Its not a grey area. Its a weapon, weapons can be effective against swarms even if you have to make a ranged attack with them. Spells like ray of frost cannot be. Why? Because they are spells which affect a single target.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would a ray of frost hit one spider in a swarm, kill it, and then proceed to hit another? Presumably if it was intended to work this way it would be a line attack (like a lighting bolt or black dragon breath attack) and not a ray attack.
Acid Splash is again SR: No, creation, it isn't a spell when it hits.
It is real acid.
Vial of Acid is an area effect thing.
But an attack with a corrosive longsword isn't. But it still works against swarms (and acid arrow is the spell component).
Vial of Acid is an area effect thing.But an attack with a corrosive longsword isn't. But it still works against swarms (and acid arrow is the spell component).
I wasn't aware of that. Care to expand?
I wasn't aware of that. Care to expand?Vial of Acid is an area effect thing.But an attack with a corrosive longsword isn't. But it still works against swarms (and acid arrow is the spell component).
Yeah, if you attack with a weapon that does energy damage, such as a corrosive longsword, you make the attack roll if you hit you deal the weapons damage (it's dice, plus your damage modifiers) and the the energy damage get calculated separately. This way you apply any immunity and vulnerability appropriately.
In this example, if you attack a swarm made of fine creatures with a corrosive lomgsword, you will deal zero weapon damage plus 1d6 acid damage.
To craft a corrosive weapon, the spell Acid Arrow has to be used during the process.
An attack is not a "targeted effect". It is an attack.
An attack is a targeted effect, that's why a number of feats refer to the target of your attack, melee and ranged.
Attacks are not effects. Attacks are attacks. Yes attacks have targets. Just because you have to target something with your attack doesn't make your attack an "effect".
I wasn't aware of that. Care to expand?Vial of Acid is an area effect thing.But an attack with a corrosive longsword isn't. But it still works against swarms (and acid arrow is the spell component).Yeah, if you attack with a weapon that does energy damage, such as a corrosive longsword, you make the attack roll if you hit you deal the weapons damage (it's dice, plus your damage modifiers) and the the energy damage get calculated separately. This way you apply any immunity and vulnerability appropriately.
In this example, if you attack a swarm made of fine creatures with a corrosive lomgsword, you will deal zero weapon damage plus
1d6zero acid damage.
Yeah, I thought so. You're misinterpreting the rules, I'm afraid. The corrosive effect affects only a single creature (the one hit by the sword), and as such is also ignored by the swarm.
Yeah, I thought so. You're misinterpreting the rules, I'm afraid. The corrosive effect affects only a single creature (the one hit by the sword), and as such is also ignored by the swarm.
I posted this in another thread...
A number of posters have said in 3.5, Torchs and Flaming weapons were said to do damage to swarms. But that in Pathfinder, they do not say that they do. The reason that they do not is (that I can see) when you attack with one of the above you are attacking one target. I was not able to find a FAQ on this (if there is, can someone link it).
So how would you rule the damage taken when more than on creature touched a flaming weapon at the same time? Would only the first creature to touch it take damage, or all of them?
This could cover a sword with Corrosive as well.
Can you tell me where it says only one damage is taken.
It's because bonus damage added to an attack is still "weapon damage". If a weapon does 1d8+ 2d6 (vicious) + 1d6 fire (flaming) + 2d6+2 (bane) + Str, it's all still weapon damage, and the immunity a swarm made up of fine creatures to weapon damage still applies. No provision is made for energy damage, heck, there are weapons (the battle poi, for example) that deal energy damage.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Q: How many creatures can you target with a single ray?
A: One.
Q: Is that a specific number?
A: Yes.
Q: Are swarms immune to rays?
A: Yes.
Q: Is there an exception somewhere?
A: Maybe. If so, it's an exception.
It's because bonus damage added to an attack is still "weapon damage". If a weapon does 1d8+ 2d6 (vicious) + 1d6 fire (flaming) + 2d6+2 (bane) + Str, it's all still weapon damage, and the immunity a swarm made up of fine creatures to weapon damage still applies. No provision is made for energy damage, heck, there are weapons (the battle poi, for example) that deal energy damage.
Ok. Can you link or quote where in the rules it says this.
From what I can find.
Weapons are classified according to the type of damage they deal: B for bludgeoning, P for piercing, or S for slashing.
This leads me to think that if it is not B,P, or S, it's different.
Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage (such as sneak attack damage or bonus damage from the flaming weapon quality) is not multiplied when you score a critical hit.
A creature with this special quality ignores damage from most weapons and natural attacks. Wounds heal immediately, or the weapon bounces off harmlessly (in either case, the opponent knows the attack was ineffective). The creature takes normal damage from energy attacks (even nonmagical ones), spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities.
And this would cover non-energy types. (Bane, Sneek Attack)
Some magic weapons deal additional dice of damage. Unlike other modifiers to damage, additional dice of damage are not multiplied when the attacker scores a critical hit.
I see where Str is added to the weapon damage.
You apply your character's Strength modifier to:
Damage rolls when using a melee weapon or a thrown weapon, including a sling. (Exceptions: Off-hand attacks receive only half the character's Strength bonus, while two-handed attacks receive 1–1/2 times the Strength bonus. A Strength penalty, but not a bonus, applies to attacks made with a bow that is not a composite bow.)
This tells us its energy damage.
When a vicious weapon strikes an opponent, it creates a flash of disruptive energy that resonates between the opponent and the wielder. This energy deals an extra 2d6 points of damage to the opponent and 1d6 points of damage to the wielder. Only melee weapons can be vicious.
You quoted it yourself. Some magic weapons deal additional damage dice. It's damage dealt by a weapon, so it's still weapon damage. Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing aren't explicitly weapon damage, there are spells that inflict damage of those types, such as ice storm dealing cold and bludgeoning.
So the only possible definition there can be for "weapon damage" is "damage inflicted by a weapon".
|
It's because bonus damage added to an attack is still "weapon damage". If a weapon does 1d8+ 2d6 (vicious) + 1d6 fire (flaming) + 2d6+2 (bane) + Str, it's all still weapon damage, and the immunity a swarm made up of fine creatures to weapon damage still applies. No provision is made for energy damage, heck, there are weapons (the battle poi, for example) that deal energy damage.
No, energy damage is energy damage and is resisted by abilities that stop energy damage, it isn't weapon damage.
Vicious = energy damage (it is in the ability description)
Flaming = fire damage, i.e. energy damage
Bane is weapon damage.
Probably you mean that the energy damage is dealt by the weapon attack, but that is different from being "weapon" damage.
So what is "weapon damage" if it's not "damage dealt by a weapon"?
|
|
You quoted it yourself. Some magic weapons deal additional damage dice. It's damage dealt by a weapon, so it's still weapon damage. Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing aren't explicitly weapon damage, there are spells that inflict damage of those types, such as ice storm dealing cold and bludgeoning.
So the only possible definition there can be for "weapon damage" is "damage inflicted by a weapon".
Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.
From that piece of the rules we evince that energy damage dealt together with a weapon attack isn't weapon damage.
So what is "weapon damage" if it's not "damage dealt by a weapon"?
Yes, it is the damage dealt by the weapon (and bane add to that), but, as quoted above, the energy damage dealt together with the weapon attack isn't weapon damage.
A weapon can inflict energy damage, such as the battle poi, that deals fire. Does that mean it's damage isn't weapon damage?
I just want to note, I -want- the rules to say that a flaming sword or a torch can hurt a swarm. But I don't think they actually do, and if that's the intent, they need to be revised.
EDIT: did some searching, and I found this thread. http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rycb?What-is-weapon-damage#1
While weapon damage is not strictly defined, which is the core of the issue I'm having with deciphering the rules on this topic, there is at least some evidence cited that "weapon damage" may very well work the way you and others have claimed, Diego Rossi.
A weapon can inflict energy damage, such as the battle poi, that deals fire. Does that mean it's damage isn't weapon damage?
I just want to note, I -want- the rules to say that a flaming sword or a torch can hurt a swarm. But I don't think they actually do, and if that's the intent, they need to be revised.
EDIT: did some searching, and I found this thread. http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2rycb?What-is-weapon-damage#1
While weapon damage is not strictly defined, which is the core of the issue I'm having with deciphering the rules on this topic, there is at least some evidence cited that "weapon damage" may very well work the way you and others have claimed, Diego Rossi.
"Weapon damage" isn't the issue. The issue is the single-target nature of a flaming sword. You hit something with a flaming sword, it catches on fire. Congratulations, you just barbecued one spider.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A FAQ is not necessary. The answers are in the listing.
"Weapon damage" isn't the issue. The issue is the single-target nature of a flaming sword. You hit something with a flaming sword, it catches on fire. Congratulations, you just barbecued one spider.
So the problem you see is the something you are attacking is the spider in Spider Swarm. But that is not so. The AC is for the hole Spider Swarm, so you are hitting the Swarm. The Weapon damage says if the Swarm is made of smaller than Tiny creatures, no damage. You agree with this.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures
So the next part of damage is the Flaming effect. You are still targeting the Swam. There is no mention of "specific number of creatures" in any Energy effect damage. So the Energy dose damage the Swarm.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Weapon damage" isn't the issue. The issue is the single-target nature of a flaming sword. You hit something with a flaming sword, it catches on fire. Congratulations, you just barbecued one spider.So the problem you see is the something you are attacking is the spider in Spider Swarm.
Exactly correct. The rest of your response has been edited to remove all incorrect statements.
Exactly correct. The rest of your response has been edited to remove all incorrect statements."Weapon damage" isn't the issue. The issue is the single-target nature of a flaming sword. You hit something with a flaming sword, it catches on fire. Congratulations, you just barbecued one spider.So the problem you see is the something you are attacking is the spider in Spider Swarm.
Ok... I see now... you ignore the other rules...
Got it.
I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong), that Orfamay Quest's stance is based on the explanation for why swarms have the traits (and immunities to damage) that they do.
You can't hurt a swarm of fine creatures with a sword attack because you wouldn't be harming any reasonable amount of the swarm's component creatures. So the question is, how does it make logical sense that the sword's ability to deal energy damage changes this fact.
If a sword hit fails because "you kill only a few creatures in the swarm", as is often cited, then the type of damage the sword does shouldn't matter.
The Rules As Written aren't clear on this point, but it is a potentially valid, if punitive reading of the rules, since "weapon damage" is ambiguously defined.
As I have shown in above posts, Weapon damage and Energy damage fall under two separate Swarm Traits rules. As yet there has been no one showing rules that contradicts this.
Weapon damage is based off the creature size in the Swarm.
Energy damage is based of the number of creatures effected in the Energy effects description.
Some effects are rays. You aim a ray as if using a ranged weapon, though typically you make a ranged touch attack rather than a normal ranged attack. As with a ranged weapon, you can fire into the dark or at an invisible creature and hope you hit something. You don't have to see the creature you're trying to hit, as you do with a targeted spell. Intervening creatures and obstacles, however, can block your line of sight or provide cover for the creature at which you're aiming.
Rays state it affects one creature.
(an invisible creature= one, the creature= one)Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire that deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.
Flaming weapon dose not give a number of creatures it affects. It can hit any number of creatures while active.
Target creature or object touched
Shocking Grasp is a spell effect that effects one creature.
Well sure, flaming can affect any number of creatures...if any number of attacks are made. An attack with a flaming weapon targets one creature, and deals energy damage to one creature. It doesn't affect every creature in the same square.
Yes, flaming is fire damage, which is energy damage. And it isn't subject to damage reduction. It should (and is probably the intent) for the flaming 1d6 damage to affect a swarm. But the rules are very unclear as to why (or why not).
The design decision to make certain swarms immune to weapon damage is simply that you can't target enough of the creatures that make up a swarm with a weapon attack to disrupt the swarm. It doesn't matter if the weapon is a dagger, a greatsword, or a table.
Weapon damage is never properly defined by the rules, you need to infer what is considered "weapon damage" by looking at things like Vital Strike. We're given lines such as:
"All weapons deal hit point damage. This damage is subtracted from the current hit points of any creature struck by the weapon."
"Dmg: These columns give the damage dealt by the weapon on a successful hit. The column labeled “Dmg (S)” is for Small weapons. The column labeled “Dmg (M)” is for Medium weapons. If two damage ranges are given, then the weapon is a double weapon. Use the second damage figure given for the double weapon's extra attack. Table: Tiny and Large Weapon Damage gives weapon damage values for Tiny and Large weapons."
"Extra damage over and above a weapon's normal damage is not multiplied when you score a critical hit."
"Additional Damage Dice: Some magic weapons deal additional dice of damage. Unlike other modifiers to damage, additional dice of damage are not multiplied when the attacker scores a critical hit."
"Sneak Attack: The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter."
You will note nothing in those previous sections states that this isn't the damage of the weapon, in fact, it's been cited that sneak attack IS part of the damage of the weapon.
The argument that flaming is different from weapon damage and would not be subject to "immunity to weapon damage" stems from this section of the rules:
"Type: Weapons are classified according to the type of damage they deal: B for bludgeoning, P for piercing, or S for slashing. Some monsters may be resistant or immune to attacks from certain types of weapons. Some weapons deal damage of multiple types. If a weapon causes two types of damage, the type it deals is not half one type and half another; all damage caused is of both types. Therefore, a creature would have to be immune to both types of damage to ignore any of the damage caused by such a weapon. In other cases, a weapon can deal either of two types of damage. In a situation where the damage type is significant, the wielder can choose which type of damage to deal with such a weapon."
So if a creature is immune to b/p/s damage and a weapon deals slashing and fire, it's immunity does not apply. But nowhere does it say energy damage cannot be weapon damage. The battle poi, in fact, is a weapon that does fire damage.
By the quoted rules, one of these things is actually true:
"Weapon damage" refers to all damage dealt by an attack with a weapon. Flaming is weapon damage, certain swarms are immune.
"Weapon damage" refers to the base damage of a weapon. Flaming is not weapon damage.
"Weapon damage" refers to b/p/s damage dealt by a weapon. Flaming is energy damage that is part of the weapon's damage, in which case THE SWARM IS NOT IMMUNE TO ANY DAMAGE INFLICTED BY A FLAMING WEAPON.
As per the rules of immunity I quoted.
Again, it's probably the second option, which falls neatly between the two extremes, but the rules don't come out and specify which is the case, which is why this debate keeps popping up, and with no conclusive answer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flaming: Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire that deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.
Flaming deals extra damage on a weapon attack. If the swarm is immune to the damage from the weapon, then the swarm is immune to any extra damage added to the weapon damage, whether it be flaming, sneak attack, favored enemy, etc. Unless the ability specifically removes the swarms invulnerability to the weapon damage, extra damage on a weapon attack doesn't apply.
DR is bypassed by energy damage because it says it is. Swarm immunity to weapon damage does not say energy damage bypasses it, so it doesn't.
|
Is this for PFS? Honestly, OP, just make your own call. Tell your players that in your games, at your tables, rays affect swarms with the exception of disintegrate.
I think you're in the minority, and I strongly doubt it will be changed. But at your table? Go for it! As long as everyone knows at the outset (or you let them retcon if you didn't make it clear), then you're fine.
Even in PFS, you're probably going to be OK because it's a ruling that favors the players. Where you'll have trouble is when the PC witch uses Vomit Swarm and you use scorching ray to destroy it. Then you'll need to be able to point to the FAQ you're asking for. But until then, man, do your thing!
Flaming: Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire that deals an extra 1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.Flaming deals extra damage on a weapon attack. If the swarm is immune to the damage from the weapon, then the swarm is immune to any extra damage added to the weapon damage, whether it be flaming, sneak attack, favored enemy, etc. Unless the ability specifically removes the swarms invulnerability to the weapon damage, extra damage on a weapon attack doesn't apply.
DR is bypassed by energy damage because it says it is. Swarm immunity to weapon damage does not say energy damage bypasses it, so it doesn't.
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
"All weapons deal hit point damage. This damage is subtracted from the current hit points of any creature struck by the weapon."
If you think the immunity is because the weapon hits one creature in the Swarm, can you quote me where it says that?
A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernable anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking. A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage. Reducing a swarm to 0 hit points or less causes it to break up, though damage taken until that point does not degrade its ability to attack or resist attack. Swarms are never staggered or reduced to a dying state by damage. Also, they cannot be tripped, grappled, or bull rushed, and they cannot grapple an opponent.
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
Fine/Dim swarms are immune to weapon attacks and take no damage, which includes extra damage from flaming. Tiny swarms would take half damage, both the weapon die as well as the extra damage dice from flaming, etc.
I think I understand your position Link2000 but disagree with it.
Yes, the spell creates a ray/acid ball/arrow/whatever. I think that effect still only applies to a specific number of creatures, specifically the one(s) you attack with it. Maybe it has to do with how I envision a ray. I see it as a pulse of energy, that travels in a line. I think other people imagine it as more of a beam, where the beam persists over a few seconds sweeping across the target. Maybe that's why different people envision the effect differently.
I would like a FAQ answer to this, because before the thread I hadn't considered people would allow rays and other Effect spells that require attack rolls to effect a swarm.
Another reason I think rays do not affect swarms, is that touch effect spells do not. As far as I can tell, all touch spells include the Target line of "creature touched", but the ranged spells that require ranged attack rolls don't. Shocking grasp lets you deal damage to a target with a touch attack. Ray of frost lets you deal damage to a target with a ranged touch attack. If ray of frost works on swarms, I don't see why shocking grasp shouldn't (other than it specifically includes the Target: creature touched line, while ranged Effect spells don't).
Because I think the spells should function similarly (both require a touch attack to hit, both deal some form of energy damage) and the touch spell explicitly states the touched creature is the target, I infer that ray and other effect spells that require an attack roll should fall to the same limitations. Especially considering that touch range attack spells tend to be more powerful since it puts the spellcaster more in harms way.
I can't reconcile having a ranged touch attack spell work, but a touch spell not, so I default to having both not work. As far as a question about your point of view, how do you resolve touch spells being ineffective (like shocking grasp) but ray of frost dealing damage?
Well, I see you point, but a arrow does affect some swarms, right?
I dont see why a missile made of a bolt of ice and a bolt of steel fire from a crossbow would affect the same type of warm differently.
And, yes, I know you guys can quote the rules, and due to the wording say that XXXX- but many, many times the literal meaning of the rules is not the RAI and that's EXACTLY the purpose of a FAQ.
So, please hit the FAQ button, then, and also on the associated FAQ thread I started.
Even if you think it's clear by a literal meaning.
Q: How many creatures can you target with a single ray?
A: One.Q: Is that a specific number?
A: Yes.Q: Are swarms immune to rays?
A: Yes.Q: Is there an exception somewhere?
A: Maybe. If so, it's an exception.
How many creatures can you target with a single arrow?
A: One.Q: Is that a specific number?
A: Yes.
Q: Are all swarms immune to arrows?
A: No.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arrows are not spells. An arrow would continue through some amount of rats and deal (halved) damage to the swarm. This is the same rational for a sword dealing damage against a swarm of rats.
The ray only affects one rat. It is magic and can only affect one. This is why it does no damage to the swarm. Why? Magic.
As always, if you don't like it, you can house-rule in your game, but its important to know what the rules actually say before you make changes.
The only one of the feats you mentioned that would pertain to this is Concentrated Splash, which modifies splash attacks. Bringing up a feat that modifies something like this isn't helping... whatever it is you're trying to do, I honestly don't know at this point.
Sounds like the poster was looking to get both full contact AND splash damage on a swarm.
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.Fine/Dim swarms are immune to weapon attacks and take no damage, which includes extra damage from flaming. Tiny swarms would take half damage, both the weapon die as well as the extra damage dice from flaming, etc.
So what you are saying is a Flaming Sword would do Piercing 1/2 damage and Energy 1/2 damage to a Tiny Swarm.
In your interpretation would a Flaming Club do No Blunt damage and 1/2 Energy damage to a Tiny Swarm. Seeing how you think it would with the Sword?if a creature is immune to b/p/s damage and a weapon deals slashing and fire, it's immunity does not apply. But nowhere does it say energy damage cannot be weapon damage. The battle poi, in fact, is a weapon that does fire damage.
I had to look this up.
This pair of arm-length chains has handles at one end and heavy fuel-soaked torch heads at the other. The weight of the poi is insufficient to deal physical damage, but the burning fuel deals fire damage. If you are proficient in battle poi, you are treated as if you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for the purposes of making poi attacks. Poi can be extinguished by spending a full round action smothering them in sand or submerging them in water.
This weapon is not doing Physical Fire damage. It's doing No Physical damage, and Energy Fire damage.
(Would Tarantula say it does no damage at all because no Physical damage is done?)
Tiny takes half from slashing and piercing only. So a flaming sword would do 1/2 damage slashing, full damage energy. I previously posted without referencing swarms again, and mis-remembered their stat.
Battle poi would do full damage because it is fire.
Flaming club would do full weapon damage and full fire damage because they do not reduce bludgeon damage at all.
I still don't understand how you see Energy damage is Weapon damage. I guess I never will.
Thank you for attempting to show me how you think it should work.