There are numerous threads pointing out the fact that the cantrip Acid Splash is not well defined in what doing "1 point of acid splash damage" on a hit means, so I am not especially interested here in reviving that debate which can only be resolved if we ever get another round of Errata on the core rulebook.
But I am curious to find out how most tables are choosing to run it:
Does your table treat "1d6 acid damage plus 1 splash acid damage." as meaning:
A. Only the target takes 1d6+1 acid damage, with that 1 point of splash damage just engaging swarm weaknesses?
B. Only the target takes 1d6 acid damage, and then the target and all adjacent creatures take 1 point of acid splash damage?
C. Some other option?
Please start your response with the letter, even if you want to talk more about the issue. Also feel free to post for how you see live play podcasts handle the situation. I am curious more about how this spell is being handled in play more so than how it is supposed to be used.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The option A is how I rule it...
Or I would rule if someone had taken the cantrip, because no one is interested in that cantrip in my table to be honest, the damage is only decent when it hit swarm weakness when compared to other cantrips.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
C
If an attack with a splash weapon fails, succeeds, or critically succeeds, all creatures within 5 feet of the target (including the target) take the listed splash damage. On a failure (but not a critical failure), the target of the attack still takes the splash damage. Add splash damage together with the initial damage against the target before applying the target’s weaknesses or resistances. You don’t multiply splash damage on a critical hit.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
C
splash (trait) When you use a thrown weapon with the splash trait, you don’t add your Strength modifier to the damage roll.If an attack with a splash weapon fails, succeeds, or critically succeeds, all creatures within 5 feet of the target (including the target) take the listed splash damage. On a failure (but not a critical failure), the target of the attack still takes the splash damage. Add splash damage together with the initial damage against the target before applying the target’s weaknesses or resistances. You don’t multiply splash damage on a critical hit.
My reading of rules tends to go for A.
The Acid Splash spell is neither a weapon nor has the splash trait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two great places to carry on a debate about why people are interpreting the spell the way they do can be found here:
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42q3s?Acid-Splash#1
and here:
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42tui?Understanding-acid-splash#1
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm inclined to go with B. (I don't give Acid Splash any damage on a miss).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
C, with the same reasoning as Nefreet.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Avatar [level 10]
"Hei Feng Speed 70 feet, air walk, ignore difficult terrain and greater difficult terrain; Melee Single Action drunken sword (forceful, reach 15 feet), Damage 4d6+6 slashing plus 1d6 electricity splash damage; Ranged Single Action storm surge (range 120 feet, air, water), Damage 4d6+3 bludgeoning plus 1d6 electricity splash damage. The caster is immune to this splash damage."
This seems to indicate that splash damage hits the 5' even when not a thrown weapon.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I go with C and agree with Nefreet. While the spell doesn't have the Splash trait for some reason, the damage is specifically called out as "Splash" damage. This would be no different than calling it any other type of damage, it would follow the rules for that type of damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
B.
It's Splash damage, not the Splash trait. It only works on a hit.
Avatar [level 10]
"Hei Feng Speed 70 feet, air walk, ignore difficult terrain and greater difficult terrain; Melee Single Action drunken sword (forceful, reach 15 feet), Damage 4d6+6 slashing plus 1d6 electricity splash damage; Ranged Single Action storm surge (range 120 feet, air, water), Damage 4d6+3 bludgeoning plus 1d6 electricity splash damage. The caster is immune to this splash damage."This seems to indicate that splash damage hits the 5' even when not a thrown weapon.
So is this a B? or a C?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So is this a B? or a C?Avatar [level 10]
"Hei Feng Speed 70 feet, air walk, ignore difficult terrain and greater difficult terrain; Melee Single Action drunken sword (forceful, reach 15 feet), Damage 4d6+6 slashing plus 1d6 electricity splash damage; Ranged Single Action storm surge (range 120 feet, air, water), Damage 4d6+3 bludgeoning plus 1d6 electricity splash damage. The caster is immune to this splash damage."This seems to indicate that splash damage hits the 5' even when not a thrown weapon.
Whichever letter means it works like the current splash rules. For instance, if the Avatar [Hei Feng] fails to hit, hits or crits with their drunken sword, the target and everyone within 5' gets 1d6 electricity splash damage.
Whichever letter means it works like the current splash rules. For instance, if the Avatar [Hei Feng] fails to hit, hits or crits with their drunken sword, the target and everyone within 5' gets 1d6 electricity splash damage.So is this a B? or a C?Avatar [level 10]
"Hei Feng Speed 70 feet, air walk, ignore difficult terrain and greater difficult terrain; Melee Single Action drunken sword (forceful, reach 15 feet), Damage 4d6+6 slashing plus 1d6 electricity splash damage; Ranged Single Action storm surge (range 120 feet, air, water), Damage 4d6+3 bludgeoning plus 1d6 electricity splash damage. The caster is immune to this splash damage."This seems to indicate that splash damage hits the 5' even when not a thrown weapon.
SO C. splash damage should work identically to the splash trait, it doesn't mater that the spell only mentions splash damage on a hit.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
B.
It's Splash damage, not the Splash trait. It only works on a hit.
So what does splash damage mean if it's not supposed to be referencing the splash trait?
Honestly I can't imagine it means anything else, but I'm new to this argument.
If the underlying question of this thread is confusing, these two threads discuss the nuances of the question in great detail:
and
My interest in this thread is in seeing how tables are using it in play, not how they think it is supposed to work, or how it actually works according to raw. Although I think if it is interpreted in certain ways, it is certainly much less likely to be used at all.
At the table I play at, the GM ruled it A.
At the table I GM at, I rule it B.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what does splash damage mean if it's not supposed to be referencing the splash trait?
The way I understand it the argument is that splash is being treated as a damage type here. The spell does acid and splash so it can target splash weaknesses, but the aoe damage and other mechanics are part of the trait itself and since Acid Splash lacks that, it doesn't actually get those benefits.
Not saying that's right, but that's how I understand the logic behind position A in the OP.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I imagine it like this — people either:
select acid splash because they see only one splash definition in Pathfinder 2 and run it that way.
don't select acid splash because they don't see the Splash Trait, and determine that "unknown=non-existent".
I think this is pretty spot on. IMO, one issue is with the splash trait itself as it was clearly written with bombs in mind instead of a generic trait for splash damage. It'd make thing easier if it was rewritten to remove the assumption that all splash attacks are thrown weapon attacks and if the trait were to be placed on all splash spells.
I was trying not to contaminate this thread with the general discussion about the issue because I was hoping to get a decent sample of whether there was generally a consensus about how this was working at tables or if it was a point of general disagreement, but it was probably a bad idea to try to do that kind of poll in this format anyway.
I think it might be some time before we get any kind of errata at this point, but I think it is important to figure out what the general effect of rules confusion is on the elements of the game they effect.
Honestly, I think the RAW here is pretty clearly A, but it really shouldn’t be, because the spell is absolute garbage even in the only situation where A is useful, (triggering weaknesses). You are always better off with produce flame or preferably electric arc.
However, if the spell was just supposed to have the splash trait, the specific wording of it is still confusing, as the spell only does splash damage on a successful hit, making the general application of the splash trait not really work at all. That is why B is my guess, but it is honestly fair to say that there is no one clear RAI for this spell at all.
Knowing how it is generally being used, and how people feel about it’s balance when they use it that way would be a nice stand in for an Errata that we might be waiting a very long time for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was trying not to contaminate this thread with the general discussion about the issue because I was hoping to get a decent sample of whether there was generally a consensus about how this was working at tables or if it was a point of general disagreement, but it was probably a bad idea to try to do that kind of poll in this format anyway.
I think it might be some time before we get any kind of errata at this point, but I think it is important to figure out what the general effect of rules confusion is on the elements of the game they effect.
Honestly, I think the RAW here is pretty clearly A, but it really shouldn’t be, because the spell is absolute garbage even in the only situation where A is useful, (triggering weaknesses). You are always better off with produce flame or preferably electric arc.
However, if the spell was just supposed to have the splash trait, the specific wording of it is still confusing, as the spell only does splash damage on a successful hit, making the general application of the splash trait not really work at all. That is why B is my guess, but it is honestly fair to say that there is no one clear RAI for this spell at all.
Knowing how it is generally being used, and how people feel about it’s balance when they use it that way would be a nice stand in for an Errata that we might be waiting a very long time for.
It wouldn't be the first example of an ability that didn't have the proper trait added to it, or needed another trait that was missing. I think you pretty much got your answer if you were looking for a general poll though. Small sample size, for more results try reddit I suppose and put up an actual Poll.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
C, I assume it was just a mistake, and even if it wasn't the spell is so bad it needs it to have a niche.
However, if the spell was just supposed to have the splash trait, the specific wording of it is still confusing, as the spell only does splash damage on a successful hit, making the general application of the splash trait not really work at all. That is why B is my guess, but it is honestly fair to say that there is no one clear RAI for this spell at all.
I take it as the wording is awful vs it needing a hit: When it says "If you hit, you deal 1d6 acid damage plus 1 splash acid damage" I take it as 'If you hit, you deal 1d6 acid damage' and the 'plus 1 splash acid damage' are meant to be different instances, much like when you look up Alchemist's Fire and it says "The bomb deals 1d8 fire damage, 1 persistent fire damage, and 1 fire splash damage." It doesn't go into the particulars of the different damage types in the descriptions. For instance, if you look up the bomb trait it too suggests you need a hit: "An alchemical bomb combines volatile alchemical components that explode when the bomb hits a creature or object. It's the splash part that differs for bombs but if you rely on bombs trait you'll miss the splash damage there too.
None of these arguments work when your GM reads the spell and says, “the raw here is clear. The spell does not have the splash trait and splash damage is a thing in the bestiary that creatures are weak to.” At that point you just have to write the spell off. Again I hope We get an Errata soon, and I encourage others to house rule a more effective version of this spell. But just from the responses above, it is not an anomalous interpretation to take the spell at face value and interpret it as A.
At that point you just have to write the spell off.
Its a cantrip. 1d6 for a cantrip is pretty good. Getting to use it on swarms and things that are weak to splash/aoe and it excels pretty well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At that point you just have to write the spell off.Its a cantrip. 1d6 for a cantrip is pretty good. Getting to use it on swarms and things that are weak to splash/aoe and it excels pretty well.
it is 1d6 with no attribute modifer at level 1 and then only heightens every other level. It starts behind and stays behind without having anything special that it really offers over produce flame:
Acid splash level 1
1d6+1splash = 4.5 damage average (3.5 acid, 1 point acid splash), best case scenario: crit: 7 points acid damage, 1 point of persistent damage - triggers weaknesses against swarms.
Acid splash level 9 spell
4d6+5+4 splash = 23 damage average (19 acid, 4 splash), 33 best case critical hit+5 persistent.
Produce flame level 1
1d4+4 fire = 6.5 average, best case crit: (double damage: 16 fire damage, +4 persistent.)
Produce flame Level 9
9d4+5 = 27.5 fire damage, best case crit: 82 fire damage + 36 persistent fire damage.)
weaknesses against splash damage are
lvl 0 - 5
lvl 1 - 3 (x2)
lvl 3 - 5
lvl 4 - 5 (2)
So best case scenario, against one of the 6 creatures in the bestiary with this weakness, you will do an average of 1 to 3 more points of damage than produce flame for having targeted a swarms weakness (the swarm trait in the back of the book actually only calls out area damage and splash weapons as its weaknesses, but the entry does just list splash as the damage type).
But it is the critical effect that makes it clear to me that there is no way this is supposed to work like A. Even when it works like B it is a terrible critical, but you probably used it to target more than one creature to begin with so you knew what you were getting into. Produce Flame is the massively superior single target blast spell, and it is not all that great a spell in the first place.
At least Daze (the comparably terrible damage cantrip) hits on a successful save and has a critical effect that is worth casting the spell for.
None of these arguments work when your GM reads the spell and says, “the raw here is clear.
Well, if the DM has made up their mind then it was never a debate or discussion in the first place... What I can take from the thread is that it isn't clear which makes a "the RAW is clear" stance an unsteady one: we don't have a clear and explicit definition for splash damage when removes from the splash trait so any answer you have can't be 'clear and explicit' by extension.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A is essentially the correct answer, but only on a hit.
There is a difference between the Splash trait and splash damage.
Weapons with the Splash trait can deal splash damage on anything but a crit fail. The Acid Splash spell only deals splash damage on a hit/crit hit. Splash damage is a damage type, and can feature in a resistance or vulnerability. About the only other interaction I could find with splash damage was the Hydra, which can have all neck stumps cauterised by splash damage.
The description of Hei Feng seems to misinterpret how splash damage works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The description of Hei Feng seems to misinterpret how splash damage works.
Or people are misinterpreting how splash damage works and Hei Feng got it right...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A is essentially the correct answer, but only on a hit.
There is a difference between the Splash trait and splash damage.
Weapons with the Splash trait can deal splash damage on anything but a crit fail. The Acid Splash spell only deals splash damage on a hit/crit hit. Splash damage is a damage type, and can feature in a resistance or vulnerability. About the only other interaction I could find with splash damage was the Hydra, which can have all neck stumps cauterised by splash damage.
The description of Hei Feng seems to misinterpret how splash damage works.
Actually the Hydra example is probably the best circumstantial evidence we could ask for in determining how Acid Splash's Splash damage works.
Read the whole section: "A creature can prevent this regrowth by dealing acid or fire damage to the stump, cauterizing it. Single-target acid or fire effects need to be targeted at a specific stump, but effects that deal splash damage or affect areas covering the hydra’s whole space cauterize all stumps if they deal acid or fire damage. If the attack that severs a head deals any acid or fire damage, the stump is cauterized instantly. If all five heads are cauterized, the hydra dies."
This heavily implies that Acid Splash, despite the interpretation that it is a "single target" spell actually can hit multiple creatures, as it lumps Splash Damage in with area effect damage for the purposes of this ability.
While circumstantial, and not a general rule, this reinforces the idea that Acid Splash doesn't just hit a "single target" but instead acts like any other instance of Splash Damage, and effects everyone around the target as well.
Nobody in our group has ever taken it, so it's never come up. I suspect that's because it is viewed as weak, which suggests the more stringent interpretations are being observed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody in our group has ever taken it, so it's never come up. I suspect that's because it is viewed as weak, which suggests the more stringent interpretations are being observed.
I've seen it used and used it myself... Well almost: The elven feat Elemental Wrath lets you get acid splash cantrip as an innate primal spell at will, with only verbal components and deals acid, cold, electricity, or fire [picked when feat taken].
The appeal is the lack of the manipulate trait for it, meaning it avoids a lot of the reactions for casting. Use it on a desert/arctic elf when using it with fire/cold and you can blast away point blank and the 5' splash doesn't bother you.
I mean, one trick about it is that even the loosest interpretation, C. that it works exactly like a splash weapon and does damage on a miss to the primary target, is still not all that powerful, because it is 1 point of splash damage for the first 9 levels of play, only bumping up to 2 then, 3 at level 13 and a whopping 4 at level 17.
Even heightened to level 7 (13th level) is about comparable to a level 2 burning hands (actually a little worse), which the guides all say would be an absolute waste of actions by the time you have level 7 spells.
I agree that the the way the spell appears to work when you read it as literally as possible makes it garbage and that it is only really playable by house ruling some kind of splash trait on to it, but there is no obvious guidance for how to do that.
I think my personal advice is probably to give the players as much agency as possible and interpret it as C and test it in play. Does it become a better spell than Electric Arc in even 50% (or 10%) of situations? Probably not (it requires an attack roll and does 1 point of damage on a miss. If you have an 18 casting attribute you can't do less than 2 points of damage on a successful save for Electric arc, so you'd have to miss at least 3 or 4 targets with Acid splash, and have none of them be your allies, or be targeting 2 swarms to really have a clear "Acid Splash is the most powerful cantrip in this situation." Neither of those are common situations.
I mean, one trick about it is that even the loosest interpretation, C. that it works exactly like a splash weapon and does damage on a miss to the primary target, is still not all that powerful, because it is 1 point of splash damage for the first 9 levels of play, only bumping up to 2 then, 3 at level 13 and a whopping 4 at level 17.
I think it's balance that way because of the persistent damage. If you crit vs a weakness target it takes the extra damage then and at the end of it's turn plus any other targets in the area that have weakness take extra too. For instance, you crit hit some Dragonscarred Dead with a cold acid splash and that weakness cold 10 starts adding up. The flip side is that it kind of sucks vs non-weakness foes because of that.
@Unicore: You can always look at the bright side: At least Acid Splash is not Ray of Frost who's only real benefit is 120 foot range. Well that and a critical speed debuff I suppose, but other than that it will only ever be 1/2 as effective as Electric Arc. And requires a Spell Attack roll to boot.
@Unicore: You can always look at the bright side: At least Acid Splash is not Ray of Frost who's only real benefit is 120 foot range. Well that and a critical speed debuff I suppose, but other than that it will only ever be 1/2 as effective as Electric Arc. And requires a Spell Attack roll to boot.
In any situation other than a dungeon crawl, that 120ft range is a really big deal. It will often mean getting a free shot or two off before someone gets close enough to retaliate. It just happens that most adventurers find themselves in situations where it just doesn't matter that much because of the nature of tactical combat on a battle grid where every inch is only 5ft.
That makes it circumstantial, but at least its critical effect likes up well with its circumstance. A -10 spd when you are 100ft away from the target you are fighting is brutal. It also does double damage on a critical hit which means that its damage is much better than acid splash's as well.
At least Acid Splash is not Ray of Frost
I mean, if we're going with the notion that Acid Splash's splash effect is just damage, Ray of Frost is going to always be better unless you're dealing with weakness vs acid. Even giving it that 1 damage on a miss and to adjacent targets doesn't to much to nudge the math in its favor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ray of Frost's range is a big deal, IMO.
All I know is, in my experience, range beyond 60 feet is typically wasted. Used in a handful of situations granted, but wasted in every other situation.
That is completely anecdotal, and limited to my experience granted, but as a GM that tends to strictly use maps, usually physical, anything beyond that is untenable. This also has the unfortunate effect of making longbows difficult for players in the group to use due to Volley.
But I would say that in my experiences defense, combat in a "fantasy" setting tends to be close up affairs. Exceptions would be chases or sieges.
All I know is, in my experience, range beyond 60 feet is typically wasted. Used in a handful of situations granted, but wasted in every other situation.
That is completely anecdotal, and limited to my experience granted, but as a GM that tends to strictly use maps, usually physical, anything beyond that is untenable. This also has the unfortunate effect of making longbows difficult for players in the group to use due to Volley.
But I would say that in my experiences defense, combat in a "fantasy" setting tends to be close up affairs. Exceptions would be chases or sieges.
I mean, even if that is the case, 60 feet is still better than most cantrips get. And if I'm playing a squishy caster keeping as much distance as possible is usually worthwhile.
And honestly, even if you don't need that range most of the time, there are going to be times where without said range you can effectively do nothing. Ray of Frost is like the back up ranged weapon of cantrips to electric arc's bastard sword, only you don't need to spend money keeping it competitive.
All I know is, in my experience, range beyond 60 feet is typically wasted. Used in a handful of situations granted, but wasted in every other situation.
That is completely anecdotal, and limited to my experience granted, but as a GM that tends to strictly use maps, usually physical, anything beyond that is untenable. This also has the unfortunate effect of making longbows difficult for players in the group to use due to Volley.
But I would say that in my experiences defense, combat in a "fantasy" setting tends to be close up affairs. Exceptions would be chases or sieges.
I mean, even if that is the case, 60 feet is still better than most cantrips get. And if I'm playing a squishy caster keeping as much distance as possible is usually worthwhile.
And honestly, even if you don't need that range most of the time, there are going to be times where without said range you can effectively do nothing. Ray of Frost is like the back up ranged weapon of cantrips to electric arc's bastard sword, only you don't need to spend money keeping it competitive.
Good points. I've seen that solved by simply using Reach spell with Electric Arc, but if you don't have all 3 actions to spend, I suppose Ray of Frost would be handy back up spell.
Like I said, basing all of that on my personal experience. Space tends to be limited on physical maps, without changing the "scale" of an encounter which always gets wonky.
How much range comes up varies quite a bit from campaign to campaign, but generally speaking any sort of wilderness combat can easily accommodate those sorts of distances. I've done a lot of mucking about in forest myself.
Also, Cold weakness is pretty dang common, so having Ray of Frost is a handy way to trigger that.
How much range comes up varies quite a bit from campaign to campaign, but generally speaking any sort of wilderness combat can easily accommodate those sorts of distances. I've done a lot of mucking about in forest myself.
Also, Cold weakness is pretty dang common, so having Ray of Frost is a handy way to trigger that.
Is it? I am not finding very many examples of creatures with Weakness to Cold. A cursory search on Archives only pulls up 1. This one.
And I don't think I've run into weakness cold yet. Any examples? Am I just failing at my search fu?
Edit: For reference, I searched "Weaknesses Cold" and specified to only return matches with all terms. Maybe my methodology was flawed somehow?
How much range comes up varies quite a bit from campaign to campaign, but generally speaking any sort of wilderness combat can easily accommodate those sorts of distances. I've done a lot of mucking about in forest myself.
Also, Cold weakness is pretty dang common, so having Ray of Frost is a handy way to trigger that.
Is it? I am not finding very many examples of creatures with Weakness to Cold. A cursory search on Archives only pulls up 1. This one.
And I don't think I've run into weakness cold yet. Any examples? Am I just failing at my search fu?
Edit: For reference, I searched "Weaknesses Cold" and specified to only return matches with all terms. Maybe my methodology was flawed somehow?
I just searched the Bestiary for "Cold".
Crimson Worm
Balor
Red Dragons
Gold Dragons
Flame Drake
Cinder Rat
Living Wildfire
Salamander
Firewyrm
Elemental Inferno
Fire Mephit
Efreeti
Fire Giant
Flesh Golem
Alchemical Golem
Clay Golem
Stone Golem
Hell Hound
Nessian Warhound
Phoenix
Terotricus
Wemmuth
The Golems aren't weakness, but Ray of Frost is super effective against them.
How much range comes up varies quite a bit from campaign to campaign, but generally speaking any sort of wilderness combat can easily accommodate those sorts of distances. I've done a lot of mucking about in forest myself.
Also, Cold weakness is pretty dang common, so having Ray of Frost is a handy way to trigger that.
Is it? I am not finding very many examples of creatures with Weakness to Cold. A cursory search on Archives only pulls up 1. This one.
And I don't think I've run into weakness cold yet. Any examples? Am I just failing at my search fu?
Edit: For reference, I searched "Weaknesses Cold" and specified to only return matches with all terms. Maybe my methodology was flawed somehow?
I just searched the Bestiary for "Cold".
List omitted for space.
The Golems aren't weakness, but Ray of Frost is super effective against them.
Fair dues. I wish there was an easy sorting method for things like that on Archives. But that is neither here nor there.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does your table treat "1d6 acid damage plus 1 splash acid damage." as meaning:A. Only the target takes 1d6+1 acid damage, with that 1 point of splash damage just engaging swarm weaknesses?
B. Only the target takes 1d6 acid damage, and then the target and all adjacent creatures take 1 point of acid splash damage?
C. Some other option?
Please start your response with the letter, even if you want to talk more about the issue. Also feel free to post for how you see live play podcasts handle the situation. I am curious more about how this spell is being handled in play more so than how it is supposed to be used.
C. In my game, splashes work a bit differently. This goes for Alchemist bombs, Acid Splash, etc...
Crit Hit: x2 damage to target, (x1) normal damage in splash area
Hit: Normal damage to target, 1/2 damage in splash area
Miss: 1/2 damage to target, no splash damage
Crit Miss: No damage