Kineticist Weapon Infusion Questions (2E)

[Alexander Dimitri Makarov]

Good afternoon fellow Pathfinders!

Weapon Infusion reads as follows:

The Rules wrote:

PFS Standard

Weapon Infusion
Free Action
Feat 1
Infusion Kineticist
Source Rage of Elements pg. 21 2.0

With a signature flair, you shape blasts of elemental power into the form of a weapon, such as a sword made of whirling wind or a bow that shoots flames. If your next action is an Elemental Blast, choose a weapon shape for it to take. You can choose to change the blast's damage type to bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing—whichever suits the weapon shape—and you can choose other alterations depending on whether you make a melee or ranged blast.

Melee Add one of the following traits of your choice: agile, backswing, forceful, reach, sweep.

Ranged Choose one of three options: range increment 100 feet and the volley 30 feet trait, range increment 50 feet and the propulsive trait, or range increment 20 feet and the thrown trait.

I have a few questions about this:

1. Can an elemental blast be shaped like an improvised weapon, e.g. deal ranged bludgeoning damage by shaping a fire elemental blast like a melon and giving it range 100/volley 30?

2. Can an elemental blast be shaped like a weapon from a source I don't own yet, e.g. a chakram?

2. Can a ranged blast be shaped like a melee weapon, then given a ranged trait, e.g. acid shaped like a club to deal bludgeoning damage then given range increment 20 feet and thrown?

[Pirate Rob]

Hi Alexander,

Pathfinder Society has no specific rulings regarding that feat. You'd likely do better in the Rules Questions section of the forum.

That said, I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how that feat works.

You don't need to line up perfectly an existing weapon and the "shape" you choose actually has almost no mechanical effect (Other than determining damage type)

You choose a damage type of bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing and a weapon that supports that type.

And if you choose Melee your blast gains one of agile, backswing, forceful, reach, sweep.

If you choose Ranged you get Increment 100/Volley 30 or Increment 50/Propulsive or Increment 20 and thrown.

That said I don't think a "watermellon" is a weapon, but there's plenty of ways to attack at great range with bludgeoning.

[Squark]

Like Rob says, you don't have to line the trait you give your blast 1:1 with an existing weapon. You can have your slashing fire reach kinetic blast look like a flaming Nodachi even though it doesn't have deadly d12 or brace, and you don't need to have access to the Nodachi to do this.

As for making your elemental blasts look like things that aren't weapons... Flavor is generally free, but do mind how your character fits in with the tone of the game.

[JiCi]

Why "melons" exactly ^^; ?

[Finoan]

I'm agreeing with Rob.

The shape and description of the Weapon Infusion blast is entirely up to you. It can be shaped like a standard weapon. It can be shaped like a weapon that you don't have access to. It can be shaped like the wrong type of weapon for its traits (a crossbow shaped melee blast with backswing or a greataxe shaped ranged blast). I would even allow it to be shaped like something that isn't even normally a weapon, such as a long stemmed rose.

However, in all cases, Weapon Infusion doesn't make the blast into a weapon. It is still an elemental Impulse effect. It exists only for the action duration of the blast, and then it ceases to exist - so it can't be enchanted, even temporarily with things like Runic Impression. You don't use Strike to attack with it and the blast attack cannot be used as a subordinate action that calls for a Strike (such as Sudden Charge).

[Darrell Impey UK]

Whilst I agree with all of the above, I did as a GM allow it to trigger "axe" vulnerability when shapped into an axe.

[Agonarchy]

I'd be all for a feat that let you make actual weapons, but in the mean time the flavor flexibility is great.

My shark-themed water/earth kineticist tends to throw "harpoons" and "anchors" or use "shark bites" and "fin strikes" in melee.

[Easl]

Darrell Impey UK wrote:

Whilst I agree with all of the above, I did as a GM allow it to trigger "axe" vulnerability when shapped into an axe.

I probably wouldn't do that, because as Finoan says EB isn't a rules-legit weapon, it is a blast no matter what shape it is. Your fire blast katana isn't a katana, it functions just as a blast. Your earth blast javelin isn't a javelin, it functions just as a blast. But on the plus side, your wood blast coconut isn't a coconut, it functions just as a blast and not as an inferior coconut. Shape it any way you want (cough as Squark says, that fits the tone of your campaign cough), the mechanics are as written no matter what the shape. To my mind, this makes the kineticist much more anime-like or superhero-like than most other classes. But that can be a cool thing.

[Baarogue]

I dunno. I think I would side with Darrell on this and allow a blast shaped into a weapon to trigger vulnerabilities to that weapon type. Weapon Infusion does say, "you shape elemental power into the form of a weapon," "choose a weapon shape for it to take," and, "whichever suits the weapon shape" - not to mention the ability to change the damage type and/or add a weapon trait to the blast

I think that's enough to indicate that the infusion is really forming the blast into a weapon and not just there for flair like this was GURPS. But I would also not allow the blast to be shaped into any old random object, like a melon, no matter how loud the "b-b-b-but *everything* is an improvised weapon" crowd is

but I do agree with all of these points by Finoan
>It exists only for the action duration of the blast, and then it ceases to exist - so it can't be enchanted, even temporarily with things like Runic Impression. You don't use Strike to attack with it and the blast attack cannot be used as a subordinate action that calls for a Strike (such as Sudden Charge).

Which also means it wouldn't trigger Weapon Critical Specialization Effects because those are triggered on a Strike

[Easl]

Baarogue wrote:

I dunno. I think I would side with Darrell on this and allow a blast shaped into a weapon to trigger vulnerabilities to that weapon type.

Keep in mind this allows a kineticist to trigger any and all weapon type vulnerabilities for the cost of a single feat. Granted, those aren't common. But that doesn't seem too strong to you?

I am also not sure what mechanics purpose is served by preventing PCs from shaping it into melons etc. If a GM wants a thematic restriction because they don't want one player turning the game into a Bugs Bunny episode when none of the other players want that...absolutely. I get that. But outside of the 'not being a team player in the storytelling' scenario I simply don't see any reason to squash their fun.

But maybe more importantly since this is on the Rules subforum, my reading of Weapon Infusion leads me to believe both the 'triggers weapon vulnerability' and 'can't shape it into an improvised weapon' ideas are not RAW.

[Baarogue]

Aight, how about this. Improvised weapons are allowed... if they take the -2 improvised weapons normally take? :3

Honestly I just hate the faction that wants to argue you can rune up a barstool. Improvised weapons are not weapons outside of the moment they are being used to attack. But by that same logic you could counter with "but the blast IS being used to attack that very moment" so I'm willing to swerve first. I'd allow it, and without the -2 I joked about above

But I absolutely will stand by also allowing them to trigger weapon vulnerabilities being RAW. All of the feat's text supports it with no stretches of interpretation necessary

[Finoan]

Baarogue wrote:

But by that same logic you could counter with "but the blast IS being used to attack that very moment" so I'm willing to swerve first. I'd allow it, and without the -2 I joked about above

Readying an action to cast Runic Impression on a Weapon Infusion Kinetic Blast seems really, really expensive.

[Baarogue]

Finoan wrote:

Baarogue wrote:

But by that same logic you could counter with "but the blast IS being used to attack that very moment" so I'm willing to swerve first. I'd allow it, and without the -2 I joked about above

Readying an action to cast Runic Impression on a Weapon Infusion Kinetic Blast seems really, really expensive.

Expensive in levels and MC feats on the character sheet? Expensive in action economy? Expensive in damage left on the table because that's a really terrible combo? I'm unsure what you're trying to say here

And did you miss me agreeing with you about Runic Impression even if we disagree on the vulnerabilities point?

[Easl]

Baarogue wrote:

Aight, how about this. Improvised weapons are allowed... if they take the -2 improvised weapons normally take? :3-

That's also not in the rules.

Quote:

Honestly I just hate the faction that wants to argue you can rune up a barstool.

Well you're in luck then with EB, because it can't be runed up regardless of whether you make it look like a barstool or a bastard sword.

Quote:

But I absolutely will stand by also allowing them to trigger weapon vulnerabilities being RAW. All of the feat's text supports it with no stretches of interpretation necessary

You and I read obviously read the feat's text differently. I see "you can change it to p, b, or s." I see "you can add agile..." I do not see "it acts like a weapon in other weapony ways" or "you can trigger weapon vulnerabliites."

IMO, Weapon Infusion adds the things it says it adds. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not add abilities dependent on weapon shape, and it doesn't add use penalties based on weapon shape either. The player can describe it as a giant 2-H foot-wide anime ice blade. The player can describe it as an ice feather - mechanically, they're the same.

[NorrKnekten]

Easl wrote:

Quote:

But I absolutely will stand by also allowing them to trigger weapon vulnerabilities being RAW. All of the feat's text supports it with no stretches of interpretation necessary

You and I read obviously read the feat's text differently. I see "you can change it to p, b, or s." I see "you can add agile..." I do not see "it acts like a weapon in other weapony ways" or "you can trigger weapon vulnerabliites."

IMO, Weapon Infusion adds the things it says it adds. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not add abilities dependent on weapon shape, and it doesn't add use penalties based on weapon shape either. The player can describe it as a giant 2-H foot-wide anime ice blade. The player can describe it as an ice feather - mechanically, they're the same.

Pretty much that yeah, It only changes damage type and adds one of six weapon traits. It is still an Elemental Blast and not a weapon. It does not gain any other weapon properties such as a weapon category, if it did the feat would've explicitly said so. Same reason as to why you cannot apply a Weapon Critical Specialization effect.

Sure a GM could say it works, But that is a GM over-ruling what the feat actually does.

[Finoan]

Baarogue wrote:

Finoan wrote:

Baarogue wrote:

But by that same logic you could counter with "but the blast IS being used to attack that very moment" so I'm willing to swerve first. I'd allow it, and without the -2 I joked about above

Readying an action to cast Runic Impression on a Weapon Infusion Kinetic Blast seems really, really expensive.

Expensive in levels and MC feats on the character sheet? Expensive in action economy? Expensive in damage left on the table because that's a really terrible combo? I'm unsure what you're trying to say here

And did you miss me agreeing with you about Runic Impression even if we disagree on the vulnerabilities point?

Mostly expensive in action economy. Though spending a focus point on it too is probably a bit much for the duration of the effect compared to the mileage you normally get for Runic Impression. I was actually envisioning it being a team strategy: Kineticist character with Magus character supporting them. But looking at the spell again, that wouldn't work because of the targeting of Runic Impression. So the Multiclass feat cost would also be really high.

With this comment I wasn't really agreeing or disagreeing with the rules legality of enchanting the Weapon Infusion Kinetic Blast. Just mentioning that even if it was allowed, it would probably still be a bad strategy.

[Dragonchess Player]

No an elemental blast with the Weapon Infusion is not an actual weapon and cannot be treated as an actual weapon. It is a blast, even though it resembles a weapon.

You can't apply abilities, actions, and modifiers that are for weapons to an elemental blast. Period.

Otherwise you get kineticists taking the eldritch archer (a "bow" elemental blast) or mauler (a "halberd" elemental blast) archetypes to "shoot" spells to take effect on a target of a blast or to use Slam Down with a blast...

[Alexander Dimitri Makarov]

I just realised I wrote two question 2's XD

So, pick a weapon shape, pick a damage type (b/p/s), pick a weapon trait, these choices do not need to be related.

[Baarogue]

Alexander Dimitri Makarov wrote:

I just realised I wrote two question 2's XD

So, pick a weapon shape, pick a damage type (b/p/s), pick a weapon trait, these choices do not need to be related.

Aside from the melee/ranged restriction on the traits, correct, the damage type and traits need not be related to the weapon shape chosen