| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thrower’s Bandolier is in the new blog post. You can now put weapon runes on the Thrower’s Bandolier and it covers the weapons in it! Sounds cool.
Indeed. A different character in a game I was in was trying to use thrown weapons as a flurry ranger. Quick draw would get the action cost for anything except Hunted Shot, but the rune costs were prohibitive. Fortunately the adventure only went up to level 4, so it worked well enough for most of that time.
And the Bandolier can hold a lot of Bulk L items. 20 of them from the look of it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks quite good for monks with Shooting Stars Stance. It's also nice with enough room for 20 L weapons so you should have room for different material versions and/or different damage type weapons.
Or infinite bulk 0 weapons! Shurikens have been lifted from their purgatory.Indeed. A different character in a game I was in was trying to use thrown weapons as a flurry ranger. Quick draw would get the action cost for anything except Hunted Shot, but the rune costs were prohibitive. Fortunately the adventure only went up to level 4, so it worked well enough for most of that time.
And the Bandolier can hold a lot of Bulk L items. 20 of them from the look of it.
Yes! I have all the Shurikens!!! [insert evil laugh]
Or infinite bulk 0 weapons!
I'd describe it as an 'unbounded' amount rather than an 'infinite' amount, but that is a distinction that is probably irrelevant.
Uh, might not work with chakri. Ug.
Why not?
Uh, might not work with chakri. Ug.
I'd work fine: it'd just mean they have reload 1 instead of reload 0 for having them on your wrist. It just means you need quickdraw.
Myself, I'm looking at boomerangs! A 60' range and B damage looks pretty sweet!
I'm really excited about this one!
Uh, might not work with chakri. Ug.I'd work fine: it'd just mean they have reload 1 instead of reload 0 for having them on your wrist. It just means you need quickdraw.
Myself, I'm looking at boomerangs! A 60' range and B damage looks pretty sweet!
Right but the reload 0 is what makes them special. Otherwise, they're just worse boomerangs.
Edit: unless boomerangs are bulk 1 in which case, I'd fill the bandoliers with chakri instead.
The differences between them is damage types [B vs S] and the boomerang has +20' range: the cost the same, have the same bulk and use he same hands.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing stops you from putting Returning on the bandolier to enable having two 1 bulk thrown items, right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But yeah, boomerangs are goated. A thaumaturge with a collection of them with the bandoliers and QuickDraw effectively gives them a shortbow with full strength mod to damage.
Getting Quick Draw is enough of an investment (two archetype feats) that it doesn't seem unreasonable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so for the sickness... is there anything that prevents you from putting alchemical bombs in your thrower's bandolier and thus giving them runes?
You probably wouldn't want to add Striking, but being able to apply weapon property runes to those things would be... significant.
Okay, so for the sickness... is there anything that prevents you from putting alchemical bombs in your thrower's bandolier and thus giving them runes?
LOL I was just thinking the same thing: some flame, frost, shock, corrosive ect on our bombs. ;)
Okay, so for the sickness... is there anything that prevents you from putting alchemical bombs in your thrower's bandolier and thus giving them runes?LOL I was just thinking the same thing: some flame, frost, shock, corrosive ect on our bombs. ;)
Well... they *did* say they were looking to buff the alchemist with this book....
I'm almost certain that it's unintentional... but I think that by RAW it works. I'm just surprised they didn't catch it earlier.
Also, Shooting Star Stance is now viable! Also, it's still not as good as Monastic Archer Stance.
Mind that if you want have a throwing item in each hand, your bandolier only applies runes to the most recently drawn. This may not be an issue in most cases but it's worth being aware of. Don't want to start the fight with two weapons drawn unless one weapon is your melee standby and the other is from the bandolier.
I love the idea of putting two 1-bulk items in the bandolier, slapping a Returning rune on it, then swapping which you're throwing around based on current enemy weaknesses.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now shurikens don't have to pay the returning tax for no reason, such bliss...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so for the sickness... is there anything that prevents you from putting alchemical bombs in your thrower's bandolier and thus giving them runes?
You probably wouldn't want to add Striking, but being able to apply weapon property runes to those things would be... significant.
Well, there is the precedent of things like the doubling rings that say that you can't replicate runes onto items that couldn't get them normally. And that weapon runes can only be put on permanent items - not consumable ones.
But yeah, that explicit wording is missing from the rules text in the blog at least.
Okay, so for the sickness... is there anything that prevents you from putting alchemical bombs in your thrower's bandolier and thus giving them runes?
You probably wouldn't want to add Striking, but being able to apply weapon property runes to those things would be... significant.
Well, there is the precedent of things like the doubling rings that say that you can't replicate runes onto items that couldn't get them normally. And that weapon runes can only be put on permanent items - not consumable ones.
But yeah, that explicit wording is missing from the rules text in the blog at least.
Is there a rule about not being able to put runes onto consumable weapons? You really shouldn't but I think you can.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a rule about not being able to put runes onto consumable weapons? You really shouldn't but I think you can.
Again, it is hidden in the item usage rules rather than being in the rune rules. Just like the 'worn in a slot' rule that tripped me up earlier today.
Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.
I only remember this because it came up in a different discussion about ABP recently.
Hmm, can you use it with Chakri with reload zero that have a limit of 2 per hand?That's what we were trying to figure out earlier. Probably not is my assumption.
I think the solution to that is two bandoleers
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a rule about not being able to put runes onto consumable weapons? You really shouldn't but I think you can.Again, it is hidden in the item usage rules rather than being in the rune rules. Just like the 'worn in a slot' rule that tripped me up earlier today.
Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.I only remember this because it came up in a different discussion about ABP recently.
Huh.
Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit. Adding or transferring a rune takes downtime to accomplish. The Usage entry indicates the type or types of items a rune can be etched into, such as “etched onto a weapon.” More information about etching runes is found here.
Whenever you draw a weapon from the bandolier, the bandolier's runes are replicated onto that weapon. Any runes already on the weapon are suppressed, and any runes previously replicated to a different weapon in this way are removed, returning it to normal.
Yeah... I'm going to say that putting the two of those together results in a "the rules are unclear". I know how I'd be running it at any table I ran (Nope!) and I'm pretty sure that that's also the intended interpretation, but I can't prove it in a court of RAW.
On the flip side, this whole discussion has brought up the idea of buying up a bunch of cheap talismans, and affixing *those* to your bombs when you make them in the morning, and that has possibilities.
...though, admittedly, on further investigation, those possibilities aren't amazing. Bloodseeker beak will give you a whole extra 1d4 damage for 20gp. Eye of Enlightenment will give a free Recall Knowledge for 25 gp (if you hit). There's a bunch of stuff that's basically useless to a bomber. The gruel here is pretty thin. Ah, well.
Is there a rule about not being able to put runes onto consumable weapons? You really shouldn't but I think you can.Again, it is hidden in the item usage rules rather than being in the rune rules. Just like the 'worn in a slot' rule that tripped me up earlier today.
Runes must be etched onto permanent items, such as armor, weapons, or runestones to grant their benefit.I only remember this because it came up in a different discussion about ABP recently.
Ah perfect, thank you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're saved!
Hmm. I wonder if property runes on bombs is particularly out of place in terms of math. Bombs are roughly equal to martial thrown weapons. Probably wouldn't break anything.
Mostly it is just really confusing and hard to keep track of things.
For the fundamental runes (I know you specified property runes), it is really bizarre. The item bonus from Potency runes wouldn't stack with the item bonus from higher level versions of bombs. And what would a striking rune increase for an acid flask? And what is the difference between a +1 Striking Alchemist's Fire (lesser) and an Alchemist's Fire (moderate)?
But then getting to the property runes. First, you can't put property runes on a weapon without having potency runes on it. Second, why have a Ghost Charge when you could have an Alchemist's Fire with a Ghost Touch rune?
So yeah. I can't really do much of an analysis on how badly putting property runes on bombs would break the math because the options are too many.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bombs are not Thrown Weapons, they're general Ranged Weapons, they don't have the Thrown Trait despite how it describes the action you take to Strike with them, so no, it won't work for Bombs.
For reference the list of Weapons with the Thrown Trait. Similarly, you don't apply any of the other rules for Thrown Weapons to Bombs such as applying your Str Mod to the Damage.
The Splash Trait itself is ... poorly written and needs to be revised for a number of reasons and TENDS to contradict this by saying it applies to thrown weapons but again, that's an issue as it essentially wholesale replaces the Thrown Weapon Trait altogether itself and is more descriptive in a manner that I'd call, UGH, natural language, instead of mechanically codified. Splash needs errata anyhow so I'm apt to ignore that description at it is self-breaking.
|
|
The Splash Trait itself is not a reliable source IMO as it has manifold problems such as being a kind of Trait but also sort of a Damage Type in another case as well as mixes natural language terms identical to the Thrown Trait which you'll also notice must always include a Range Increment as part of the Trait label another piece missing from Bombs which, again, aren't Thrown as in Thrown Weapons, they're Bombs with the Bomb Trait which as you noted replaces Thrown which ... makes it so they aren't Thrown Weapons, they're Bomb Weapons therefore ineligible for any ability that keys off "Thrown XX ft." on Weapons.
It cannot be both a normal Thrown Weapon and ALSO a Bomb at the same time. The whole Splash Trait needs to be rewritten regardless though, be it to clarify one way or another, I really couldn't care which way the pendulum swings at the end of the day but it needs tidying up or clarifying regardless, esp with this new item being put out as it is absolutely going to create even more questions and confusion unless it is addressed.
This also doesn't touch on the weirdness of Bombs that don't deal damage at all like the Tanglefoot Bag which also raises questions that seem to try to divide by 0, not only with the effects for runes but other abilities that key off bonuses applied to Thrown Weapons.
Either way, I don't think it works even if it would be a nice little buff, and all this not to mention the additional strange interactions it could/may/does have with regard to them being Consumble which in some places seems to also disqualify them from benefiting from Runes or Rune effects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Basically, though, the bomb math already has its equivalent of property runes baked in. Adding more property runes on top of that is approximately equivalent to adding more property runes on top of whatever existing fully-runed weapon you had. It's not going to break the game too badly, but it's more powerful than intended.
| 2 people 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.