Someone said wrote: You have calculated all the angles to maximize a bomb’s splash. When you throw an alchemical bomb with the splash trait, you can cause the bomb to deal splash damage equal to your Intelligence modifier (minimum 0) instead of the normal amount.
You have calculated all the angles to maximize a bomb’s splash. When you throw an alchemical bomb with the splash trait, you can cause the bomb to deal splash damage equal to your Intelligence modifier (minimum 0) instead of the normal amount.
So the question is fairly simple:
Scenario 1: Calc splash replaces he usual splash damage with int modifier and thus you get double intelligence modifier to bomb damage if you have both.
Scenario 2: the reading of ''usual'' splash damage is the bomb's splash damage and it's only bomb's splash +int.
I don't know exactly which way to rule it, it doesn't seem game breaking (at best it's a +3 damage increase per bomb) and alchemists are already on the lower end of the damage bracket, what do you guys think?
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I'm not sure what you're asking.
Calculated Splash lets you replace the normal splash with your Int mod.
Expanded Splash lets you ADD your Int mod to the normal splash damage, and expand the splash range to 10 feet.
You can't add your Int mod twice, you do one or the other. The "usual" damage is the damage listed in the item description.
Also, yes Alchemists do less damage, but they spread that damage to multiple targets. Doing 4 damage to 5 enemies with a single action at level 4 is pretty good.
Cordell Kintner wrote:
Also, yes Alchemists do less damage, but they spread that damage to multiple targets. Doing 4 damage to 5 enemies with a single action at level 4 is pretty good.
Above poster is correct, intmod instead of default (so typically 4 instead of 2) and then intmod plus default (so typically 4 plus 2).
Also, no offense, but there's a few "if" missing from the quote above. If the enemies are grouped up enough, which most GM's actively avoid if the critters have any sort of smarts. Also, if your teammates aren't mixed in with them, so typically not after round 1 of combat. There's no selective splash in PF2.
You also can't pick area size with the increased damage of expanded splash, so if you want to do intmod plus default splash you can't choose it to be in a 5 ft radius, has to be 10 ft or nothing, assuming you're a bomber.
It was merely hypothetical based on my experience with level 4s in Society play. Rarely are there more than 5 enemies, but even then those enemies would be pretty weak. It is indeed usually 1-3 enemies, but I was just using an outlier as an example.
For an extreme case, assume a Level 4 Bomber alchemist, attacking a creature in the middle of 8 others, which is the highest number based on the space (outside of those creatures being tiny). The alchemist Strikes with a Moderate Alchemist Fire and hits. That's an average of 9 damage from the 2d8, plus 4 to each creature around them, meaning that one bomb dealt at least 27 damage, and the persistent damage can stick around for a while if the target is unlucky.
Basically, alchemists are strong vs multiple targets, not so much single targets. That's why you need to use various bombs. Electric is great if you have a rogue in the party, Acid if you just want to melt the target with persistent damage, Thunderstones to disable casters, and Dread Ampoules for the Frightened debuff.
Cordell Kintner wrote:
Basically, alchemists are strong vs multiple targets, not so much single targets. That's why you need to use various bombs. Electric is great if you have a rogue in the party, Acid if you just want to melt the target with persistent damage, Thunderstones to disable casters, and Dread Ampoules for the Frightened debuff.
Fair enough, I've never had a cluster of baddies to bomb in society play except doing 1 damage to some spiders, after which the wizard burning handed them to death. Making swarms a non issue was fun though.
It would be really nice if bombers did more damage to single target if they choose not to do a radius damage, it would help a lot, though I'd rather have better accuracy with the debuff bombs I'll eventually get so i can be a reliable debuffer. Maybe better accuracy if they choose not to cause radius splash?
I'm waiting on the 2nd round errata to resume PFS, because it just wasn't fun using my bomber through level 4.
FYI, thunder stones don't actually hurt casters except for a specific set of spells with the auditory trait. Spells with a verbal component but no auditory trait are unaffected.
Aricks wrote: FYI, thunder stones don't actually hurt casters except for a specific set of spells with the auditory trait. Spells with a verbal component but no auditory trait are unaffected. I can count on one hand the number of non-focus spells without verbal components.
Cordell Kintner wrote: Aricks wrote: FYI, thunder stones don't actually hurt casters except for a specific set of spells with the auditory trait. Spells with a verbal component but no auditory trait are unaffected. I can count on one hand the number of non-focus spells without verbal components. Just stating that thunder stones don't really disable casters.
Thunder stones apply deafened, and the deafened condition affects the auditory trait. It doesn't cause failures for spells with the verbal component. It actually protects the target from any spells or effects with the auditory trait.
They're only useful for sonic damage.
Deafened
Source Core Rulebook pg. 619 1.1
You can’t hear. You automatically critically fail Perception checks that require you to be able to hear. You take a –2 status penalty to Perception checks for initiative and checks that involve sound but also rely on other senses. If you perform an action with the auditory trait, you must succeed at a DC 5 flat check or the action is lost; attempt the check after spending the action but before any effects are applied. You are immune to auditory effects.
Oh, I could have sworn Deafened made casting with Verbal components harder. Guess I was just assuming it as a holdover from PF1.
If you want to mess with casters, you’d need to get your hands on the formula for Peshpine Grenades.
The Stupefied is condition is rather nasty for casters.
Cordell Kintner wrote: Oh, I could have sworn Deafened made casting with Verbal components harder. Guess I was just assuming it as a holdover from PF1. Yeah, I was in the same boat. Had a bit of a flat "what" moment when I actually read the rules in detail. I'm hoping it gets Errata'd soon.
Old_Man_Robot wrote: If you want to mess with casters, you’d need to get your hands on the formula for Peshpine Grenades.
The Stupefied is condition is rather nasty for casters.
Yup, that seems to do what thunder stones should do in the first place. I haven't looked to see if Age of Ashes is PFS'able yet, I want to check now.
Oddly enough, the Dwarven Daisies lock down casters pretty well too, since it sometimes inflicts dazzled on the target, so assuming they want to cast something at anything besides themselves, it'd be the standard concealed flat check. I'm suddenly reminded of the "can you magic missile something that is concealed" thread. Although, reading dazzled closely, "all creatures and objects are concealed from you", does that mean you're concealed from yourself to target yourself with a spell?
I wonder if you quick alchemy a dwarven daisy with dazzling from debilitating bombs feat, would the target have to save twice or would it be counted as one effect? Same question crops up for peshpine grenades and greater debilitating bomb feat with stupified from there.
Recent threads in Rules Discussion
|
