Resonance Test- Alchemist's Fire Splash Damage

[Pfi]

This applies to the proposed changes in Resonance Test

So most of the Bomb's do 1 splash damage but this doesn't change at any level for the bombs in the Resonance test. A level 20 Alchemist's fire still only does 1 splash damage.

Given the importance of Focus points as another resource to keep track of, I wanted to point out the complete uselessness of the Focus point ability of Alchemist's Fire.

Acid Flask can have a focus point spent to do the persistent damage up front, pretty neat and good. Alchemist's Fire allows you to spend a focus point to increase the splash radius from 5 ft to 10 ft. However the splash damage is 1 damage, at all levels. So I am using a Focus point to do 1 damage to each creature within 10 ft, at level 1 up to level 20. This just seems very weak and pointless.

Am I missing something about splash damage?

It is always 1, all the time for bombs that do splash damage. I think splash damage should be changed so that it counts for something at later levels.
I also think Alchemist's Fire should be changed too. The Focus effect should make it so that each creature within the splash radius (and if Paizo is being generous keep the increased splash radius for the Focus effect) also take the persistent damage.

[Alyran]

There are 2 feats that increase splash damage. One at level 4 that increases splash to 1+INT mod. One at level 10 that increases splash to 2+INT mod and the radius to 10 feet.

The level 4 one seems like a fair damage increase. The level 10 one seems...weak, by comparison. And makes alchemist fire's focus ability useless.

[Pfi]

I assumed you wouldn't want them because there are better feats at those levels.

And you're right. Again, to the point that splash damage seems like the tiniest tick and the Focus effect of Alchemist's fire is useless.

[Alyran]

Pfi wrote:

I assumed you wouldn't want them because there are better feats at those levels.

And you're right. Again, to the point that splash damage seems like the tiniest tick and the Focus effect of Alchemist's fire is useless.

I can actually see the level 4 splash damage increase being quite useful in a game where your DM uses lots of swarms or hordes of enemies.

[shroudb]

Alyran wrote:

Pfi wrote:

I assumed you wouldn't want them because there are better feats at those levels.

And you're right. Again, to the point that splash damage seems like the tiniest tick and the Focus effect of Alchemist's fire is useless.

I can actually see the level 4 splash damage increase being quite useful in a game where your DM uses lots of swarms or hordes of enemies.

Yes, I'm sure that the 300+ hp monsters of higher CR will tremble before that amazing 5-6 damage AoE you'd do at like level 10-19.

Splash should revert to old form of minimum rolled damage, and "calculated splash" should change to "calculated throw" that adds Int as base damage (so that it can also multiply on a Crit (like every single other attack in the game benefits from a stat)

[masda_gib]

Splash damage (and something like 1 persistant damage) only hurt against creatures with weaknesses.

The 1 point splash damage becomes 21 points if you have fire weakness 20. Now have a alchemist throw 3 bombs at your feet in one round and you take 63 points splash damage.

Without weakness it's useless, yes.

[shroudb]

masda_gib wrote:

Splash damage (and something like 1 persistant damage) only hurt against creatures with weaknesses.

The 1 point splash damage becomes 21 points if you have fire weakness 20. Now have a alchemist throw 3 bombs at your feet in one round and you take 63 points splash damage.

Without weakness it's useless, yes.

hey, i have a counter argument, splash damage is useless to the rest 95% of the creatures that have resistance to your elemental damage because it turns 2 feats worth of damage (the 2+Int spalsh damage increase) to 0.

We can't be really serious about balancing around "a few monsters have weaknesses so it's ok"

Or, we can have swords deal 1 damage and only use them vs creatures with Vulnerability slashing 20+

in short:

exploiting vulnerabilities should be a bonus, not just so to set it in the bare minimum an ability should do to even begin with

OR

alternatively:

make ALL creatures. Every single one of them (including humans and the like) be Vulnerable 20 to at least 1 element. So that we can juggle vulnerabilities to actually pull off a bit decent damage.

[Joey Cote]

Yeah, I really don't want my character taking an extra 20 points of damage from an energy type just to make alchemist's feel good about their splash damage.

Splash damage is supposed to be incidental damage, a little extra. The problem with the bombs is their damage doesn't scale anything like weapons because

1-They don't get a bonus to hit like magic and weapon quality give.

2-Alchemist's don't increase in skill in bombs (or they get expert extremely late). This is only slightly offset by only needing to hit touch AC.

3-The base damage die is pretty small on most bombs meaning it doesn't scale well. 3d4 at 7th is extremely weak on a limited attack per day weapon.

4-The alchemist gets no + to damage from Int or Dex or even Str.

5-Bombs can't be used with sling/crossbows, ect.

6-No ability to create rune like effects on your bombs, so they cannot be given ghost touch, disrupting, etc.

There is so much more that is a problem with alchemists, splash damage is the least thing I think needs looking at.

[shroudb]

Joey Cote wrote:

Yeah, I really don't want my character taking an extra 20 points of damage from an energy type just to make alchemist's feel good about their splash damage.

Splash damage is supposed to be incidental damage, a little extra. The problem with the bombs is their damage doesn't scale anything like weapons because

1-They don't get a bonus to hit like magic and weapon quality give.

2-Alchemist's don't increase in skill in bombs (or they get expert extremely late). This is only slightly offset by only needing to hit touch AC.

3-The base damage die is pretty small on most bombs meaning it doesn't scale well. 3d4 at 7th is extremely weak on a limited attack per day weapon.

4-The alchemist gets no + to damage from Int or Dex or even Str.

5-Bombs can't be used with sling/crossbows, ect.

6-No ability to create rune like effects on your bombs, so they cannot be given ghost touch, disrupting, etc.

There is so much more that is a problem with alchemists, splash damage is the least thing I think needs looking at.

I was being half-sarcastic there for all the people, including MArk, that say that's ok to do 1 damage because something, somewhere, might take 500damage from it because it has Fatal flaw: fire.

And I really don't feel that splash is supposed to be incidental damage that might matter once/20 levels of an alchemist's career.

It's a BOMB ffs. Splash was always a key component to it.

And yes, direct hits hurt more, but splash should be at least around respectable AoE.

That means that it should do AT LEAST around 10-15 damage by level 10 and around 20-25 damage by level 20.

Keep in mind that bombs are a 2 Action "cast" same as spells.

And due to how many you have, they should do at least 1/2 the damage of an equal level spell.

[Megistone]

A bomb is exactly the weapon I think about when there are a bunch of enemies close together. I'm very disappointed at how small the splash damage is.

[Doktor Weasel]

shroudb wrote:

Splash should revert to old form of minimum rolled damage, and "calculated splash" should change to "calculated throw" that adds Int as base damage (so that it can also multiply on a Crit (like every single other attack in the game benefits from a stat)

Exactly this. This would be a good start in making alchemists almost useful. Also give better proficiency in bombs. Then make more and better elixirs that can do more of the things alchemists could do with their extracts in PF1. At high level they could turn themselves into powerful monsters, get True Seeing or other powerful effects. The current selection of elixirs and mutagens are rather weak in comparison.