|
If I throw Alchemist's Fire into a Web Spell, does it burn 9 squares (1 for the square hit, and 8 squares take Splash Damage), or 1 square of web away? Also, does the fire spread from those squares to engulf the entire web? It seems really weird if one 50 GP item can singlehandly defeat a Level 2 spell.
The strands of a web spell are flammable. A flaming weapon can slash them away as easily as a hand brushes away cobwebs. Any fire [to include fireball] can set the webs alight and burn away one 5-foot square in 1 round. All creatures within flaming webs take 2d4 points of fire damage from the flames.
[Bracketed] text added by me. Bold text highlighted by me.
I'm not going to say that you or your GM shouldn't allow AOE fire effects destroy more web, just pointing out what the spell's text actually says.
Yes, it would burn away 9 squares of web. You're doing fire damage to all 9 squares.
Really, we houseruled long ago that once you set webs on fire, the fire continues spreading out by 5 ft in all directions each round till the whole web is burned down. Makes much more sense that way, and is amusing to watch.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The alchemists fire burns all squares hit by the fire (as do area effect spells). The fire does not spread though.
As for defeating a 2nd level spell... if you are trapped in a web spell and you defeat it by spending a round burning yourself and your friends out, the spell has definitely had a desireable effect.
StreamOfTheSky and Dennis Baker, I hate to disagree with either (or both) of you on account of your habits of being correct, but the text of the spell doesn't seem to agree with you. Like I mentioned in my initial response, you aren't going to find me saying not to let AOE fire spells destroy more web since it makes perfect sense to me.
I will say, though, that you should expect, in a houserules-free environment (like PFS), to have any single damaging source of fire destroy one 5-foot square in a round (persistent fire damage will continue to destroy web at a rate of 1 square/round) and all creatures in the web to take 2d4 points of fire damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's fine if you disagree. I don't follow stupid RAW, never have been a proponent of that. A 20 ft radius fireball only burning one 5 ft square of web because web's description was poorly written is definitely going to be one of those times where what I say is not technically "correct."
It's pretty clear they meant any fire applied to a 5 ft square would burn that square away (and thus fire applied to 9 squares does so to 9) and they just...failed at rules-writing.
I also avoid PFS and other such organized play, for reasons like this. Of course, calling PFS houserule free is sort of a bad joke... they have a TON of houserules. Stuff that's banned because it's not family friendly or lets PCs make things during downtime, variant bonuses from classes instead of things they don't like... Those are all "houserules."
I can't disagree with your take on "houserule-free" being a joke since, really, they just decided that the biggest houserule will be "the following content is banned..."
I can't disagree with that "they just...failed at rules-writing," either. In my games, if any square of web takes even a point of fire damage, that square is destroyed and (here's where I houserule...) any creature in that square or a square adjacent to it take 2d4 points of fire damage. The following round, any creatures in those adjacent squares take another 2d4 points of fire damage, those squares' web is destroyed, and the flames go out. Why? because that's what makes sense to me.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
You are reading it wrong.
The rule does not say "For any given effect exactly one space is affected" that would be stupid. For a fireball, there is "fire" in every single square of it's area effect. Each space with "fire" in it is burned clear.
It is worded the way it is so it is clear the fire doesn't spread or burn more than one space.
Would dropping the Alchemist's Fire in one's own square be a Free Action, a Move Action, or a Standard Action?
Dropping a weapon is a free action, but the alchemist fire might not shatter if dropped because you normally need to "throw" it (make an ranged attack) for it to shatter.
Perhaps this is just out of stubbornness, but I still have to disagree on the letter of the law, so to speak. If the word "one" was replaced by "the," I would whole-heartedly agree with you. If it was replaced by "every affected" than there could really be no argument. Feel free to try to change my mind but we would only be arguing interpretation (since it really is not spelled out very well), rather than making a conclusive rules ruling.
That said, though, Dennis has actually written rules for PFRPG whereas I have not. If anybody is torn between interpretations, you probably ought to go with Dennis'.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
It doesn't say "per round" either so by your definition, a torch would light one space then be worthless afterwords. Wall of fire would burn one space then have flames covering a bunch of spaces filled with webs. Flaming sphere would burn one space, flame blade would light one space, large fire elementals could only burn one space...? I think.
I suppose you're right. In my minimalist interpretation (any given source destroys a single square for anyone who didn't bother reading the 13 whole posts that this thread is at the moment), any given source, be it a torch or a hole in space creating a permanent gate to elemental fire, would only destroy a single square no matter how long it lasted. I actually wrote an inference as literal interpretation; thank you for pointing that out.
This is part of why, by the way, I agree with you and SOTS (for how it should work, not for how it is written). It could have dealt to have a better description but with word counts and the price of full-color pages and so forth, if everything Paizo published included the degree of detail that many of us wish it did, we would be paying enormously and, for those of us who like print copies, carrying enormous books. By and by, the minutia of how effects interact with other effects could not realistically be documented to include every possibility.
I don't really feel like looking up the quote so I'll paraphrase: James Jacobs said something along the lines of "we have all the quality control we could ever need in the form of hundreds, maybe even thousands of GMs." I don't always agree with Mr. Jacobs, especially about rules, but I have to admit, rule 0 is the most important rule in any RPG book.
Anyway, zean, I hope you have all the information you need (possibly much more than you wanted) for your game to have dealt with the alchemist's fire vs. web issue. If you are the GM, I highly recommend trying to read the rules for exactly what is written, then adjust to suit your group's needs. Remember, if everybody is having fun, you can't be wrong.
Something of a thread Necro, but this is the most appropriate place for this question.
Alchemist's fire, or an Alchemist's bomb being thrown into a web, how far in can it penetrate?
Does it shatter when entering the webbing? Does it get caught in the webbing and not shatter? Does it get caught in the webbing and then detonate?
Given that the flask is flying, it probably isn't effected by difficult terrain. Does it need to make a combat maneuver or Escape Artist check to travel through the webs? If so, would those be made with the bonuses of the thrower?
Can you target a square within the web, assuming it's within 15, as past 20 feet the square has total cover, and is thus not able to be targeted?
The square, getting the bonus of +4 for being behind partial cover, does that mean that if you roll under a 14 on your ranged attack with the alchemist's fire/bomb, it scatters per the ranged scatter rule? If so, and the scatter roll is a 5, does the alchemist's fire then enter the square that had total cover before detonating?