| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From a pure balance point of view, adding Property Runes to Bombs won't break the math, and even quite the opposite. Bombs efficiency goes down at high level mainly because there's no Property Rune added to their damage.
If you play a Bomber, Bombs expected damage goes down after level 9 and crumble up to level 20 where it's equivalent to an archer secondary attack.
Even if you grab Bombs on a martial class to make a martial Bomber, the cost in feats and the clunkiness of your build (especially at low level) is not really paid back with the Bombs assets.
Allowing Property Runes on Bombs would make them really strong at level 11, and that's all. For the rest of your career it would just put them closer to a Bow Strike from a Fighter Archer with no feats.
I do not believe that you are correct. Sadly, I also do not currently have the time/energy resources necessary to actually run the numbers and prove one of us wrong.
I guess the thing is that bombs already have pseudo property runes in their secondary effects. Sometimes they're better than property runes too like the dread ampoule vs fearsome rune. Or the skunk bomb once it releases. Just nothing that adds damage usually.
Yeah, but they pay the secondary effects by a reduction of damage. Fearsome Rune does not reduce the weapon damage dice.
I do not believe that you are correct. Sadly, I also do not currently have the time/energy resources necessary to actually run the numbers and prove one of us wrong.
You can try, but you'll be disappointed.
As a side note, Citricking's tool does that in a minute.
We also have to keep in mind that bombs aren't just a weapon, they are also a consumable. Even an alchemist doesn't get the good stuff all day, much less everyone else.
I definitely agree that this is almost certainly not intended, but let's say I wouldn't mind the opposite being the case :D.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could argue that a Fearsome Rune does lower damage by opportunity cost of having a damage-increasing rune in its place, but it's more complicated than that, really. In the end, the question to me is if it is healthy to add a required item like the Thrower's Bandolier for bombs to "work optimally" (and you could argue that throwing weapons had this problem with the returning rune before).
|
ANOTHER problem in addition to the very valid one Xethik mentioned above but entirely different.
Bombs that an Alchemist creates are made by spending Reagents that you regain during daily preparations which just so happens to be the exact same time that you would need to Invest in the Bandolier which, if you're using Bombs that are Consumable and need to be re-prepared every day. Since you only actually acquire functional Bombs from Reagents once you fully complete your prep there is no timing window in which your Reagent created Bombs can be placed into the Bandolier so they can be attuned to the newly re-Invested item.
Until you complete the full hour of daily prep neither the Investment nor the Regents + created Alchemical Items can be resolved given that there is not incremental function on that system whereby during the prep you do X, then Y, the Z, instead you do all of it and then ALL of the results trigger as soon as you complete the daily preparations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ANOTHER problem in addition to the very valid one Xethik mentioned above but entirely different.
Bombs that an Alchemist creates are made by spending Reagents that you regain during daily preparations which just so happens to be the exact same time that you would need to Invest in the Bandolier which, if you're using Bombs that are Consumable and need to be re-prepared every day. Since you only actually acquire functional Bombs from Reagents once you fully complete your prep there is no timing window in which your Reagent created Bombs can be placed into the Bandolier so they can be attuned to the newly re-Invested item.
Until you complete the full hour of daily prep neither the Investment nor the Regents + created Alchemical Items can be resolved given that there is not incremental function on that system whereby during the prep you do X, then Y, the Z, instead you do all of it and then ALL of the results trigger as soon as you complete the daily preparations.
I don't think you need to invest at daily preparation unless I missed text on the bandolier itself. While you can carry over investments at daily preparation, you can just let your investment end, make your bombs and slap them onto the bandolier, and then invest into the bandolier (which probably only takes a few actions or minutes).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Thrower's Bandolier does require investment.
But I don't think I have ever heard of a rule saying that you can't do all the things that you do during daily preparations in any order that you choose. Or that if one thing during your daily preparations depends on something else done during your daily preparations, that you can't do one of them.
That sounds like a Too Bad To Be True ruling in general.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For example: Witch.
If a Witch familiar dies, it is restored during daily preparations the next morning. Spell preparation is also done during daily preparations.
Ruling that if the familiar dies it can get restored the next morning, but you won't have time to prepare spells would make the character unplayable for an entire day.
I don't think you need to invest at daily preparation unless I missed text on the bandolier itself. While you can carry over investments at daily preparation, you can just let your investment end, make your bombs and slap them onto the bandolier, and then invest into the bandolier (which probably only takes a few actions or minutes).ANOTHER problem in addition to the very valid one Xethik mentioned above but entirely different.
Bombs that an Alchemist creates are made by spending Reagents that you regain during daily preparations which just so happens to be the exact same time that you would need to Invest in the Bandolier which, if you're using Bombs that are Consumable and need to be re-prepared every day. Since you only actually acquire functional Bombs from Reagents once you fully complete your prep there is no timing window in which your Reagent created Bombs can be placed into the Bandolier so they can be attuned to the newly re-Invested item.
Until you complete the full hour of daily prep neither the Investment nor the Regents + created Alchemical Items can be resolved given that there is not incremental function on that system whereby during the prep you do X, then Y, the Z, instead you do all of it and then ALL of the results trigger as soon as you complete the daily preparations.
You can invest whenever you want, as long as you haven't reached your 10/day limit. It might just take a moment, as it typically takes the same time as donning the item.
And this is really a non-issue, as all of those things can/do happen during your daily preparations, not at the end. You can decide on whatever order you like, so using Advanced Alchemy to make bombs and then investing your bandolier works perfectly fine.
The Thrower's Bandolier does require investment.
But I don't think I have ever heard of a rule saying that you can't do all the things that you do during daily preparations in any order that you choose. Or that if one thing during your daily preparations depends on something else done during your daily preparations, that you can't do one of them.
That sounds like a Too Bad To Be True ruling in general.
Yeah it does, that's because it is wrong :)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can try, but you'll be disappointed.
As a side note, Citricking's tool does that in a minute.
...and yet, you keep invoking Citricking's tool, and then I work it out manually and you discover things that you did not know.
It's not bad as a first-order approximation, but it requires you to bake all of your assumptions and judgement calls in at the beginning rather than actually looking at their implications once you're done.
I say the bombs benefit from the runes. Also it doesn't matter because item bonuses don't stack (with the exception of armor runes because they have to to work)
How about a quick example?
level 12 character - level 6 cantrip heightening.
At level 12 you can get +2 and Greater Striking runes.
A +2 Greater Striking shortbow does 3d6 damage.
A +2 Greater Striking throwing knife does 3d4+2 damage.
level 6 Produce flame and ray of frost do 6d4+5 damage.
level 1 Alchemists fire (lesser) does 1d8 fire, 1 persistent fire, and 1 splash damage.
level 1 Acid Flask (lesser) does 1 acid, 1d6 persistent acid, and 1 splash damage.
level 11 Alchemists fire (greater) does 3d8 fire, 3 persistent fire, and 3 splash damage.
level 11 Acid Flask (greater) does 1 acid, 3d6 persistent acid, and 3 splash damage.
So... How much damage do each of those alchemical bombs do with the +2 and Greater Striking fundamental weapon runes applied?
And how does that compare on balance to the shortbow, throwing knife, and cantrips?
L11 Major Alchemist's Fire is likely going to do 3d8 + 3 Splash + 3 Persistent Fire. Average damage: 19.
Greater Striking Composite Shortbow: 3d6 + 1 = 11 avg damage. (If the thrower has Str 14, I figure the Archer can too.)
Greater Striking Throwing Knife: 3d4 + 2 = 9 avg damage
If we're generous, we use Telekinetic Projectile as our Cantrip and do 6d6 + 5, for 26 avg damage.
If the Bandolier added in Greater Striking (forget the +2 Weapon Potency, doesn't stack with the Bomb's built in Item Bonus to Strikes) you'd be looking at 5d8 + 3 Splash + 3 Persistent... so, avg damage of 28.
So, the Bomb is looking very, very good. If you throw in a couple of elemental Property Runes to the weapons, things improve: 18 pts avg for the Shortbow, 16 pts for the Throwing Knife. The Bomb is still ahead here, even before the Bandolier... but not by much.
Now, if our hypothetical Bomb is being used by an Alchemist who took Expanded Splash @ L10, it's going to do 3d8 + *8* Splash + 3 Persistent, for an avg damage of 24. The Bandolier Bomb would be 33.
And if the Bandolier could add Weapon Property Runes to the Bomb, we start getting into the ridiculous.
If the Bandolier added in Greater Striking (forget the +2 Weapon Potency, doesn't stack with the Bomb's built in Item Bonus to Strikes) you'd be looking at 5d8 + 3 Splash + 3 Persistent... so, avg damage of 28.
Striking sets your dice at 3: "The weapon deals three weapon damage dice." As such, it'd turn a Major Alchemist's Fire [3d8] into an Major Alchemist's Fire [3d8]... It doesn't ADD a number of dice but sets a new dice total.
Now, if our hypothetical Bomb is being used by an Alchemist who took Expanded Splash @ L10, it's going to do 3d8 + *8* Splash + 3 Persistent, for an avg damage of 24. The Bandolier Bomb would be 33.
I didn't ask about hypothetical bombs. I asked about those two types of bombs specifically. The Alchemist's Fire and the Acid Flask. I chose them specifically because of their differences in how they calculate their damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All right. Fine.
We'll look at level 15, to pull a number out of a hat. We'll talk about level 15 bombs and level 15 Composite Longbows.
For the bomb, we're running Alchemist's Fire. We're assuming no meaningful supporting feats on either side, no critical specialization, and no particularly pertinent class features.
The level 15 alchemist's fire is still the Greater that you got back at level 11. +2 to hit, 3d8 fire damage, 3 persistent, 3 splash. On a crit, you get 6d8 fire damage, 6 persistent, and 3 splash. On a miss, you just get 3 splash.
- avg damage crit: 27 + 6 persistent + 3 splash
- avg damage hit: 13.5 + 3 persistent + 3 splash
- avg damage miss: 3 splash
- avg damage critfail: nothing
The level 15 composite shortbow is the +2 greater striking bow that you got at level 12. (deals 3d8, +1 from strength, deadly d10) It can (and will) fit two property runes, and 15 is actually a really good level for property runes. We'll go with greater flaming and greater shock. WE'll also compare and contrast with the property runes and without. If bombs *should* have property runes, the "withouts" will be comparable. If they *shouldn't*, the "withs" will.
Without:
- avg damage crit: 40
- avg damage hit: 14.5
- avg damage miss/critfail: nothing
With (+1d6 base each from greater shocking and greater flaming, plus pertinent crit effects):
- avg damage crit: 54 + 11 ongoing fire + 7 electrical damage to each of up to two targets of your choice within 10 of the target
- avg damage hit: 21.5
- avg damage miss/critfail: nothing
/*************/
Rough Conclusions:
- Against the "without property runes" numbers, the bombs are doing quite well overall. The conservative estimate for splash and persistent is that splash won't hit any other enemies, and the persistent will trigger once. Under those assumptions, the bomb is doing 36 on a crit (a little bit below), 19.5 on a hit (well above) and 3 on a miss (more than 0). More generous/reasonable numbers (call it what you will) would have the persistent damage triggering twice, and the splash hitting one other foe. That'll leave numbers of 45, 25.5, and 6 - *well* above what the longbow can bring to bear without property runes.
- adding the property runes changes things. Obviously, the bomb still has the advantage of being the only option that can deal damage even on a miss. On a hit, conservative numbers have it down by 2, while generous numbers have it up by 4. On a crit, though... well, we'll use the same conservative vs generous on the persistent damage for both sides, and say that for the extra bolts its "hit none" vs "hit two". There, the conservative bow is dealing 65 (getting dangerously close to double the conservative bomb crit) and the generous bow is dealing 90 (which actually is double the generous bomb crit numbers).
So... the comparables there really depend on how conservative vs generous you're being, and how often you expect to hit, vs missing or critting. On the other hand, I think it's pretty clear that asserting "bombs ought to get property runes" is functionally equivalent to asserting "bombs ought to do more base damage than standard ranged weapons in general". After all, we were comparing to the composite longbow.
Now, I'll admit that there's a *lot* that complicates this. Bombs are consumable. They also need you to spend a feat just to get one strike per action. There are a lot of feats out there that make bows better, especially if you happen to be a ranger. Bombs are consumable. Oh, and the lightning and fire damage off those runes ignore resistances while triggering vulns
On the flip side, you've also got the fact that if you're walking into battle with a pile of bombs, they're not all going to be the same kind of bomb, and that ability to pick the bomb based on the needs of the moment can be valuable. If you happen to be an alchemist, there are a lot of feats (and class features) that make *bombs* better. There's stuff on both sides.
Still, I think the overall assertion that bombs are roughly equivalent to property-runed ranged weapons holds pretty well here.
Hmm. With this particular style of thrown weapon gameplay, I wonder if traits like sweep and forceful still apply. If I wanted to throw around a bandolier full of hand adze's, would their traits work as they continue to leave my hands? Or would they stop functioning as soon as I throw one?
I don't believe they would function; "this weapon" in those reads as the specific item, not the category of item. You'd probably want a Returning Hand Adze to make best use of those traits.
shurikens was what i was thinking, yes.Leaving aside bombs, really excited for flying blade swash as well!With finishers being specific actions, your action economy is better treated with a returning rune still. Unless you have access to shurikens. Those you can use finishers with without extra actions.
I think Braggart Swashbucklers with Antagonize might have some play. Antagonize with a ranged character makes it far less practical for enemies to clear the frightened condition. Pair up with someone good at preventing enemy movement and you could spread the debuff pretty reliably.
All right. Fine.
I'm really sorry, Sanityfaerie, but I'll be a bit lazy and directly head to the best information available.
Here are the Graphs.
Blue: Bow Fighter with no feat
Yellow: Bomber (I use 1d10 damage to represent an Alchemist Fire with one persistent damage tick)
Green: Fighter with Alchemist and Demolitionist Dedication
I ignore Perpetual Bombs are they would not benefit from the Bandolier anyway.
But damage on a single target is not enough. Here is a comparison between Bombs and Bow.
Bomb pros:
- Avoid resistances and exploit weaknesses.
- Deals splash damage.
- Has some lower damage status inflicting versions.
Bomb cons:
- Cost resources.
- Low range.
- Costs a lot of feat (all your feats actually for the Fighter Bomber unless FA).
- Can't be used with activities as you need to use Quick Bomber to throw them.
Bombs have strong assets but at a significant cost. I don't feel it's completely balanced, in my opinion Archers can grab a few strong feats giving them the versatility of Bombs without losing damage. And there are tons of action economy enhancers available, too.
As the graphs show, Alchemist Bomber starts to drop at level 8 (what a wonderful coincidence) and end up really bad at level 20.
The Fighter Bomber deals slightly more damage overall than the Alchemist Bomber, but still goes down at level 10 and never recover.
Once you add in Elemental Runes to Bombs, you get these Graphs.
The Bomber Alchemist is now more in line with the Fighter archer, but it still drops at level 13. Overall, considering all the other assets of the Alchemist class, I think it's legitimate.
The Bomber fighter on the other hand now deals more damage than the Fighter archer across most of its career.
(My) Conclusion: I don't see Property Runes to Bombs imbalancing the game. They turn Bomb into a strong high level option instead of a weak one, and I think it's a good thing and not a bad one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All right. Fine.I'm really sorry, Sanityfaerie, but I'll be a bit lazy and directly head to the best information available.
Okay, so let's look at your assumptions here.
- You're assuming splash hits one target.- You're assuming that persistent damage only ticks once.
- You're basing this on the first attack of the round (no MAP to deal with)
Past that, I can't actually see your math, so I don't know which other assumptions you have baked into this.
I also think that baking in the feats from the beginning is a bit of a mistake. We should be trying to compare them as baseline weapons first, before we try to compare the builds that can use them. I recognize that this is going to make the bomb numbers go down, and I'm fine with that. My point here isn't to support a position. It's to identify which position to support.
Okay, so let's look at your assumptions here.
- You're assuming splash hits one target.
- You're assuming that persistent damage only ticks once.
- You're basing this on the first attack of the round (no MAP to deal with)
And that you are in the first range increment, that there's no cover, that the enemy is of your level with high AC.
Splash, Persistent damage, range, cover, etc... are all circumstantial bonuses. I can't add 0.37 to hit to the Fighter before level 12 because there are 23% chances to be in the Bomb second range increment but in the Shortbow first range increment.
We can speak of all these elements. Having played an Alchemist, I can tell you that Splash is not really interesting unless you also hit a Weakness. Weaknesses are not common but very interesting. Persistent damage is worth one round at most, it rarely ticks if the party knows how to focus fire, but it's an important tactical element against bosses.
We should be trying to compare them as baseline weapons first
That doesn't exist. No one will buy bombs and use them as their main weapon. So you need to specify which class to determine when they get which bomb.
Also, the feats have a massive impact, it's half your damage nearly. Removing them will give completely wrong data. On the other hand, it's hard to buff bow damage, so the numbers are nearly fine for the Bow Fighter.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We should be trying to compare them as baseline weapons firstThat doesn't exist. No one will buy bombs and use them as their main weapon. So you need to specify which class to determine when they get which bomb.
Also, the feats have a massive impact, it's half your damage nearly. Removing them will give completely wrong data. On the other hand, it's hard to buff bow damage, so the numbers are nearly fine for the Bow Fighter.
Who said anything about main? Presumably there's a use case for "carries around a few bombs as a secondary weapon". Similarly, there's a use case for "carries around a bow because you need a ranged option". If the word on bombs is that they're simply not viable without a whole bunch of supporting feats, then that seems like a pretty pertinent fact to make clear in this discussion. If, without feats, they're only useful as special-case tools, that likewise seems like a useful thing to uncover. I'm not currently convinced that either is so.
Now I do also think there's a place for the math talking about what it looks like when you go all-out, but that one gets weird pretty quickly because "go all out" for bombs is pretty heavily focused on the bomber alchemist, and their ability to deal damage with bombs is only part of what they are. Better to start with the idea of comparing the weapons as weapons, and include the "and there are these feats over here that can help" rather than starting out comparing characters of seriously different classes and feat distributions.
Presumably there's a use case for "carries around a few bombs as a secondary weapon".
I don't think there is, at least without taking weakness or secondary effects into account: I have never seen someone carry around a random bomb 'just in case' the way I see someone do so with a bow. I guess it could happen but it enough of an outlier that I don't think it warrants a serious breakdown of it.
Isn't it a little early to be making assumptions about how the thrower's bandolier will work? We have an entry for it, sure but there could be content in the book that talks more about alchemical items and how they work? It would be pretty awesome if the issues around what splash damage even is (is it a trait and only a weapon trait? A damage type of its own? and how does a spell do splash damage if it is a weapon trait?) would get resolved in this book, for example.
|
|
Even if you would rule that the LAST thing you do during preparation is to attune your magic items after having finished your Bombs and then loaded them into the Bandolier that still leaves a pretty huge functionality gap for the Alchemist in that the only way to get this bonus, if it IS intended, would be to have it apply tho those you prepare at the start of the day given that you cannot have the benefits apply to the Quick Alchemy created Bombs one makes.
Also, how exactly would this interact with Bombs that don't deal ANY damage or those that do non-standard damage such as a static amount, and then add XdX Persistent damage on hit? Should Tanglefoot Bags be eligible for Frost/Flaming/Impactful Runes?
The more I look at the half-dozen wonky interactions here the more I believe there is no intent for this item to benefit Bombs. I think this kind of interaction is a prime example for a day-1 FAQ clarification given the drastic difference in functionality this would cause table variation for Alchemists, hopefully someone on the FAQ/Errata "team" has this on their radar.
Isn't it a little early to be making assumptions about how the thrower's bandolier will work? We have an entry for it, sure but there could be content in the book that talks more about alchemical items and how they work? It would be pretty awesome if the issues around what splash damage even is (is it a trait and only a weapon trait? A damage type of its own? and how does a spell do splash damage if it is a weapon trait?) would get resolved in this book, for example.
We've already gotten a look a the alchemical section and it had nothing on it, so the only hope would be an answer about alchemy traits in a non-alchemy section of the book. Possible? Sure, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it.
Also, how exactly would this interact with Bombs that don't deal ANY damage or those that do non-standard damage such as a static amount, and then add XdX Persistent damage on hit?
Seems simple to me: you can't increase weapon dice on something that doesn't HAVE weapon dice: so nothing for non-damaging ones and the same for non-dice damaging effects. And this isn't really anything new. For instance, we already have weapons that deal 1 damage, magic ammo that deals no damage and runes that deal Persistent damage so it's work the same as it does now.
Still sits here waiting for someone to propose how to apply Striking Runes to both Alchemist's Fire and Acid Flask in a way that is consistent for both and that doesn't cause arguments.
... and that doesn't cause arguments.I'm afraid you may be sitting for quite some time.
Exactly.
People like to think that the rules are clearly telling them to do things the way that makes sense to themselves, without considering how vague and ambiguous their houserules actually are.
unfortunately, boomerange is B so we cant apply poisons with it, but Chakri are S so there's no issue there.
Where's the rule that says you can't poison bludgeoning weapons?
unfortunately, boomerange is B so we cant apply poisons with it, but Chakri are S so there's no issue there.Where's the rule that says you can't poison bludgeoning weapons?
Page 550 it looks like. An injury poison is only triggered if the attack death piercing or slashing. Mind you, if you had a way to add P/S to a boomerangs attack...
unfortunately, boomerange is B so we cant apply poisons with it, but Chakri are S so there's no issue there.Where's the rule that says you can't poison bludgeoning weapons?
You would at least need the weapon to have Versatile P or S.
Edit: Ninja'd.