Skinsend

[Bbauzh ap Aghauzh]

PFS does not make up new rules with the exception of a few to keep organized play running smoothly.

So I can guarantee that before they create a new rule for this corner case, they would just ban it.

[Tactical Monkey]

Fluff wise, it makes sense to me in why would an alchemist who might be dressed up as a mad doctor bother to go up to some dangerous brute other than to incapacitate.

Rules wise, I can see this defiantly getting changed or banned as well. Its not an inherently broken thing in combination but in how its used.

Its an amusing trick that gave an alchemist a certain edge. Though the alchemist already has plenty of ways to be cruel to his foes.

[BigNorseWolf]

There's no rules for having someone else cast a self only spell on you against your will, but the DM has more than enough argument to say it doesn't work at all or that it allows a save.

[neferphras]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

There's no rules for having someone else cast a self only spell on you against your will, but the DM has more than enough argument to say it doesn't work at all or that it allows a save.

I used to be on the side of "this should be outlawed" then i heard that there were fighter type characters out there averaging 50 damage a hit by abusing one rule or another. I no longer have an issue with this, in fact i will be using this trick from now on.

[talbanus]

neferphras wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

There's no rules for having someone else cast a self only spell on you against your will, but the DM has more than enough argument to say it doesn't work at all or that it allows a save.

I used to be on the side of "this should be outlawed" then i heard that there were fighter type characters out there averaging 50 damage a hit by abusing one rule or another. I no longer have an issue with this, in fact i will be using this trick from now on.

And *this* response is why the powers-that-be need to actively resource to produce errata and rulings to maintain game balance. Pouring through all the books, trying to come up with broken ... erm, I mean high powered combinations that can end combats quickly and decisively isn't my idea of fun. However, it is fun for a lot of players (including some of my friends). However, if you are going to put out enough new character capabilities often enough that your player base is effectively continuously beta-testing your product, then PLEASE react to the results of the beta testing in a timely and effective manner. That way less of my table time would get absorbed by build discussions and rules interpretation arguments.

Thank You

[Cold Napalm]

neferphras wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

There's no rules for having someone else cast a self only spell on you against your will, but the DM has more than enough argument to say it doesn't work at all or that it allows a save.

I used to be on the side of "this should be outlawed" then i heard that there were fighter type characters out there averaging 50 damage a hit by abusing one rule or another. I no longer have an issue with this, in fact i will be using this trick from now on.

50...bah. You can do 120 by 6 :P .

[neferphras]

Cold Napalm wrote:

neferphras wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

There's no rules for having someone else cast a self only spell on you against your will, but the DM has more than enough argument to say it doesn't work at all or that it allows a save.

I used to be on the side of "this should be outlawed" then i heard that there were fighter type characters out there averaging 50 damage a hit by abusing one rule or another. I no longer have an issue with this, in fact i will be using this trick from now on.

50...bah. You can do 120 by 6 :P .

thank you for supporting my position. :-)

[neferphras]

I almost hate to resurrect this Thread, but thought I should put this out there as a question.

So Touch Injection reads
You must hold an elixir, infused extract, poison, or potion in hand as you cast this spell. The held substance drains from its container into a magical sac in your body. While the spell lasts, you can deliver the substance with a mere touch. To do so to an opponent, you must make a successful melee touch attack. If you hit, the substance takes effect immediately, despite any onset period, and that opponent receives the normal saving throw (if any) against the substance. If you miss, the substance remains in the magical sac for you to use later.

This spell protects you from poison in the sac, but unless you have the poison use class feature, you suffer a 5% chance of exposing yourself to the poison when you first cast the spell. If you roll a natural 1 while attempting to inject the poison into an enemy, you are exposed to it.

It is a 2nd level alchemist 3rd Sorc Wiz spell
Polypurpose Panacea is level 1 for each
SkinSend is level 2 for each

So yes the Infusion discover makes this trick EASIER to do for an Alchemist because you can make it work for any spell they cast. But honestly, if you are going to pull this puppy out of the hat, why is it not worth the 50 gold for a potion? I mean 50 gold for a potion of PolyPurpose Panacea is well worth the benefit. Am i missing some game mechanic that makes the potion route not as effective, if not a bit expensive.

[Cold Napalm]

neferphras wrote:

I almost hate to resurrect this Thread, but thought I should put this out there as a question.

So Touch Injection reads
You must hold an elixir, infused extract, poison, or potion in hand as you cast this spell. The held substance drains from its container into a magical sac in your body. While the spell lasts, you can deliver the substance with a mere touch. To do so to an opponent, you must make a successful melee touch attack. If you hit, the substance takes effect immediately, despite any onset period, and that opponent receives the normal saving throw (if any) against the substance. If you miss, the substance remains in the magical sac for you to use later.

This spell protects you from poison in the sac, but unless you have the poison use class feature, you suffer a 5% chance of exposing yourself to the poison when you first cast the spell. If you roll a natural 1 while attempting to inject the poison into an enemy, you are exposed to it.

It is a 2nd level alchemist 3rd Sorc Wiz spell
Polypurpose Panacea is level 1 for each
SkinSend is level 2 for each

So yes the Infusion discover makes this trick EASIER to do for an Alchemist because you can make it work for any spell they cast. But honestly, if you are going to pull this puppy out of the hat, why is it not worth the 50 gold for a potion? I mean 50 gold for a potion of PolyPurpose Panacea is well worth the benefit. Am i missing some game mechanic that makes the potion route not as effective, if not a bit expensive.

Target: Self spells can not be made into potions.

[Kyle Baird]

I can't wait to use this trick so I can win Pathfinder!

↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A START

Did I get that right? Woo! WINNING!

[neferphras]

Cold Napalm wrote:

neferphras wrote:

I almost hate to resurrect this Thread, but thought I should put this out there as a question.

So Touch Injection reads
You must hold an elixir, infused extract, poison, or potion in hand as you cast this spell. The held substance drains from its container into a magical sac in your body. While the spell lasts, you can deliver the substance with a mere touch. To do so to an opponent, you must make a successful melee touch attack. If you hit, the substance takes effect immediately, despite any onset period, and that opponent receives the normal saving throw (if any) against the substance. If you miss, the substance remains in the magical sac for you to use later.

This spell protects you from poison in the sac, but unless you have the poison use class feature, you suffer a 5% chance of exposing yourself to the poison when you first cast the spell. If you roll a natural 1 while attempting to inject the poison into an enemy, you are exposed to it.

It is a 2nd level alchemist 3rd Sorc Wiz spell
Polypurpose Panacea is level 1 for each
SkinSend is level 2 for each

So yes the Infusion discover makes this trick EASIER to do for an Alchemist because you can make it work for any spell they cast. But honestly, if you are going to pull this puppy out of the hat, why is it not worth the 50 gold for a potion? I mean 50 gold for a potion of PolyPurpose Panacea is well worth the benefit. Am i missing some game mechanic that makes the potion route not as effective, if not a bit expensive.

Target: Self spells can not be made into potions.

where do you get that??? Nothing in the description of potions in core or ultimate equipment states that.

[neferphras]

yeah i just double checked , it spell has to "target" one or more creatures, that can include you. Basically as long as you have the Target header in your spell its solid.

[neferphras]

Kyle Baird wrote:

I can't wait to use this trick so I can win Pathfinder!

↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A START

Did I get that right? Woo! WINNING!

I assume this is sarcasm, which is good, but until they stop 160 damage per round at 6th level, or Witch slumber (A BY FAR more broken mechanic than this), its all on the table.

[Jeff Merola]

neferphras wrote:

where do you get that??? Nothing in the description of potions in core or ultimate equipment states that.

Core Rulebook, Page 551.

Creating Potions wrote:

Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.

[neferphras]

yeah its not under potion, where one might look for such things, its under item creation rules... gah... all in one place would be nice. Ok so at least now see why its an alchemist work around only.

[FLite]

You know, the easy way to for paizo to errata this *and all the other exploits that might come from it* would be to say that all spells of range personal can only be used on willing targets.

That would fix it without them having to deal with this one corner case.

[Aaron Mayhew]

In regards to Polypurpose Panacea being used in this manner at least...

There's an FAQ about Alchemist extracts that states the drinker of a variable effect extract, infusion (such as the panacea or protection from energy or what have you) doesn't have to choose what effect it has until they drink it. So... there's some grounds at least for making the panacea not cheesy.

Also, right below that, personal range spells can be given out as infusions.

Right here.

Hope this doesn't ruin your plans to win pathfinder, Kyle.

[Serum]

Andrew Christian wrote:

Additionally, delivering the potion is not doing it via a spell.

It is doing it via a touch attack. The spell creates a sack under your skin where you store the potion you want to deliver.

The reason that touch spells don't provoke, is because there is a visible representation of that spell that looks dangerous, so your opponent has to respect that you can damage him with that touch.

If I walk up to a badguy and try to touch him, and he doesn't want me to touch him, that will require a touch attack.

Are you trying to say that because its a touch attack, it doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity, even if all I'm doing is simply touching him?

If you could find an example of a melee touch attack that the rules are clear will provoke, you might have some footing for this argument. As far as I know, there is not a single melee touch attack that does so.

[neferphras]

Serum wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

Additionally, delivering the potion is not doing it via a spell.

It is doing it via a touch attack. The spell creates a sack under your skin where you store the potion you want to deliver.

The reason that touch spells don't provoke, is because there is a visible representation of that spell that looks dangerous, so your opponent has to respect that you can damage him with that touch.

If I walk up to a badguy and try to touch him, and he doesn't want me to touch him, that will require a touch attack.

Are you trying to say that because its a touch attack, it doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity, even if all I'm doing is simply touching him?

If you could find an example of a melee touch attack that the rules are clear will provoke, you might have some footing for this argument. As far as I know, there is not a single melee touch attack that does so.

Sure it provokes, dont see any reason why it would not. Cost benefit comes into play.

[Robert A Matthews]

neferphras wrote:

Serum wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

Additionally, delivering the potion is not doing it via a spell.

It is doing it via a touch attack. The spell creates a sack under your skin where you store the potion you want to deliver.

The reason that touch spells don't provoke, is because there is a visible representation of that spell that looks dangerous, so your opponent has to respect that you can damage him with that touch.

If I walk up to a badguy and try to touch him, and he doesn't want me to touch him, that will require a touch attack.

Are you trying to say that because its a touch attack, it doesn't provoke an attack of opportunity, even if all I'm doing is simply touching him?

If you could find an example of a melee touch attack that the rules are clear will provoke, you might have some footing for this argument. As far as I know, there is not a single melee touch attack that does so.

Sure it provokes, dont see any reason why it would not. Cost benefit comes into play.

I don't see a reason why it would. Touch attacks while holding a charge do not provoke, so I don't see why a touch attack while holding a sac that contains a potion of a spell would. The same action is taking place, you are touching the target and a spell is taking effect. I don't agree with the notion that you have to look dangerous with your hand to avoid an attack of opportunity. The table lists the actions that provoke. Touch attack is not on it. A GM could say that the table only says it lists "most" of the actions that provoke, but in that case, they are using their discretion to rule that it provokes. The rules do not support that ruling, but also do not prohibit them from making it.