I'm currently running an alchemist for a campaign and I'm planning on going a little crazy with him. Part of the flavor of this is the Confusion Bomb discovery and the Madness Bomb discovery.
The problem I'm having is that I don't own all of the books yet, so I have to get some of my info online. I'm curious if these two abilities are able to stack.
I know not all bomb related discoveries stack, but I also know that some can. I'd like any help people can offer with this.
Thank you in advance for any help with this, I know this is a pretty simple question but I need to know so I don't cheat on accident :(
|
They do not stack. Alchemist Discoveries. Specifically, Confusion does not stack with other Bomb Discoveries. Madness can stack. Discoveries marked with an asterisk are non-stacking.
Discoveries with asterick can't stack only with other asterick discoveries. So you're good.
Discoveries that modify bombs that are marked with an asterisk (*) do not stack. Only one such discovery can be applied to an individual bomb.Yep, I was mistaken. I've been playing it too restricted this whole time. The chaos I have lost, the MAD BEAUTIFUL CHAOS!
so as I understand you guys, these two in particular can stack, and I can add Madness to other bombs I use. I just can't add Confusion to ones with an asterisk on them.
Also, reading them they each reduce the damage of the thrown bomb by 2 damage dice. I presume so, but those would stack? (ie: a bomb that would do 6d6+int-mod if under the effect of both discoveries would do 2d6+int-mod damage)
One other thing that I noted on here and I'm just making sure that it isn't an oversight on the discovery.
"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."
So does this mean that a Confusion Bomb doesn't allow a will save to negate (there is nothing in the rule as I read it that says it would) and I want to, again, make sure I fully understand the discovery before I start hucking around confused enemies.
|
In regards to the damage penalty, yes, I would assume that you apply both discovery effects completely and that includes the penalty for each.
As for the Confusion, it says it affects the target as if under the effects of a confusion spell for 1 round per level. The confusion spell lasts 1 round per level and allows a will save, so I think it stands to reason that since the bomb duplicates the effect of the spell, that it is meant to do so in every regard, including the save.
In regards to the damage penalty, yes, I would assume that you apply both discovery effects completely and that includes the penalty for each.
As for the Confusion, it says it affects the target as if under the effects of a confusion spell for 1 round per level. The confusion spell lasts 1 round per level and allows a will save, so I think it stands to reason that since the bomb duplicates the effect of the spell, that it is meant to do so in every regard, including the save.
I understand this, and that's kind of how I saw things at first. The point my friend made was that 1) the rule of it doesn't say it gives a save and 2) since it doesn't effect a burst like the spell does it might not have one because an attack roll already has to be made.
Still, I'm just trying to get different voices on this particular discovery as well :)
As for the Confusion, it says it affects the target as if under the effects of a confusion spell for 1 round per level. The confusion spell lasts 1 round per level and allows a will save, so I think it stands to reason that since the bomb duplicates the effect of the spell, that it is meant to do so in every regard, including the save.
I think it is good to be cautious about reading too much into the bolded part. D&D in general (3.5 & PF) often reference spell effects as a short cut to reprinting the rules. Since a bomb is a Su ability, not Sp, it isn't a duplication of the spell itself, just the spell's effects. For example, if a monster's gaze attack (Su) caused confusion, I wouldn't necessarily assume the save was implied. I think it is often the case that the save is explicitly mentioned in the Su's description, such as an Umber Hulks confusing stare. If the save isn't mentioned, it is reasonable to assume there isn't one, since it does require an attack roll.
|
|
You are correct about reading too much into things, Gherrick, but that works two ways. However, when I made my post I was paraphrasing and not giving a direct quote of the discovery in question. It actually reads; "A creature that takes a direct hit from a confusion bomb takes damage from the bomb and is under the effects of a confusion spell for 1 round per level of the alchemist.
To me if it says it works as a spell, or copies a spell, then it copies all that is not specified as different (in this case the target hit, not the burst area) and does this in order to save type space and use cross referencing instead of reinventing the wheel every time an effect is created.
Now this is just my take on things based on my years of playing and (D)GMing... does it seem oddly imbalanced one way or another? If so, then it probably was not intended that way. But then, I have always tried to keep the game in a general spirit of play and avoid turning it into a game of "Lawyers and Loopholes". YMMV.
There was another thread where the save issue was hotly contested. I agree with your interpretation of why it should. And confusion is a pretty powerful effect to not allow a save.
There was another thread where the save issue was hotly contested. I agree with your interpretation of why it should. And confusion is a pretty powerful effect to not allow a save.
It is a powerful effect, but there is an attack roll involved, so enforcing a hit + failed save really decreases the viability of the ability. That said, I agree that a good balance would allow a save after the first round the confusion takes effect, ensuring a minimum of 1 round of confusion on a hit.
A bit off-topic, but is there any way to increase the bomb DC via a feat? I assume spell focus is out, and elemental focus still only applies to spells, I think.
You are correct about reading too much into things, Gherrick, but that works two ways. However, when I made my post I was paraphrasing and not giving a direct quote of the discovery in question. It actually reads; "A creature that takes a direct hit from a confusion bomb takes damage from the bomb and is under the effects of a confusion spell for 1 round per level of the alchemist.
Fair enough. I didn't look at the actual wording, so I think your interpretation is very reasonable.
Also note that the Confusion spell can affect multiple targets; confusion bombs will only affect one target. As saving throws are specified in other discoveries (for example, Incendiary), I would say the lack of a save is balanced out by the single target and hit roll.
I have been reading that Ability Focus (bombs) increases saves by 2
I have been reading that Ability Focus (bombs) increases saves by 2
Hrm. AF is a monster feat, and specific to "special attacks". Granted, that's a fair equivalent to a Su ability. IMO, +2 seems too strong for a PC, since the regular spell focus is only +1. Still, good to see something to base a PC feat on.
Only houserules deny a PC access to Bestiary feats.
I'm not sure the point of categorizing them as "monster feats" if the intent was for anyone (including PCs) having access to them.
Thanks for the clarification. The feat in question (Ability Focus) still has the unfortunate wording of "special attacks" which is true only on a monster stat block. Was there any FAQ/clarification that states a PC's Su/Ex features can count as a "special attack"? If it does, then that is a very potent feat to get as an alchemist.
|
|
The damage plus confusion is indeed powerful, but the idea that you could apply a confusion effect for a minimum of 8 rounds(must be 8th level to acquire this discovery), with no save/resistance besides a generally laughable touch attack roll? That is where it just seems to me to require some sort of check and balance.
The idea that a touch attack is enough balance for an confusion bomb seems laughable. Lets remember that as levels go up, touch attack tends to go down because creatures get bigger and bigger and slower and slower (less Dex). While they may have high AC it's due to lots of natural armor. Allowing the alchemist to bomb the gigantic animal about to rip you a new one with no chance to miss and no save seems silly to me.
To give some perspective here, while no-save is strong, confusion itself has some significant weaknesses.
If the confused target is attacked, the confusion becomes nearly useless.
Even confused targets that aren't attacked will have a ~40% chance of hitting someone on the caster's side.Confusion itself seems to me to be like a level 2 spell effect; only level 4 because of it's AoE.
That said, a bunch of slots for a level 2 spell effect seems like a pretty good deal for an alchemist even if it gets a save. Then again, things like stink cloud seem even stronger and affect many more targets and don't reduce bomb damage...
What would the save of the confusion effect even be? half CL plus int? At least it's slightly more than a wizard would get.
It may not seem like a confusion effect is overly powerful to you, but think of from this sort of perspective.
The alchemist uses his confusion bomb (with no save under you take) and bombs the beast-totem power-attacking two-handed weapon wielding barbarian standing 10ft in front of you. He doesn't get to make a save against this bomb. He now has a 25% chance to kill you in one round because he deals 50 damage, per swing.