|
(Pasted from Archives of Nethys)
Parting Blast
Source Occult Adventures pg. 137
When you die, your body explodes in one final, destructive kinetic blast.
Prerequisites: Kinetic blast class feature.
Benefit: You can accept 1 point of burn to prepare a kinetic blast that automatically triggers upon your death. If you are killed at any point before your burn is removed, your body instantly erupts in an explosion that deals an amount of damage equal to that of your simple blast to all creatures in a 5-foot radius. A parting blast destroys your body, which might prevent any magic that requires an intact corpse.
Obvious PVP potential here, with ZERO player control regarding if it hits allies or not.
Is this one really legal in PFS? Are there any restrictions on using this feat in PFS games (like standing too close to other characters...)?
Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Pullman
|
Parting Blast is legal in PFS.
The thing about burn is that it is nonlethal damage. With this feat active you'll have some sort of nonlethal damage on you. Making it just a little more difficult to kill you since you will probably be falling unconscious instead of outright dying. There are always those crits with x3 weapons though.
If you've got this active it would probably behoove you to be very mindful of battlefield positioning and warn people before hand.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe this falls under the "it wasn't intentional, and wasn't fully recognized as a consequence of certain actions" part of logic.
Like an alchemist's bomb that doesn't threaten any allies with splash damage, but misses and ends up splashing an ally. It happens.
Now, if you're sitting at 1 hit point in front of a raging dragon, perhaps you should mention it.
But it's not bad enough to ban.
|
|
I believe this falls under the "it wasn't intentional, and wasn't fully recognized as a consequence of certain actions" part of logic.
Like an alchemist's bomb that doesn't threaten any allies with splash damage, but misses and ends up splashing an ally. It happens.
Now, if you're sitting at 1 hit point in front of a raging dragon, perhaps you should mention it.
But it's not bad enough to ban.
I can see that argument. Thanks.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A parting blast destroys your body, which might prevent any magic that requires an intact corpse.Anyone who uses this gets to enjoy their Resurrection costs every time anyway.Resurrection requires part of a creatures body to remain. This would force you to use True Resurrection so it's unlikely to happen more than once.
I cannot see any good reason why anyone would take this other than to troll their fellow players.
By my reading the mechanic of it is for the purposes of needing a corpse. A res should work considering it even works on the dust of disintegrate.
|
If you've got this active it would probably behoove you to be very mindful of battlefield positioning and warn people before hand.But, ultimately, this is a damaging effect that can allow your PC to harm allied PCs with lethal damage. Definitely seems against the anti-PVP policy of PFS.
There isn't a no PVP rule in PFS. There's a no PVP heading in PFS, in which the section specifies no player killing. Yes, some take that to just the heading and make it no PVP, but damaging your fellows due to your abilities going off (either intentionally or not) is actually within the rules. Though the best policy is to ask first (the don't be a jerk rule) and if they say no don't do it. It isn't actually a hard and fast rule.
|
but damaging your fellows due to your abilities going off (either intentionally or not) is actually within the rules
How exactly do you propose that you can damage your allies but not kill them? When you swing at them or use a spell on them you don't know in advance how much damage you're going to do or whether you're going to kill them.
The heading follows from the text. It is not remotely stopping at the heading even before you considered the stated intent of not allowing the players to fight each other by the thinly vieled proxy of their characters.
|
|
Wait, so I'm allowed pvp provided my actions don't directly cause deaths?!?!The guide says you cannot intentionally kill another PC. That doesn't mean you can carpet bomb people to near death and leave them to be murdered by the enemy.
I was told this was not okay. I had a whole thread regarding law clerics including chaotic PCs in their anti chaotic AoE spells
|
|
There's a ton of variation. I will not take it to the extreme of no PVP at all though some do. There is a functional difference between the two for me however.
All situations I've personally seen
Dropping one fireball beginning of combat that hits all enemies and 1 ally (cause they won initiative and charged in) versus being able to hit noone/1 enemy. I'll allow the fireball as the GM. (I still prefer clearance from the player, but do not require it)
I have a character that has used the magic missiles from the quarterstaff of entwined serpents as out-of-combat chastisement for bad behavior, I also healed the damage back off the character. Direct PVP actions (now obviously I also knew the fellow player and how he'd laugh about it), but still. With a no PVP rule unallowable, with a no player killing rule allowable.
Alchemist want to throw his bomb at the only enemy standing but doesn't have selective (or enough selective) to not hit his allies next to the enemy. No PVP can't do it, no player killing can.
Someone is playing a scaredy cat character walking through a room where all the furniture is covered in clothes. Player 2 wants to use ghost sound (and/or mage hand) to freak the character (not player) out. No combat involved, however it is PVP. Not allowed by no PVP, is allowed by no killing.
But remember all these situations can and should be trumped by the "don't be a jerk rule" too. Our hobby is fundamentally designed to be inclusive - that is to say without others there is no game. Say take away what you will from my answer.
|
|
For pretty much every game I've ever been in (minus the We Be Goblins series, because...well, goblins), obvious targeting of a single PC with any sort of combat action hasn't been okay.
Now, area-of-effect damage/condition stuff?
GM and player asks any at the table that would be affected if they'll let it happen, if someone says no (for whatever reason), then it doesn't happen.
Stops individual Gm's from having to decide where to draw the line, and also prevents PC's from dying/being hurt/spending money because the GM ruled that area-of-effect stuff (without permission) isn't PVP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gotta admit I'm curious, Joe. What do you do...
Dropping one fireball beginning of combat that hits all enemies and 1 ally (cause they won initiative and charged in) versus being able to hit noone/1 enemy. I'll allow the fireball as the GM. (I still prefer clearance from the player, but do not require it)
...when an abnormally high fireball roll kills the character of the player who didn't give clearance?
...when a low fireball roll keeps all of the enemies alive, but weakens the character (whose player didn't give clearance) to the point where the enemies kill him on their initiatives?
I have a character that has used the magic missiles from the quarterstaff of entwined serpents as out-of-combat chastisement for bad behavior, I also healed the damage back off the character. Direct PVP actions (now obviously I also knew the fellow player and how he'd laugh about it), but still. With a no PVP rule unallowable, with a no player killing rule allowable.
...when a character retorts with a punch to the face (Brawler language for, "I understand your concern, but I believe that my behavior was appropriate for the situation")?
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Alchemist want to throw his bomb at the only enemy standing but doesn't have selective (or enough selective) to not hit his allies next to the enemy. No PVP can't do it, no player killing can.
The problem with this logic is that you can hit the ally either way. The only way you can completely avoid hitting an ally if you have selective is with blast bombs.
EDIT:Also there are explosives that you can't select out too making it even more problematic.
|
I think these discussions s are always silly...think about them in char for a moment....how often would it be OK to fireball your fellow agent. Only if it were really dire. Because it's 'my thing' doesn't cut it
It kinda does when it's a well telegraphed thing.
Hmm, the party wizard likes to open up at large groups with a fireball. Oh look! A large group of enemies! I'ma charge em!
... but the wizard hasn't cast anything yet... I'ma gonna charge them anyway!
Cooperate ya'know?
|
|
Gotta admit I'm curious, Joe. What do you do...
Dropping one fireball beginning of combat that hits all enemies and 1 ally (cause they won initiative and charged in) versus being able to hit noone/1 enemy. I'll allow the fireball as the GM. (I still prefer clearance from the player, but do not require it)
...when an abnormally high fireball roll kills the character of the player who didn't give clearance?
...when a low fireball roll keeps all of the enemies alive, but weakens the character (whose player didn't give clearance) to the point where the enemies kill him on their initiatives?
Frankly, both are part of the game. If you win initiative and put yourself in the position with the blaster caster on your team ready to open up with something to weaken the opponents, then die because you're the only one up there getting a fireball and full attacked it's on you. That said, in both cases I'd encourage the fireball caster to help with the raise. (Holding action to let your casters lead off is generally a good idea)
I may even allow a retcon of actions if the fireball takes them to straight dead, but I've yet to see it happen, so I don't know.
...when a character retorts with a punch to the face (Brawler language for, "I understand your concern, but I believe that my behavior was appropriate for the situation")?
I have a character that has used the magic missiles from the quarterstaff of entwined serpents as out-of-combat chastisement for bad behavior, I also healed the damage back off the character. Direct PVP actions (now obviously I also knew the fellow player and how he'd laugh about it), but still. With a no PVP rule unallowable, with a no player killing rule allowable.
So be it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I will never forget playing a game with a player who was completely unconcerned about being in an ally's damage radius. One player introduced his character with - basically - "I throw really big fireballs." The first fight we get jumped by a single opponent, but the second fight is a bunch of enemies a fair distance away. "My specialty!" he says with a grin. So the rest of us who beat him in initiative spend a round buffing or delaying. Except for the rogue right in front of him in order who goes charging into the middle of the bad guys.
Blaster: "Sigh. OK, if I put it right here I can hit one of them without hitting you but that's it."
Rogue: "No! Get them all! I've got evasion."
B: "I don't think you understand. I throw really big fireballs. And a 1 always fails."
R: "I can take it! Show off your stuff!"
B: "But if you fail your save..."
R: "Just do it! I went in here expecting you to do this! You do what you're built to do and I do what I'm built to do!"
B: "OK." (rolls dice). "Well that was a pretty crappy roll. Take 105 damage. DC 22."
R: "Uhhhh..."
The rogue made his save but learned a valuable lesson about believing his party members when they are trying to protect him.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One time our seeker group's monk ran through a blade barrier's ring, crossing the blades twice. Failed both saves and got the nickname "Blodpalt".
|
|
So the distinction between Parting Blast and Fireball, is that the fireball user is choosing to place the blast in a spot with allies. Parting Blast is set up in advance and the player has no real choice regarding who is hit.
Yes, pretty much. Blowing up your teammates one way is an accident the other is on purpose, the on purpose part is whats not allowed.
|
|
So the distinction between Parting Blast and Fireball, is that the fireball user is choosing to place the blast in a spot with allies. Parting Blast is set up in advance and the player has no real choice regarding who is hit.Yes, pretty much. Blowing up your teammates one way is an accident the other is on purpose, the on purpose part is whats not allowed.
Gotcha, so it's intention, not the results, that matter with regard to the PVP rules of PFS?
|
|
So the distinction between Parting Blast and Fireball, is that the fireball user is choosing to place the blast in a spot with allies. Parting Blast is set up in advance and the player has no real choice regarding who is hit.Yes, pretty much. Blowing up your teammates one way is an accident the other is on purpose, the on purpose part is whats not allowed.
I still do not think the option should be legal for pathfinder agents.
A reckless option like this is just waiting to upset people. This is why the wild rager is banned.
I would like to see this removed. The last thing I want to happen is me risk my life saving an ally and oops he takes me with him.
But I would love to see the bad guys have it in scenarios.
|
|
A reckless option like this is just waiting to upset people. This is why the wild rager is banned.
I would like to see this removed. The last thing I want to happen is me risk my life saving an ally and oops he takes me with him.
Mostly agree.
Though it is true that in order to trigger, this one requires the PC to die. So in most sessions, it's just an alternate option to add burn to your kineticist.
It would only be wreckless if the PC was trying to use it constantly, and since it destroys the PC's corpse (making spells to bring them back to life very expensive), the odds that they'll be able to use it wrecklessly seem pretty low. Does seem like a feat you'd probably want to ban from level 1 characters, just because the potential that the player is using it wrecklessly is much higher at level 1.
Though in terms of PFS options, I can certainly see it as a very viable option along the lines of allowing on PC to die so the others could survive. Especially against swarms.
A reckless option like this is just waiting to upset people. This is why the wild rager is banned.
I would like to see this removed. The last thing I want to happen is me risk my life saving an ally and oops he takes me with him.
Mostly agree.
Though it is true that in order to trigger, this one requires the PC to die. So in most sessions, it's just an alternate option to add burn to your kineticist.
It would only be wreckless if the PC was trying to use it constantly, and since it destroys the PC's corpse (making spells to bring them back to life very expensive), the odds that they'll be able to use it wrecklessly seem pretty low. Does seem like a feat you'd probably want to ban from level 1 characters, just because the potential that the player is using it wrecklessly is much higher at level 1.
Though in terms of PFS options, I can certainly see it as a very viable option along the lines of allowing on PC to die so the others could survive. Especially against swarms.
Seems more of a feat for a trollish Boon Remover build to me.
Stand next to the PFS goblin and explode, huh?But that's just my nasty, suspicious nature.