Damanata As best I can determine you are arguing that a red dragon with a mystic connection to the essence of fire blocks a flame thrower better than a red dragon statue is so rules wonky that we have to accept as an alternative that a flame thrower can just shoot through a giant sequioa: because 409 isn't going to save you from every bit of rules wonkyness.
BNW: the line weapon literally shoots through the dragon not around it.
This is a mite circular and you can't have it both ways.
Now we first use a cold based line weapon. In order to get through the dragon and hit the fire elemental the line needs to deal 16 points of damage or more. Would you rule the line stopping at/in the dragon?
If I'm treating the dragon like a dragon no if i'm treating the dragon like a wall yes. But I think it's rather silly to argue rules from an extrapolation of an extrapolation. There aren't rules for a creature cutting off line of effect to the stuff behind it, so arguments from that "what if..." don't hold any weight or show any inconsistency.
In all of these we've yet to adjucate the cover for the elemental
From the way line is written, it ignores cover as you just have to hit the elemental's AC. Line weapons ignore all circumstance bonuses and maluses to the enemy AC and to your attack roll.
In all of these we've yet to adjucate the cover for the elementalFrom the way line is written, it ignores cover as you just have to hit the elemental's AC.
Cover increases the targets AC. Nothing says that they don't get a cover bonus. You're making an attack roll and there is cover in between you and the target. Cover applies.
Line weapons ignore all circumstance bonuses and maluses to the enemy AC and to your attack roll.
That would be something they would have spelled out if it was the case.
This is why i keep saying the bit about a line not stopping is only an exception to the line weapon specific rule that it stops at a creature or cover it doesn't damage.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm also curious how you'd calculate cover for flexible line weapons. Do you care about cover between you and the starting point of the line? Between the starting point and the endpoint of the line?
---
Let's face it, line weapons are not realistic. They continue dealing the same potential damage to each target, no matter how many in the line; then abruptly lose all power at the end of a hard range cutoff. So arguing any aspect of them on "this would be realistic" is problematic at best.
"When attacking with such a weapon, make a single attack roll and compare it to the relevant Armor Class of all creatures and objects in a line extending to the weapon’s listed range increment. Roll damage only once. The weapon hits all targets with an AC equal to or lower than the attack roll."
The way it is written is really strange. It doesn't look like you add any bonus or malus against one creature (like Get'Em, the creature being prone, etc...).
But it's true that cover should work. I made a misread for that.
So, it means you have a -4 against all creatures but the first when using a line weapon?
I'm also curious how you'd calculate cover for flexible line weapons. Do you care about cover between you and the starting point of the line?
Cover says it's between you and the creature.
So, flexible line is far better than line, because it also allows you to avoid cover.
I'm also curious how you'd calculate cover for flexible line weapons. Do you care about cover between you and the starting point of the line? Between the starting point and the endpoint of the line?
---
A flexible weapon generates lines of effect at a distance from the user. Choose two points, both of which must be within the weapon’s first range increment. The weapon’s effect extends from one point to the other. Other than this placement, resolve the attack per the line weapon special property.
That sounds like its shooting from point A to point B and point A would be the origin/where you determine cover from.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One last attempt:
We fire a line weapon with a range increment of 60 ft.
We draw a line starting from our square 60 ft straight following the schematics for lines on page 269, thereby hitting 12 squares
Then we roll damage.
Then we roll our attack and note the result.
If critical roll the crit damage separately and apply only to the first target hit in line.
From there on the following function starts:
01 Start in square 1
02 Check for creature or object
03 If creature or object go to 05
04 If no creature or object go to 12
05 Is the noted down attack roll equal or higher to the relevant AC of the creature or object.
06 Yes, go to 08
07 No, go to 12
08 Apply the damage to the creature or object
09 Does the creature or object take hitpoint damage
10 Yes, go to 12
11 No, go to 17
12 Check if end of line is reached
13 Yes, go to 17
14 No, go to 15
15 Go to next square
16 Go to 02
17 END
A few things to remember for line of effect in respect to lines:
You need clear line of effect to the point of origin of the effect, which means the corner of the square the creator of the effect is in.
It is blocked by a solid barrier that can stop the effect in question, which for line weapons is stated to be an object or creature it fails to deal hitpoint damage on a succesful attack to.
It's not that I don't understand you it's that I don't agree with you.
I believe that a line weapon continuing when it overcomes hardness only overcomes the lines local rule about stopping when it hits a creature. It doesn't effect other rules about lines of sight and lines of effect that are required to make an attack roll against someone or hit someone with an area of effect spell.
Allowing low level line weapons to shoot through 30 feet of rock because they only have hardness 10 and thus will get a yes at 10 is abject sillyness. The rules having slight differences between a red dragon and a red dragon statue, not so much.
|
|
Okay, just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly:
What is the difference for you between hardness X and resistance X?
I'm really trying to grasp why you believe that adamantine rounds fired from a rail cannon do not continu until they reach the end of the line?
I fully agree with you that low level elemental line weaponry is stopped by stone/metal etc if not because of hardness then by the ineffective weaponry rule (though I'm prepared to fight you tooth and nail on stopping plasma :P)
One last attempt
Do line weapons ignore cover? I know BNW answer to that, but I want your answer.
|
|
By an extreme strict reading of all the relevant rules:
Line weapons ignore cover from objects that would normally block line of effect, but not from objects that provide cover or from creatures.
This is where common sense should kick in and result in: no line weapons do not ignore cover, so all objects and creatures after the first get +4 to AC. I'm even willing to give all those behind objects filling the entire side of a square (like walls) improved cover.
Total cover is irrelevant for line (weapons) because I have line of effect to the edge of my square and from there the line and line weapon rules kick in.
Okay, just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly:
What is the difference for you between hardness X and resistance X?
Not much. I don't know why you think I'm positing a difference.
I'm really trying to grasp why you believe that adamantine rounds fired from a rail cannon do not continue until they reach the end of the line?
1) a line is an area of effect. You need line of effect from your gun to the thing you're shooting. If you're firing 30 feet into rock at someone on the other side, you don't have that.
2) shooting a line weapon is an attack. You need line of effect to attack someone. If you're shooting 30 feet into a rock wall, you don't have that.
3) "However, if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line (typically due to damage reduction or hardness), the path is stopped and the attack doesn’t damage creatures farther away." makes a line weapon MORE restrictive, not less, than other line effects. A lightning bolt will not stop at an adamantine table. A line weapon machine gun will. This is a restriction, not cart blanche to read into it the opposite that -if an attack damages a creature or obstacle in the line it keeps going no matter what-
I fully agree with you that low level elemental line weaponry is stopped by stone/metal etc if not because of hardness then by the ineffective weaponry rule
Still gets silly with machine guns shooting rock and flame throwers cutting through forests.
(though I'm prepared to fight you tooth and nail on stopping plasma :P)
If you want to fight a wolf tooth and nail...
By an extreme strict reading of all the relevant rules:
Line weapons ignore cover from objects that would normally block line of effect, but not from objects that provide cover or from creatures.
This is where common sense should kick in and result in: no line weapons do not ignore cover, so all objects and creatures after the first get +4 to AC. I'm even willing to give all those behind objects filling the entire side of a square (like walls) improved cover.
Total cover is irrelevant for line (weapons) because I have line of effect to the edge of my square and from there the line and line weapon rules kick in.
I love your answer as it basically says: Depends. Sometimes yes and sometimes no. Either it gives cover and then there is no way to shoot through a wall or it doesn't give cover and you can.
Also, cover is not concealment. If you don't know the proper position of an enemy, it's concealment. If you know the proper position of an enemy but if there are things along the way stopping your shots, then it's cover.I'm a bit puzzle by the concept of cover for line weapons, as they are not stopped by what is in the way. But the way line weapons is written, it should give cover, and as such, if you shoot through a wall, you don't hit anything behind (even if your shot technically continues).
|
|
1 & 2:
A line is an area effect (page 268)
It interacts with line of effect that it extends to the limit of the range or until it strikes a barrier that blocks line of effect.
Line of effect for an effect with an area requires you to have line of effect to the point of origin of the effect.
The line area effect originates from one of the edges of your square and continues along a predefined straight path (examples of 30 foot lines on a grid on page 269).
The line of effect is blocked by a barrier that stops the effect in question.
A line weapons line of effect is blocked ONLY if it fails to deal damage, which is a specific override to the normal line and line of effect rules.
I'm not firing at the person behind a 30 foot rock. He just happens to stand in the line and might get hit because I'm comparing my attackroll to the AC of everything in that area.
3.
Lightning bolt follows the rules of lines as laid out on page 268. It doesn't interact with the adamantine table unless the adamantine table is set up to act as a line of effect breaking object. Then it just full stops because a 5x5(x3") piece of adamantine counts as a pretty solid object.
The line weapon however does indeed suffer from being able to be stopped by an adamantine table both set up to act as barrier and just standing there, and yes, that makes it more restrictive than other line effects, though that can be overcome by dealing hitpoint damage to the admantine table (aka overcoming hardness) because it has specific exceptions to other line effects.
Machine guns don't have the line property.
Flame throwers don't have the line property but the blast property, which functions different.
As for fighting tooth and nail
I love your answer as it basically says: Depends. Sometimes yes and sometimes no. Either it gives cover and then there is no way to shoot through a wall or it doesn't give cover and you can.
Also, cover is not concealment. If you don't know the proper position of an enemy, it's concealment. If you know the proper position of an enemy but if there are things along the way stopping your shots, then it's cover.
I'm a bit puzzle by the concept of cover for line weapons, as they are not stopped by what is in the way. But the way line weapons is written, it should give cover, and as such, if you shoot through a wall, you don't hit anything behind (even if your shot technically continues).
Fine, I'll bite.
Concealment is not mentioned anywhere in line weapon attacks. Arguments can be made for both applying and not applying. Area of effect reflex save vs attack roll. Personally I'm going to apply 50% miss chance from concealment for everything that's behind the first wall I'm hitting.Cover however has pretty specific interactions with line of effect.
Following these interactions by an extreme reading means that I ignore objects that block line of effect because my line weapon property states I only lose line of effect if I don't deal hitpoint damage to a creature or object in my line. This means they at most can provide cover, and creatures only provide cover anyway.
If the creature or object I hit doesn't take damage my line doesn't continu.
So, let's read line of effect.
"Line of Effect
If a weapon, spell, ability, or item requires an attack roll and has a range measured in feet, it normally requires that you (or whoever or whatever is using the ability) have a line of effect to the target to be effective (subject to GM discretion). A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what an attack or ability can affect."
It looks like what we need.
"A line of effect is blocked by a solid barrier that can stop the effect in question (such as a wall, for most effects), but it is not blocked by purely visual restrictions (such as smoke or darkness)."
Ok. So, this is not the case, as the wall doesn't block line of effect.
"You must have a clear line of effect to any creature or object you wish to target or to any space in which you wish to create an effect without an area. For effects with an area, you must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of the effect."
You don't. The creature is behind the wall, and you haven't destroyed the wall, so you don't have clear line of effect. Hence the creature has full cover and is not affected.
Do you have an issue with this reading?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do. I'm not targeting the creature.
It happens to be in the area of effect created by line and is then subjected to the effect, which in case of a line weapon is started by checking if my attack roll beats the relevant AC
Edit: actually, based on all of this I retract my statement about cover applying to line weapons. It doesn't apply because my effect never interacts with cover other than checking for stopping completely.
Even concealment wouldn't apply.
Line says:
"However, if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line (typically due to damage reduction or hardness), the path is stopped and the attack doesn’t damage creatures farther away."
It doesn't say that: if an attack damages a creature or obstacle, the path is not stopped. This doesn't replace the line of effect rule, it's just an addendum. You need line of effect and you need the line to damage each creature and object in the path to affect a creature.
|
|
Wait what?
If I fail to damage a creature or obstacle hit my line stops.
If I succeed in damage a creature my line continues and I apply the check for AC and damage on the next valid target.
If I succeed in damaging an obstable (like a wall) my line continues and I apply the check for AC and damage on the next valid target
That's pretty much the entry of line weapons. Why would it suddenly stop because I hit a wall instead of a creature?
Maybe my grasp of english is failing me here, but you are treating objects and creatures differently for determining the continuation of this effect that has specific rules about this.
I've edited my previous post, as it's more clear when reading line.
If I succeed in damage a creature my line continues
Show me where that is written.
Saying "if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line, the path is stopped." doesn't mean "if an attack damages a creature or obstacle hit in the line, the path is not stopped."|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we make it as followed?
, if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line (typcially due to damage reduction or hardness), the path is stopped and the attack doesn't damage creatures father away.
When does the path stop?
If I fail to deal damage to a creature or object I hit.
When does the path not stop?
All other results.
This is like more binary than this it cannot get.
When does the path not stop?
All other results.
Nothing states that.
There is a rule, which is line of effect.In case of line, there is an extra rule: The line stops if you don't damage a creature on the path. Nothing states that line of effect rule is cancelled thanks to this rule. So both rules apply.
A line is stopped if you don't have line of effect OR if you don't damage a creature in the path.
Unless you show me something stating that line of effect isn't effective in case of line weapons, this is my reading.
|
|
You make an attack roll and compare it to the relevant AC of all objects and creatures in a line extending to the weapon's listed range increment.
This to me now actually specifically states that you do not check for line of sight or line of effect.
You simply have a line of effect.
You hit all of them if you meet or beat their AC.
Then you start with the first creature or object.
Apply damage: do I deal hitpoint damage or not?
If yes, check next creature or object and continu doing this until you either reach the end of the line, or a creature or object doesn't take damage.
Blast: "This weapon fires in a cone that extends only to its first range increment."
Explode: "Each creature within the blast radius takes the listed damage but can attempt a Reflex saving throw for half damage."
So, line of effect isn't applicable to area of effect attacks?
|
|
You must have a clear line of effect to any creature or object you wish to target or to any space in which you wish to create an effect without an area.
= Line weapons create an area effect.
= Blast weapons create an area effect.
= Explode weapons create an area effect
For effects with an area, you must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of the effect.
= Line weapon point of origin is the edge of the square of the shooter
= Blast weapons point of origin is the edge of the square of the shooter
= Explode weapons point of origin is the targeted intersection.
An effect that is a burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation affects only an area, creature, or object within line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst’s center point, a cone-shaped burst’s starting point, the
center point of a cylinder’s circle, or an emanation’s point of origin)
= Blast weapons create a cone-shaped burst
= Explode weapons create a spherical burst
Lines stop if they stike a solid barrier that stops their effect.
Line weapons require this solid barrier to be an object or creature that does not take damage from a succesful checking of attackroll vs AC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Line weapons do NOT create an area of effect.
Line spells and similar effects do.
I can see how you've confused the two. It's easy to do. The developers really should have come up with a better term for line weapons. "Penetrating" perhaps?
|
|
Penetrating is an existing weapon property that reduces the hardness of objects by an amount equal to the penetrating weapon's itemlevel.
Anyway, if we don't have an area of effect we have a line of effect though? Because we are firing a pellet along a straight line through multiple creatures and obstacles?
If you only ever get to hit/damage creatures because of "but lines of effect are blocked even if the weapon says it only gets stopped by failing to deal damage" why do line weapons specifically state creature or obstacle?
If obstacles would stop line weapons wouldn't the entry have read:
This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through mutliple creatures, if it encounters an obstacle it stops. When attacking with such a weapon, make a single attack roll and compare it to the relevant Armor Class of all creatures in a line extending to the weapon's listed range increment. Roll damage only once. The weapons hits all targets with an AC equal to or lower than the attack roll. However if an attack fails to damage a creature hit in the line (typcially due to damage reduction), the path is also stopped and the attack doesn't damage creatures farther away.
Anyway, I can reword the rules over and over, you consider that line ruling removes line of effect rule. I don't. I don't see how we can get to an agreement :)
Edit to answer this:
"This weapon fires a projectile in a straight line that pierces through mutliple creatures, if it encounters an obstacle it stops."
This isn't true. It needs to give total cover. In case of line weapons, it can also block the line if you don't damage it enough. 2 distinct conditions, one coming from the line of effect rule, the other one from the line weapons.
"Line weapons do NOT create an area of effect."
It doesn't change anything. You need line of effect to attack a creature.
Penetrating is an existing weapon property that reduces the hardness of objects by an amount equal to the penetrating weapon's item level.
Forgot about that one. In my defense, it is a rather forgettable property more often than not. "Piercing" then?
Blast, explode and line weapons create cone, sphere, and line shapes.
However, they are not called out as bursts, spreads or emanations. They should probably be defined as bursts.
Between the rules for line weapons, line shapes, line of effect, and ineffective weapons, the GM has all the tools they need to say 'yes, this railgun shoots through the bulkhead' or 'no, your flame pistol does not shoot through the airlock'. Both rulings are supported by GM interpretation clauses in line of effect.
'A line of effect is stopped by a solid barrier that can stop the effect in question' + 'straight line that pierces through multiple creatures or obstacles' = Any GM can say that a wall or creature, or other object that typically stops line of effect does not stop line of effect in the instance of a line weapon capable of dealing damage to that wall/creature/object. This is not only applicable to line weapons, but really any weapon or spell depending on the obstacle in question.
As a player, you can point these bits out to your GM and argue your case. I don't think you can say 'of course it works this way, all the time, every time', you can simply say 'I'm pretty sure my railgun loaded with adamantine rounds has line of effect past this wooden wall, what do you think GM?'.
This has been argued and argued to death. The rules literally state that you roll, compare roll to the AC of all things in the line and that it HITS all things that are in that line. It also states under what circumstances it stops.. failure to damage. Those are the rules we have. There are plenty of people willing to assume its affects and exceptions to existing rules, stated in its own rules somehow work like other things that aren't worded that way and this circular argument goes on forever and likely will until that mythical day we get a sorely needed FAQ.
I know how I rule it and use it at my table but I really, really would love to see some love or response to the many issues that need addressed.
1 & 2:
A line weapons line of effect is blocked ONLY if it fails to deal damage, which is a specific override to the normal line and line of effect rules.
I do not believe that that is the correct interpretation of the rules. You can diagram the sentence all day long what it comes down to is reading the rules this way gets very silly, while reading the rules where this only overcomes the specific limitations on line weapons stopping at an obstacle is a vastly more sensible ruling.
I'm not firing at the person behind a 30 foot rock. He just happens to stand in the line and might get hit because I'm comparing my attackroll to the AC of everything in that area.
You also don't get line of effect to him to get your line to him. You need at least a 1 foot wide hole in the wall to get line of effect and a bullet dealing 1 damage to every 10 foot cube isn't going to get you that.
Lightning bolt follows the rules of lines as laid out on page 268. It doesn't interact with the adamantine table unless the adamantine table is set up to act as a line of effect breaking object. Then it just full stops because a 5x5(x3") piece of adamantine counts as a pretty solid object.
This is incorrect.
Cover grants you a +4 bonus to AC and a +2 bonus to Reflex saves against attacks that originate from a point on the other side of the cover from you
So that overturned adamantine table provides a +2 cover bonus to your reflex save. the wooden table? +2 cover bonus.
The adamantine one is better at stopping machinegun fine railgun fire though.
Machine guns don't have the line property.
I'm really more of a large sharp objects guy. The minigun or the railgun or whatever it is.
Flame throwers don't have the line property but the blast property, which functions different.
Flame rifle 2 490 1d6 F 25 ft. Burn 1d6 20 petrol 5 1 Line, unwieldy
Thats the one that would be a real world flame thrower.
As for fighting tooth and nail
:) needs BBQ sauce.
Its bizzare to me that in one thread you argue that when specific rules apply you ignore the normal rules and in this thread you don't BNW.
The rules for Line weapons state how they work, they are exceptions to the normal rules (which even themselves note only apply in most cases.
Again, I don't think the very specific rules about line weapons apply to the general rules about line of sight or cover. I think the very specific rules about line weapons apply to the very specific rules about a line weapon stopping when it hits cover or a creature.
Specific only trumps general where the specific applies. I don't think it applies to all aspects of the line weapon, just that one aspect.
But if line weapons stop in the same ways as per the general rules, then their specific rules don't do anything in the situation in which they would come into effect. Thus they might as well not exist.
They don t. A line spell doesn t stop at cover or an immune creature. Line weapons do. That's all the rule changes.
Lines stop at full covering obstacles. Line weapons stop if they don't damage an obstacle.
Everyone seems to understand that.
These are two different conditions. So why the second one would cancel the first one?
It looks like people consider that they are mutually exclusive.
If there is a lightning immune creature, lightning bolt will go through but not electric line weapons. If there is a wall, neither the spell nor the line weapon will go through.
Line weapons are just stopped more often than line spells.
|
|
I really should stop.
Adamantine ignores hardness 29 and less. Agreed?
A line is stopped by a full covering obstacle, if that full covering obstacle can block the effect. Agreed?
Now, what happens with an adamantine projectile fired by a line weapon if it meets a stone wall (hardness 15)?
Can the wall block the effect?
I really should stop.
Adamantine ignores hardness 29 and less. Agreed?
A line is stopped by a full covering obstacle, if that full covering obstacle can block the effect. Agreed?
My driveway gets wet when it rains
My driveway is wet
Did it therefore rain?
I do. I'm not targeting the creature.
It happens to be in the area of effect created by line and is then subjected to the effect, which in case of a line weapon is started by checking if my attack roll beats the relevant ACEdit: actually, based on all of this I retract my statement about cover applying to line weapons. It doesn't apply because my effect never interacts with cover other than checking for stopping completely.
Even concealment wouldn't apply.
This is how I read it.
Just for fun, if I were to write a FAQ entry *cough* errata *cough*for this, I would change this sentence:
However, if an attack fails to damage a creature or obstacle hit in the line (typically due to damage reduction or hardness), the path is stopped and the attack doesn’t damage creatures farther away.
To something like this:
If a creature or obstacle hit in the line has any applicable damage reduction, resistance, or hardness, subtract that value from the damage applied to creatures farther away. This cannot lower the damage below zero.
Then we could all just argue about cover and concealment.
Honestly, I don't think that would stop arguments at all, since wall thickness does not affect hardness, and you would get the same silly result.
Honestly, I don't think that would stop arguments at all, since wall thickness does not affect hardness, and you would get the same silly result.
Point. I was thinking about it applying per square(or border) of wall/material/object. It would sort out some of the "50 feet of rock" nonsense results without also introducing "shoji stops a railgun" nonsense results.
The only thing we all agree with is that shoji doesn't stop a railgun :)
The line hits the shoji, the paper takes enough damage to be destroyed, line keeps going.
World's least lucky ninja on the other side probably still has concealment or total concealment depending on how well you saw his kabuki shadow against the wall
As so basically Line weapons are just terrible then?
They're great for attacking multiple targets: I've seen line weapons under the right circumstances do 3 4 or even 5 times the amount of damage as a single shot. They're great for NPCs mowing down a party. They're a little harder for PCs to use because you usually have a meatshield in the way (and making him immune to your attacks will block the gun if you hit him). If you're an envoy that can move and shoot they're amazing.
But they're situational. What other ability is nearly as powerful as ignore cover, ignore concealment, shoot at someone through a 30 foot wall and hit multiple targets all at once? What people are reading as the rules makes line way out of line for other abilities paizo has put on the guns.
A car stops when it hits a telephone pole does not mean that a car goes through mountains. That the line weapon stops when it hits cover or a creature it can't damage from hardness does not mean that that's the only way it stops.