This question was thrown out sometimes years ago, but it wasn't really answered in any of those very brief discussion so I will try that again
So named bullet, requires as a material compentent/divine focus it REquires
(an item from the selected creature or creature type)
So here is the question
1. is the neglible? Because I doubt it is, and the Gm aggrees, but to be honest that is also not my main question here
2. Want counts as an "item from the creature"?
Here is the thing, if you ahve bodyparts of a giant it will work as a named bullet for a giant no question
but would other objects work? Like for example if you find an item crafted by someone and take a piece of it, would that count as an "item from the creature"?
M/DF means material component or divine focus; divine spellcasters don't need to worry about this, they can just use their holy symbol.
'An item from the selected creature': a recognizable piece of an item crafted by them should work. Not sure about, say, taking a shaving of wood off an arrow they'd made. I probably would allow it though because of the next bit.
'an item from the selected creature or creature type': OTOH this looks so vague that as long as you can identify the creature type and you have a spell component pouch you should be golden.
Yes, the material component is for the arcane casters, the focus for divine, that is not the question
the creature type is actually more defined in the spell itslef
"ou imbue the target with deadly accuracy against a selected creature type (and subtype for humanoids or outsiders) or a specific creature you know and can name"
But yeah, here is the thing, if we for example say I have a magic item of an evil caster, would parts form that count as "item from the selected creature"? Or just things which literally are from the creature aka blood, skin etc.
And to clarification, so far the GM and I aggree that for most creatures I should be good, if it would be reasonable that I have such items aka I already encountered them and most likely killed those creatures or reasonable found them otherwise.
BUt I was warned that for certain special enemies (I assume bosses of some kind) I need to be sometimes more specific with how I got mys hands on items from them.
That's why I ask now, would anything worn, belonging or created by those creatures work for that spell, or would I need to get their blood?
I think you're thinking too far into this... it's like a voodoo doll... or getting a hound on the target's trail... it's not rocket surgery.
You would need...a spell component pouch.
That's it. That's all. Within that little pouch is a piece of every creature type and subtype. Either a bit of bodily substance or an object owned, made or handled by the creature.
|
When the target hits the selected creature, you must overcome that creature’s spell resistance, or this spell has no effect.
If you hit a creature touch AC but not the full AC and fail to overcome its SR you miss as the spell effect is canceled?
If you would have misfired you misfire?RAW its works that way, AFAIK.
When the target hits the selected creature, you must overcome that creature’s spell resistance, or this spell has no effect.If you hit a creature touch AC but not the full AC and fail to overcome its SR you miss as the spell effect is canceled?
If you would have misfired you misfire?
RAW its works that way, AFAIK.
If you fail against the Spell Resistence check, the spell on the ammunitiona has no effect on the creature.
The weapon will still not have misfired, because that has nothing to do with the creautre, it can't spell resist the ammunition being firedBut spell resistence can hinder that it ignores armor and if it threatens a crit, those effects are nullified if the spell resistences counters Named Bullet
You would need...a spell component pouch.
That's it. That's all. Within that little pouch is a piece of every creature type and subtype. Either a bit of bodily substance or an object owned, made or handled by the creature.
From pure mechanic, you are correct, but it still seems sort of wrong? I want it to work, but it also seems weird to make it something like that, something so specific, that it just being meaningless if you have component pouch seems odd.
Making it a piece of THE TARGET would certainly make it more interesting, wouldn't it?
A lock of THEIR hair is required to name your bullet.
There you go. Now it's not just any lock of Troll armpit hair, it has to be THAT specific Troll's hair... probably not in your pouch, you might have to sneak/ask nicely/get creative... good luck.
Making it a piece of THE TARGET would certainly make it more interesting, wouldn't it?
A lock of THEIR hair is required to name your bullet.
There you go. Now it's not just any lock of Troll armpit hair, it has to be THAT specific Troll's hair... probably not in your pouch, you might have to sneak/ask nicely/get creative... good luck.
That leads directly to my original question
What counts as an "Item from the creature"Still got no clear answer on that
Officially, there is no clear answer.
Most people just go with the easiest solution of "whatever piece is found in a spell component pouch" and move on.
If the spell component pouch isn't good enough you, go cut a lock of hair off your specific target. Collect its toenail clippings, or whatever satifies your version of the spell's requirements.
For literally everyone else, the random troll tooth in the pouch is good enough... even if it's not THAT troll's tooth. It's not rocket surgery...
...it still seems sort of wrong?
Welcome to one of the many issues with Pathfinder magic.
There are a ton of examples where the spell component pouch seems...unusually full of super weird stuff.Feel free to put more restrictions on yourself, but remember: the spell was designed to have this effect at this level and with the investment of a spell component pouch. So it's most likely just fine the way it is.
Now, if you had to have a piece from each and every individual you want to target, not just creature type, then okay. I see your point. And it's a cool motif, for sure. But a dragon's tooth lets you target all dragons. A bit of iron from a dwarven forge lets you target all dwarves.
That seems to be the best answer I can get.
And well the Gm and I so far have aggreed that it will be not target specific, unless for like special bosses which have certain protection
But yeah, I killed a bunch of giants so I will always have material for getting named bullets for giants. We killed a dragon so I have parts of a dragon for it. He collected the ashes of a Devil (longer story on how that happend), so I can get named bullets for devils.
Thanks for discussing that with me, I know it is a not certain subject but it does help if you get some confirmation from others.
|
|
When the target hits the selected creature, you must overcome that creature’s spell resistance, or this spell has no effect.If you hit a creature touch AC but not the full AC and fail to overcome its SR you miss as the spell effect is canceled?
If you would have misfired you misfire?
RAW its works that way, AFAIK.
If you fail against the Spell Resistence check, the spell on the ammunitiona has no effect on the creature.
The weapon will still not have misfired, because that has nothing to do with the creautre, it can't spell resist the ammunition being fired
But spell resistence can hinder that it ignores armor and if it threatens a crit, those effects are nullified if the spell resistences counters Named Bullet
The quoted test specifically says "or this spell has no effect". Not "the part of the spell that affects the attacked creature is negated". So, on what basis you say that only part of the effect is negated?
Note that the spell doesn't affect the attacked creature in any way, it affects the ammunition. So that SR effect is something very peculiar and breaks the normal conventions. As it does so, its specific rule is what should be applied.
|
|
...it still seems sort of wrong?Welcome to one of the many issues with Pathfinder magic.
There are a ton of examples where the spell component pouch seems...unusually full of super weird stuff.Feel free to put more restrictions on yourself, but remember: the spell was designed to have this effect at this level and with the investment of a spell component pouch. So it's most likely just fine the way it is.
Now, if you had to have a piece from each and every individual you want to target, not just creature type, then okay. I see your point. And it's a cool motif, for sure. But a dragon's tooth lets you target all dragons. A bit of iron from a dwarven forge lets you target all dwarves.
RAW You need a piece of a type of creature, not of the specific creature. And generally, in an adventuring career, you could have gathered pieces from all types of creatures.
It is not RAW but I would require a piece of the specific creature only if it is something unique.But in a game where I use houserules I would simply disallow the spell, as it breaks other conventions (see my other posts) and is badly described.
The quoted test specifically says "or this spell has no effect". Not "the part of the spell that affects the attacked creature is negated". So, on what basis you say that only part of the effect is negated?
Note that the spell doesn't affect the attacked creature in any way, it affects the ammunition. So that SR effect is something very peculiar and breaks the normal conventions. As it does so, its specific rule is what should be applied.
if you disallow that spell, because of bad wording, I don't argue about, it is a weird spell
But I must slightly correct myself firstThe spellresistence sets in, after "The creature was hit". so everything else before that, has happend. The weapon was fired, and it has gotten past the AC. So yeah, unless spellresistence can undo past events, the attack itself is already resolved, and the spellresistence only effects the part of the spell which are triggered through the hit, because only then the Spellresistence can prevent it.
But that would be my interpretation because just like you said, the spell is unusual in it's ruling, so yes, GM call would be required
the creature type is actually more defined in the spell itslef
For the spell effect, but not for the material component. If you have material from all 13 creature types, named bullet can be used against every creature in the game.
From pure mechanic, you are correct, but it still seems sort of wrong? I want it to work, but it also seems weird to make it something like that, something so specific, that it just being meaningless if you have component pouch seems odd.
I don't think the spell component pouch containing stuff from all the 13 creature types is out of the line. You say basically ignoring the material line "seems sort of wrong", but wouldn't it be more wrong if the spell was hugely more powerful for divine casters?
Spell material components are flavor, and so the writers put something flavorful in that line. That's it.
Also true. And afterall either knowing the name, the creature or the creature subtype for humanoids and outsiders before making the bullet is already a limitation. Atleast if you don't prepare it midcombat, and even then you might not get that information during the encounter.
What I should also state and to make the argument more reasonable to make Named bullet a bit harder to prepare is, the character I plan on getting it, does INSANE amount of damage when he crits
He is an eldritch archer Magus with a musket. in a nutshell, he can temporarily enchant his weapon with enchantments like shocking burst. And he can ranged spellstrike with spells, which thanks to the Spellslinger wizard archetype, his spell crit modifier is a x3, and if with spellstrike the weapon attack crits, the spell with it also crits
So with a crit he could do 4d12+30d6+1d6+3d10 points of damage theoraticly. And Named Bullet would make this happen much more easy.
So if a GM wants to limit Named bullet for this kind of build I do understand.
So if a GM wants to limit Named bullet for this kind of build I do understand.
Oh, so do I, don't get me wrong. I have absolutely no problem with the GM houseruling the spell to make it less gamebreaking. As long as the GM is honest and upfront about the fact that it's a houserule, and not hiding behind some bull shit interpretation that has nothing to do with the written rules.