| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, i'm going through a bit of mind storming as how the following would work and i would like any objective opinion from the rest of the community. these are all cases that follow the same base :
A character (let's say alchemist, for the bomb's case) with throw anything and catch off guard (just to get over the improvised weapon part) who uses a +1, sharding, Gloves of Improvised Might (+3 total) to throw one of the following object's duplicate shards. in each case the questions are - can he full attack while throwing the shards? and what will the effect be?
CASES:
1: using any magical weapon that has an effect when thrown, for example a javelin of lightning.
- the way i see it, as he uses it as an improvised weapon he can full attack but the shards would be thrown without activating the javelin's special ability and would resemble thrown clubs or anything of the javelin's size\weight for the damage they would deal.
2: sharding off one of his bombs (he also has fast bombs discovery to make it easier).
- seem to me that since bombs became inert if the alchemist leave them, and he need to invest some of his magic to make them blow up - each shard will ether blow up or do nothing beside splash a bit of alchemical ingredients on the target, depend if the alchemist invest it with his daily uses of bombs. as it doesn't matter where the bomb's material came from, it's the alchemist's magical power invested in it that make it blow up( which must be done before throwing the bomb).
i am not 100% sure about this one as there is also sense in saying the shard also duplicate said invested magic.
3: other fragile items that get destroyed when thrown with an effect. such as an alchemical weapon (acid\fire\frost etc flasks), bead of force, dimensional acid, cockatrice grit etc.
- i think these would allow full attack and shard with full effect of what happen when they get destroyed\hit the target ,but any lingering effect (that is not damage and stuff derived from it) would disappear almost immediately after that. probably even before the next attack is rolled. and in some cases, say a necklace of fireballs, he won't be able to put back the original object and will have to use it as well.
what are your thoughts?
(i am aware there are ways to get sharding to weapons, such as a fighter with warrior spirit using the javelin. but im looking at cases of throwing other things beside weapons)
- "Normal weapons are unaffected by gloves of improvised might except when used as an improvised weapon in a way specifically permitted by the weapon description"
Since neither Javelin of Lightning nor bombs are described with a specific improvised usage, the gloves don't do anything for them.
As for the third case, I'd apply this FAQ, namely the following part which describes the general situation: "Incidentally, using the longspear as an improvised weapon in this way would not allow you to benefit from any magical enhancements it may possess, nor would you add benefits that apply when attacking with a longspear".
While not 100% explicit for all possible cases, I'd say this at the least very strongly implies that improvised usage doesn't apply magic tied to attacking with the item in the normal way.
"doesn't apply magic tied to attacking with the item in the normal way" - as were talking about throwing the item that is part of the 1st case "...that has an effect when thrown".
"magical enhancements" is a very specific thing and not all the magical ability an item may have. hence why i put bombs is in a separate case.
and the last case which is not even always magical (acid flask?) BUT always happen when the item hits\break even if not used as a weapon.
"magical enhancements" is a very specific thing and not all the magical ability an item may have.
You know I'm trying to help you here, right? If you want to use a literal reading of the rules with complete disregard for intend, there's dozens of things to abuse, like Simple Weapon Proficiency's "without penalty" (Power Attack has a "penalty", fighting defensively has a "penalty", etc.).
Seriously, it's an FAQ for a different issue, of course it's not written to cover every single corner case that may occur when appling a combination of rule options from the future.
There is no definitive rule on the topic, because Sharding wasn't written to touch upon the interaction. Since the raison d'être of Pathfinder is to provide existing rules in favor of "make up your own stuff", I consider applying the rule closest to the topic to be the sensible course of action for cases that are clearly unintended.
and the last case which is not even always magical (acid flask?)
That's under the assumption that splashs weapons don't fall under the GoIM's "normal weapons", which is highly questionable ("A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact"). Quite frankly, I would consider anything that lets you make an attack roll without using the improvised weapon rules to be a "normal weapon" for the gloves.
I appreciate the points. Im not dissing it.
I just figure that there is a hugh differnece between effects that happen when you attack and those that happen when you hit(not weapon special effects that, as stated by both of us, is covered). And its also in the rules of the 3rd case( otherwise there will be little reason for the whole granede like miss rule. Or bead of force taking effect upon 'sharp impact'. as opposed to the javelin taking effect when thrown).
If we disregard the fragile nature of the 3rd case then you get ridiculas cases of some1 bludgening to death an enemy with an acid flask without breaking it- all because it count as a club when improvised.
The 3rd case would rightfuly take effect when sundered for example. While the 1st and 2nd wont.
Also if one want to toss any of the 3rd case to a friend and is afried he wont catch. he cant just throw it as an improvised weapon to a space close to him to circumvent the effect of it when it shatters.
On a 2nd thought i think most items on the 3rd case list should not be able to be thrown as improvised weapons.
As the whole point of thrown improvised weapons is throwing weapons or items that are not ment to be thrown and or built to damage if thrown. Which kinda is the whole opposite of the 3rd case objects. They are made to deal damage no matter how one throw them.
Saying ill throw the flask in a way it was not ment to be thrown is mute.
To start off… the Javelin is a thrown weapon to begin with… you are not going to be able to use it as an improvised thrown weapon in any way. While it could be used as an improvised club to deal bludgeoning damage instead of piercing when used in melee, the same cannot be done with it as a thrown weapon.
Bombs and alchemical weapons unfortunately aren’t affected by gloves of improvised might… much to the dismay of many alchemist players… they should be… but they unfortunately are not…
That said, if you were to find a valid way to grant them the sharding ability, then the following would likely be how each of them interact with it:
Bombs - one use of the bomb ability must be expended at the start of the attack, a fully functioning bomb is split off from the active bomb when the mimed throw is performed, at the end of the attack the real bomb is either thrown as the final attack or rendered inert. Sharding would in effect extend your uses of bombs when used with fast bombs but have no beneficial effect when used as part of a standard action attack.
Splash weapons - there is no reason to believe that the shard would behave any differently than the original. The shard vanishing after it hits just means weapons with an effect that imbed themselves in the target don’t get that functionality when used with sharding and that an opponent cannot use an ability like catch arrows to then throw it back at you as it will vanish as soon as the original attack is resolved (in this case that being right after they catch it) alchemist fire would still cause them to catch on fire, even without the liquid fuel your target can still continue to burn. There is an argument to be had against tanglefoot and tangleburn bags used with sharding though as removal of the substance does end the effect, and in the case of a tangleburn bag it shouldn’t have the same interaction with water without its sticky fuel. But most alchemical splash weapons have their lingering effects cause by the initial impact and are not actually tied to the lingering presence of the contents.
... The shard vanishing after it hits just means weapons with an effect that imbed themselves in the target don’t get that functionality when used with sharding and that an opponent cannot use an ability like catch arrows to then throw it back at you as it will vanish as soon as the original attack is resolved (in this case that being right after they catch it) ...I think there's some opening in the wording for Deflections (like Crane Wing or Deflect Arrows/Catch Arrows). A deflected attack is not a miss (it won't trigger abilities that occur on a miss) and it also isn't a hit. If it was a hit, it would discharge deflected touch attacks, which it doesn't, and they discharge if you even touch anything else normally.
By the rules, this means if you deflect or catch a sharded weapon, it wouldn't disappear and you could attack or throw it back (at which point it would disappear if you hit or missed). If they had said it disappeared at the end of the attack, action, or round that would also help mitigate this. Obviously, any GM would be fair in ruling otherwise for a shard though.
i have been through that back in my thread about making duplicates of items you are able to throw.
deflect arrows and the like won't work since they are used on attacks that hit (and thus the shard disappear after), how ever, as i mentioned in the thread, 'cut from the air' is done after the attack is made but before it is considered a hit or miss and the attack is 'deflected' which by raw is nether hit not miss, ending in a duplicate items that stay until it is used to attack with. (this is by going hard core RAW, most gm would just consider 'deflected' as 'a miss' and make it go poof right there). thus one can make duplicate out of anything he has no intention of attacking with (pearls of power, wands, headbands and belts etc).
that thread was talking about a game run in a computer-game based world where raw based exploits can be used until reported to the dev's which then get nerfed\fixed\pathced.
...or left alone and claimed to be 'working as intended', i had the whole 'bag of holding into portable hole' be a bug with both linking to the same memory cell when writing up what was placed inside, ending in an infinite loop if one is placed in the other. Also a 'Loadstone' was meant to be a stone that allow to load a 'Save' ('Load' stone), but the amount of processing needed to be used was so much it instead turned the gameplay into lagging.
@Chell Raighn.
you can totally use the javelin as an improvised weapon as long as you don't throw it as a javelin but as a stick.
one way is to throw it spinning like a boomerang so it hits with it's side, another would be to throw it back-side first (if it's not sharpened on both ends, like Olympics javelins). ether way would be an improvised thrown weapon, loose it's magical abilities as per the rules of improvising magical weapons and would most likely deal damage as a club (and have the thrown improvised weapon range unit used).
the difference between them and the 3rd case is that most things on the 3rd case are made to do their thing no matter how they are thrown (or even IF they are not thrown and just smashed right on), so there are not a lot of ways to improvise a bludgeoning weapon or the like from them without them working as intended. and therefore as i noted in the 6th post, there should not be a way to use them as improvised weapons to begin with and the whole 'glove of giving improvised weapon an ability' is mute.
seeing as this was brought back into discussion I just wanted to add something.
on a later post i made in a different thread (i just didn't bother going back to every post i made about the sharding exploit and fix it) i noted that the FAQ actually support the idea of using deflect arrows for this exploit.
the faq explain that using deflect arrows negate not only the attack but everything else that might happen if it hits or misses (the disappearance of the shard induced).
i don't know if this help your build or ideas, but i did note that gaining deflect arrows is a lot easier then cut from the air.
from the FAQ:
"If the attack is deflected, not only does the target take no damage, but any other effects (ability drain, negative levels, harmful conditions, and so on) associated with that attack do not occur. If the deflected attack is a touch spell or other effect that requires "holding the charge," the charge is not expended. For example, if a ghoul's claw attack is deflected, the target is not subject to the ghoul's paralysis ability from the attack. If a shocking grasp touch attack is deflected, the attacker is still "holding the charge." "
and
"Because it is not a miss, effects that would trigger on a miss (such as Efreeti Style or Snake Fang from Ultimate Combat) are not triggered."
this support that a deflected attack count neither as a hit or a miss and anything that proc from hitting or missing (such as the shard disappearing) doesn't happen if the attack is deflected.
loose it's magical abilities as per the rules of improvising magical weaponsWhere is that stated?
In this FAQ.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not replying specifically to your post otherwise I would have quoted it. I'm replying to the OP and generally other posts.
Considering that Joesi was the only one in a year to post here, you really should have made it clear who you were addressing.
I did not address the Glove specifically.
But the gloves are what's creating the corner case that the entire thread is about. The entire topic is about what happens if you have this specific enchantment on this specific magic item, you can't contribute to the topic if you talk about one part without the other.
GMs can generally make sensible decisions and do what they think is best at their table.
That's statement shows that you have absolutely no interest in rules discussions. That's a statement that does nothing except stifle discussion, no one interrested in discussion would ever make such an utterly worthless statement.
What are you trying to do here? Are you trying to impress us with how smart you are? Considering how flimsy some of your arguments are, I don't think that's working. Case in point:
spell Refine Improvised Weapon:T1 and note that regular weapons are not a valid target.
This is pure circular logic. 'Improvised weapon aren't weapons, as evident by the spell not being able to target manufactured weapons, which we know it does because it says "improvised weapon".'
In this FAQ.loose it's magical abilities as per the rules of improvising magical weaponsWhere is that stated?
thx for picking that one up. i clearly remembered reading it , but couldn't point out to where.
thx for picking that one up. i clearly remembered reading it , but couldn't point out to where.In this FAQ.loose it's magical abilities as per the rules of improvising magical weaponsWhere is that stated?
He didn’t have to look far… he linked that same FAQ once already in his first post in this topic…
Although with regards to this, I still somewhat wonder if that would also apply to a Monk of the Empty Hand, since for them regular weapons are used as improvised weapons even though they aren't explicitly stated to be used any differently than how the weapon is intended to be used (although maybe it's lightly implied that they are to be used differently?). I think logically —or at least to maintain consistency— that it probably would/should still apply to that case (and Shikigami Manipulation)
This is an interesting question, one without an obvious answer. MotEH says it "treats normal weapons as improvised weapons with the following equivalencies (substituting all of their statistics for the listed weapon)", and weapon enchantments are not statistics. But the idea behind the FAQ/the underlying ruling is, I believe, that an enchantment has a sort of purpose, it makes the weapon better at what how it's supposed to be used. Like, for a spear, it makes the weapon better at stabbing, not at whacking people with the stick part. If you use a sword on an MotEH, it is a bludgeoning weapon, an enchantment to make it cut (or stab) better shouldn't help.
The idea of MotEH, as made clear in the archetype's introduction, is to use "whatever is lying around" rather than designated weapons. If you could get magic enchabntments from using a weapon, but not for usign anything else, that would work contrary to the archetype's design and intend. For that, and consistency, I'd apply the FAQ to all attacks an MotEH makes.
He didn’t have to look far… he linked that same FAQ once already in his first post in this topic…
You're giving me too much credit. I, too, had totally forgotten that I had post it, and thus went to the FAQ page and searched for it anew.