.
Also, even advanced firearms don't get past wild west level tech, so an assault rifle is a bit much. A merciful double barrel shotgun is plenty enough power.
Cannon + Vital Strike...I see nothing RAW that says you can't do that...but that's just disgusting and I think against RAI...
Roaming Shadow wrote: Heck, I already know I'm stretching it with a firearm, since under normal conditions you can't deal nonlethal damage with ranged attacks. Citation?
Page 191 of the core rulebook:
"Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage:
You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to
deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty
on your attack roll."
As this is the only place it specifies dealing nonlethal damage with a lethal weapon, and specifies melee weapon, it therefore exlcudes ranged weapons by my way of reading, otherwise they wouldn't have specified "melee weapon".
Roaming Shadow wrote: Page 191 of the core rulebook:
"Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage:
You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to
deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty
on your attack roll."
As this is the only place it specifies dealing nonlethal damage with a lethal weapon, and specifies melee weapon, it therefore exlcudes ranged weapons by my way of reading, otherwise they wouldn't have specified "melee weapon".
Hm...
bolas
softstones
blunt arrows
merciful ranged weapons
Minimum damage converting to non-lethal
All point to ranged weapons being perfectly capable of dealing non-lethal damage. While not common it isn't the same thing as not being possible.
Actually I would say a "B and P" weapon won't qualify for the "Blunt weapon only" feats, because the damage is piercing as well.
Bullets still penetrate the skin and all, and do damage, and that's lethal damage.
A "B or P" weapon however would qualify.
Allia Thren wrote: Actually I would say a "B and P" weapon won't qualify for the "Blunt weapon only" feats, because the damage is piercing as well. You can say it, but it isn't true. Or rather, isn't true for the feats in question. Sap Adept and Sap Master just specify that you have to deal nonlethal sneak attack damage with a bludgeoning weapon. Not "a weapon that only deals bludgeoning damage" or "a weapon that doesn't deal slashing or piercing damage". "A bludgeoning weapon". Bullets are bludgeoning weapons.
The feat actually also says: "Normal: You take a –4 penalty on attack rolls when using a lethal weapon to deal nonlethal damage"
Now if you look at the combat section: "You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll."
So RAI is clearly that Bludgeoner only works with melee blunt weapons, and not arrows or bullets.
I would even say that's what RAW says, but apperently you won't agree.
Would basically be a giant Beanbag launcher? So why not cannon nonleathal?? unlike the beanbag guns police use to stop people (does not knock them uncoincous just hurts but doesnt kill) this cannon will flattly knock them out (big arse beanbags).do not kill them, just knock them out. same with rifle that deals nonlethal.. its would be just like a bean bag gun. I would have no trouble rulling that it works.. you have to stop overthinking things. once you do the game becomes easy to handle.
That would be special ranged weapon or ammo that deals nonlethal, i see no problem with that.
But you won't load a 12 gauge shotgun with normal ammo, shoot someone and say "Hey, look at that, I shot a hole in his chest, but don't worry, it's nonlethal"
Abraham spalding wrote: Roaming Shadow wrote: Page 191 of the core rulebook:
"Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage:
You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to
deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty
on your attack roll."
As this is the only place it specifies dealing nonlethal damage with a lethal weapon, and specifies melee weapon, it therefore exlcudes ranged weapons by my way of reading, otherwise they wouldn't have specified "melee weapon".
Hm...
bolas
softstones
blunt arrows
merciful ranged weapons
Minimum damage converting to non-lethal
All point to ranged weapons being perfectly capable of dealing non-lethal damage. While not common it isn't the same thing as not being possible.
All of thoes point to non lethal weapons except the last which is a special case. Roaming shadow's point was that Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage can be done only by melee weapons, per the rule. I have to agree.
Abraham spalding wrote: Hm...
bolas
softstones
blunt arrows
merciful ranged weapons
Minimum damage converting to non-lethal
All point to ranged weapons being perfectly capable of dealing non-lethal damage. While not common it isn't the same thing as not being possible.
First of all, those weapons are specifically nonlethal weapons, and deal nonlethal damage by default. If I remember corectly (and I'll look if asked) they take a -4 penalty to attack if you try to do lethal damage with them, so they're simply the reverse of lethal weapons. I was refering to lethal damage damage such as bows, slings, crossbows, and firearms (loaded with default ammunition).
Second, I said "normal conditions", which means nonmagically altered. By RAW, according to what I quoted, you could not normally take a -4 penalty to attack to deal nonlethal damage with a lethal ranged weapon. Attacking something with DR or you having penaltys enough to drop your damage below 1 isn't exactly a "normal consition" either, and you certainly wouldn't want to do that in order to deal nonlethal damage; there's better ways of doing it.
Allia Thren wrote: Actually I would say a "B and P" weapon won't qualify for the "Blunt weapon only" feats, because the damage is piercing as well.
Bullets still penetrate the skin and all, and do damage, and that's lethal damage.
A "B or P" weapon however would qualify.
Actually, Sap Adept and Sap Master don't specify Bludgeoning only, just "a bludgeoning weapon". Had it said "only bludeoning" I wouldn't have asked. That's why I can see it interpreted both ways.
Tharg The Pirate King wrote: Would basically be a giant Beanbag launcher? So why not cannon nonleathal?? unlike the beanbag guns police use to stop people (does not knock them uncoincous just hurts but doesnt kill) this cannon will flattly knock them out (big arse beanbags).do not kill them, just knock them out. same with rifle that deals nonlethal.. its would be just like a bean bag gun. I would have no trouble rulling that it works.. you have to stop overthinking things. once you do the game becomes easy to handle. Except that's not what he was saying. He was saying that because a cannon deals bludeoning damage, use Bludeoner (which is what I think he meant when he said Sap Master) to do nonlethal damage with a standard cannonball. Homerule ammunition like a "beanbag shot" would be another story, but that's not what he was saying. Remember, we're talking Pathfinder here, and even the "advanced firearms" don't get past wild west tech.
Roaming Shadow wrote: Abraham spalding wrote: Hm...
bolas
softstones
blunt arrows
merciful ranged weapons
Minimum damage converting to non-lethal
All point to ranged weapons being perfectly capable of dealing non-lethal damage. While not common it isn't the same thing as not being possible.
First of all, those weapons are specifically nonlethal weapons, and deal nonlethal damage by default. If I remember corectly (and I'll look if asked) they take a -4 penalty to attack if you try to do lethal damage with them, so they're simply the reverse of lethal weapons. I was refering to lethal damage damage such as bows, slings, crossbows, and firearms (loaded with default ammunition).
Second, I said "normal conditions", which means nonmagically altered. By RAW, according to what I quoted, you could not normally take a -4 penalty to attack to deal nonlethal damage with a lethal ranged weapon. Attacking something with DR or you having penaltys enough to drop your damage below 1 isn't exactly a "normal consition" either, and you certainly wouldn't want to do that in order to deal nonlethal damage; there's better ways of doing it.
No the Blunt arrows just deal Bludgeoning dmg and its lethal. It says in the description that it CAN be used to deal non lethal but at a -4 penalty.
Guns cannot be nonlethal unless the ammunition is nonlethal
Alchemical Cartridge Salt Shot solves this it is treated as non lethal and works in all scatterweapons
As for the cannon, you could load it with Salt shot (load into any scatter weapon) which is Non Lethal but still treated as Bludengoning. same as a scatter gun, and anyone who hunts with guns can tell you, shotguns and guns that scatter pellets are only lethal at closer ranges (and this is with normal shot), once you go far enough back the weapon is no longer lethal, I have many a relative who has been pelted with buckshot. So for arguments sake I see no reason for it to not work.Since this is a fantasy game there is no reason why you cant have a non lethal cannon. For the beanbag idea it shouldnt be too hard for a DM to work a formula up for ammunition that is beanbag or similar soft yet nondeadly (use salt shot as basis but instead not be alchemical) ammunition.
Again, I'm not saying ranged weapons can't be use to deal nonlethal damage ever. Yes, there are ways of dealing nonlethal damage with a ranged weapon, such as having the Merciful enchantment or loading a scatter weapon with salt shot. However, siege weapons have their own ammunition, seperate from firearms, and there is no siege engine ammunition RAW that deals nonlethal damage. Strangely though, grape shot is not listed among the entires of siege engine ammo, which seems like an oversight. Yes, as I've also said you can have a Merciful Cannon, which to say the least paints an interesting mental image for a direct hit on a medium humanoiud target. A nonlethal hit from a cannonball fired full force just sounds comical.
I'll admit I was hasty in my statement and so misrepresented the blunt arrows. As for realistic fireamrs, as I've said to some others, firearms already carry enough rules baggage without adding more. Besides, that's why pellets are cones. Buckshot, in your example, uses pellets, so beyond the listed cone size (20-30 feet depending on the scatter weapon), it can't do any meaningful damage with any pellets that stray that far. Yes, yes, in real life it works differently, but remember, Pathfinder is not a simulation of real life. Shotgun slugs I believe are solid ammunition that don't involve pellets, and so behave differently, more akin to a rifle (and are refered to as bullets in Ultimate Combat for simplicities sake).
Perhaps I needed to be more specific in my query. What I'm looking for is for a rougue, wielding a pistol (or pistol varient), to be able to deal nonlethal damage base and so use sneak attack with it (which requires the weapon to be nonlethal or be capable of dealing nonlethal damage without having to use the weapon against it's nature, ie the -4 penalty), using the Skirmisher alternate class ability and the Sap Master feat. I have another rules question thread as to wether skirmisher allows a rogue to gain the advantage of Sap Master, and now it seems that perhaps I should have combined the threads in a single "does the build work RAW?" question thread.
It sounds like it should work by RAW to me -- I'm not seeing anything that makes it not work.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
