12/12/2023 0 Comments Point blank shot pathfinder![]() To make it simple if we have a rule that state "players characters can't run" but you take a feat that say "if you have this feat you can run".now your character can run. Pathfinder, like modern D&D in general, always go for this mantra: specific always overwrite general ruling. In my opinion, rules as written, this point is not clear and since the only "help" Paizo gave us is that Point blank shot faq where we can see that the static damage only apply to bomb damage on a direct hit, not on a bomb splash damage. ![]() The splash ignore all the static damage we can apply to a bomb? (smite evil, inspire courage, point blank shot etc etc etc) Minimum of what? Of the bomb's original damage? If this is the case, well, the bomb's splash will always do X damage, where x is the number of dice rolled, plus the alchemist's INT modifier.Īnd now.what do we do with the static bonuses we can apply to a weapon damage? This is the core of the problem. We don't know what they mean with "minimum" damage. So, with "fewer" words, we can say that a bomb at first level deal only 1d6 + INT damage and the bomb's splash deal 1 + INT damage since the splash damage is always the bomb's minimum damage. Splash damage from an alchemist bomb is always equal to the bomb’s minimum damage (so if the bomb would deal 2d6+4 points of fire damage on a direct hit, its splash damage would be 6 points of fire damage). ![]() On a direct hit, an alchemist’s bomb inflicts 1d6 points of fire damage + additional damage equal to the alchemist’s Intelligence modifier. ![]() Taking alchemist case, for example, the entry related to bombs damage is this: The big problem with alchemist's bombs (and splash weapon in general) is how they are written. Sorry, but this is just what you get with Paizo. Nonetheless, it fits very neatly with their “We were always at war with Eastasia” approach to rules holes, and allows them to avoid doing that thing they loathe so much-admit they made a mistake. This is a fantastic case-in-point example for why their abuse of the FAQ greatly hinders understanding the game, and why they shouldn’t be doing that. Before the FAQ was written, officially, Point-Blank Shot affected bomb splash damage-because bombs are ranged weapons, Point-Blank Shot applies to ranged weapon damage, and nothing anywhere else (before the FAQ) contradicted that. Despite the fact that the FAQ is written as if this was always the rule, and implicitly that you should be able to determine the same conclusion from those rules alone, this simply isn’t so. The only reason Point-Blank Shot doesn’t work with the splash damage of bombs is because the FAQ says it doesn’t. Something like the FAQ entry for bombs and Point-Blank Shot.īasically, you have run afoul of Paizo’s exceptionally poor decision to use the FAQ for errata. So all bonuses to damage, to weapon damage, to ranged weapon damage, to thrown weapon damage, splash weapon damage, and so on and so forth will work with bombs, and therefore their splash damage, unless something explicitly says that thing does not. ![]() Bombs are thrown, ranged, splash weapons, and their splash damage is calculated based on their initial damage so anything that applies to the initial damage also applies to the splash (albeit with all dice minimized). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |