| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
kestrel.ca
Underboss
1684 Posts
    
 | | 10/10/2005 11:36 AM |
| | recovered topic 9716 | |
Completed Trades/Transactions: 94 || Bad Trades: 3 (Chaotic Good x2, MackeyV) | |
|
kestrel.ca
Underboss
1684 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 11:36 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Link
The first ruling is about sneak attacks with grenadelike weapons: in 'tome and blood' it says that you can make sneak attacks with ranged spells within 30 feet or less. Can you then also make a sneak attack with for instance alchemist's fire?
In this instance I would not allow a sneak attack. It doesn't make sense to have the flask hit a particularly vulnerable area and cause extra damage...
quote:
The second issue concerns skill selection and multiclassing.
The rules say that when you select skills for a new class level, your max skill ranks for a class skill are character level + 3.
Technically this means that, when for instance a 5th level wizard takes a single rogue level, he could immediately take 9 ranks in Search. That would enable him to probably search better than a 3rd level rogue would (especially because a wizard's int-mod will be probably higher). That would be a bit strange.
I don't find it necessarily that strange -- I'd say it means he's probably been interested in searching for quite a while but really needed the rogue training to bring it into focus. Turn it around, if a PC started as a rogue, and then added on wizard levels, he could still end up with 9 ranks in search, and still find traps better than a 3rd lvl rogue. But it doesn't seem so strange when looked at from that angle (although he would have had to use cross-class ranks to get there).
quote:
Another DM I know uses this houserule: when you select skills for a new class level, your max ranks is 3 + (class level of classes where this skill is a class skill) + (1/2 class level of classes where this skill is cross-class). I think this rule is OK, but maybe a bit of a hassle. Any of you use houserules for this?
It's a little more realistic, but more of a headache than I need in my games. I wouldn't bother with that rule. | |
Completed Trades/Transactions: 94 || Bad Trades: 3 (Chaotic Good x2, MackeyV) | |
|
warty_nosed_goblin
Underboss
1384 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 12:05 PM |
| As said, I'd definatly not allow sneak attack damage with alchemist's fire, as none of the damage is caused by the actual flask, only the breaking of it, and insuing fire...now if the flask was specially made so that it did damage on a hit I might allow it, perhaps something like:
Spiked Flask
Cost: 30 gp
Weight: Same as normal flask
Damage 1d4 (piercing)
Range Increment 15ft
A spiked flask is a normal flask that has spikes affixed to it so that it causes damage to a foe when they are hit by it. Due to the un-airodynamic shape of the spikes, a spiked flask has a very short range increment. In order to do damage, the character must roll better then the target's regular armor class, that is, make a ranged touch attack and a regular ranged attack at the same time (roll once).
This might need fleshing out a little bit, but it might be kinda fun to run into once and a while...I'm thinking goblin alchemists in the employ of a black dragon armed with flasks of dragon acid... | |
Call me: W.N. Gobo!
originally posted by grim:
While he is clearly insane, he does have a point. | |
|
Malin Lug
Sergeant
742 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 1:19 PM |
| The sneak attack with alchemist fire would definetly not be allowed in our game. I will agree with the arguement that it is not possible to hit a critical area with grenade like weapon.
quote:
Spiked Flask
Cost: 30 gp
Weight: Same as normal flask
Damage 1d4 (piercing)
Range Increment 15ft
I like the idea... but the stats are off. The range for an aerodynamic thrown dagger is only 10ft and the damage is the same. I would have to say the d3 damage and 10ft range increment would fit alot better.
| |
"Are you not entertained?" 
Champion of the Common Bar Wench
| |
|
kyrin
Commander
3168 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 1:53 PM |
| On the other hand, isn't sneak attack damage supposed to apply for something like Scorching Ray? That's come up in one of our groups, now that the Rogue/Sorceror has a Wand of Scorching Ray. That does no physical damage, only energy damage. How different is that from a flask of alchemist's fire or a vial of acid -- or holy water for that matter?
I'm VERY undecided about this, and I'd like to hear what others think.
JIM
aka kyrin | |
My Have/Want List <-|-|->My Trades and References 1 <-|-|->My Trades and References 2
Pronounce "Drow" like "crow"! Viva la Revolution! We Shall Overcome!
Vindicated Champion of the Stirge! Vindicated Champion of the Githyanki Knight on Red Dragon!!
Vindicated Champion of the Androsphinx! | |
|
Gristlemane
Sergeant
623 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 2:01 PM |
| As for the skills, remember that there's nothing stopping a wizard from taking ranks in Search either, you just get half a rank for each point you devote to it. So you could have an 8th level wizard who was as good at searching as a 3rd level rogue. Why shouldn't a wizard 5/rogue 1 be able to also?
Personally, I think house rules should only be made why you absolutely have to make them. 95% of house rules seem to be worse than the RAW. | |
It's deja vu all over again. | |
|
warty_nosed_goblin
Underboss
1384 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 2:24 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
On the other hand, isn't sneak attack damage supposed to apply for something like Scorching Ray? That's come up in one of our groups, now that the Rogue/Sorceror has a Wand of Scorching Ray. That does no physical damage, only energy damage. How different is that from a flask of alchemist's fire or a vial of acid -- or holy water for that matter?
I'm VERY undecided about this, and I'd like to hear what others think.
JIM
But you can aim a wand of scorching ray, that is, choose where it hits, you can't do that with alchemist's fire so well, all you do is choose where the explosion happens, not what it hits.
Put slightly differntly, with a scorching ray you can try and toast your target's vitals (aim at them) but with a flask, that's not as doable, IMHO.
aka kyrin
| |
Call me: W.N. Gobo!
originally posted by grim:
While he is clearly insane, he does have a point. | |
|
Link
Warrior
314 Posts
Netherlands
| | 10/10/2005 4:20 PM |
| About the skill points: I think all your arguments make sense. I doubted my own policy for a moment when I heard about this other DM's houserule, but now I know I am sticking with the standard rules. Thanks.
I am also quite convinced about not allowing a sneak attack for alchemists fire, but how about other grenadelike weapons like a flask of acid for example? For ranged attack spells I always allow crits btw: as warty_ng said, you can aim to hit them where it hurts. Although something like an acid splash is again uncertain -I do allow crits in that case too now. | |
trade reference thread
(30 completed trades, 1 pending)Vindicated Champion of the Noble Salamander | |
|
reezel
Sergeant
555 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 9:36 PM |
| | Well, looking at the way the rules are written, you do get sneak attack on the alchemist fire. Now, the problem here is that when looking for house rules that don't work, most people out there don't look for ways that the rules work. So, after putting a little thought into it, I can see how alchemists fire would gain bonuses for damage on sneak attack. Say you're invisible, thus giving you ability to make a sneak attack on your enemy. Now normally hurling that flask at them they would move around, trying not to get hit, letting thier armor take the brunt of the blow. Now, instead of the flask careening with the armor and burning parts of small amounts, it collides directly with thier head, burning them intensly, leaving third degree burns that can obviously result in death. And there is a good example of sneak attack damage on an Alchemists Fire hit. | |
Champion of the Beholder and Beholderkin
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. | |
|
Testament
Underboss
1397 Posts
| | 10/10/2005 10:52 PM |
| | On grenade-like weapons, you cannot sneak attack with them as you aren't aiming at a creature. You're aiming at a square. | |
Support awesome games: Play Hecatomb!
8-Bit Chibi Goths forever!
Champion of Mephistopheles
"Sorry! I was tryin' to open these beans!"
My Have/Want List, (Updated July 6 2004, will be updated soon)
| |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 10/11/2005 2:54 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Testament
On grenade-like weapons, you cannot sneak attack with them as you aren't aiming at a creature. You're aiming at a square.
That's an option, but not a requirement. It's entirely possible (and more effective) to throw a flask of whatever at someone.
I also would not allow sneak attack with a flask of whatever, for the same reason someone else gave: you're not throwing the alchemist's fire, you're throwing the flask, and the flask does no damage of any type. Since sneak attack damage becomes the same type as that of the weapon used, there's no sneak attack damage.
Look at it this way: you can also throw a flask of oil at someone, which shatters and covers them in oil but otherwise does no damage. Do you allow sneak attack damage for that?
In short: The flask is the weapon. The weapon does no damage; it merely releases something that does do damage.
I also agree that worrying too much about skill ranks is way too much trouble for any dubious benefit gained. | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
|
Iksander
Underboss
1010 Posts
| | 10/11/2005 7:10 AM |
| I would allow the sneak attack damage simply because if you don't, then it FUBARS the entire system. You'll then end up questioning every bloody type of damage and attack as to whether or not it can do sneak attack damage, as evidenced in all the above posts.
Game should be fun, not an exercise in rules adjudication. It does damage, good enough for me. Besides... how does it 'break' the system if you allow it? It's frikkin 1d6 fire damage as a base. It's not like we're talking extremes here. I can get more damage from a bow or crossbow, and more attacks in a round (you can only throw one item, whereas you get multiple attacks with other weapons as you go up levels). Call him "TrollKiller" and be done with it.
As for the skills... ugh, again, forget about it. Big deal if X has this but Y only has that. Does it really impact on your enjoyment of the game?
Personally, I'd dump the entire ranks system and go with Iron Heroes skill groups instead. | |
Bite me. | |
|
nyjastul69
Commander
2712 Posts
Rhode Island
| | 10/11/2005 12:28 PM |
| | Why would it be more difficult to target a specific area of the body with a flask than with another weapon, say a dagger? | |
In the constellation of
Cygnus, there lurks a
mysterious, invisible
force:
Rush | |
|
Pale Rider
Underboss
1023 Posts
London, Ontario, Canada
| | 10/11/2005 12:49 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by nyjastul69
Why would it be more difficult to target a specific area of the body with a flask than with another weapon, say a dagger?
Because the flask isn't doing any damage - only the exploding contents. Alchemist's Fire is a splash weapon too is it not? For those who would allow sneak attack on an AF throw do you then allow it on the splash areas too? I just can't see how you can be precise with a weapon that explodes on contact with the air. | |
Completed Trades: Crescent Hawk, Vimes, demagogue, vidman, Eric is God, Strachan Fireblade, FungiMuncher, Dudeeehm, Shasack, gausse, kyrin, nyjastul69
Champion of the Remorhaz | |
|
nyjastul69
Commander
2712 Posts
Rhode Island
| | 10/11/2005 1:12 PM |
| | What makes it more difficult to throw a flask at someones knees, feet, face, etc. than a dagger? The contents are going to soak/damage the specific area that was aimed at. There is no 'to hit' roll with splash damage so SA damage wouldn't apply. | |
In the constellation of
Cygnus, there lurks a
mysterious, invisible
force:
Rush | |
|
Mrfurious
Warrior
344 Posts
| | 10/11/2005 1:30 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by kyrin
On the other hand, isn't sneak attack damage supposed to apply for something like Scorching Ray? That's come up in one of our groups, now that the Rogue/Sorceror has a Wand of Scorching Ray. That does no physical damage, only energy damage. How different is that from a flask of alchemist's fire or a vial of acid -- or holy water for that matter?
I'm VERY undecided about this, and I'd like to hear what others think.
JIM
aka kyrin
Jim
To give an example of how to crit with energy damage.
I've got a lit torch in my hand. I tell you I'm going to hold the lit end against one part of your body. I'll let you choose one of two places. Your choices are your face, or your fore arm. The choice is obvious because one is way worse than the other.
Or imagine the scorching ray burning a small chunk of your flesh. There are areas where losing a chunk of flesh is more important than others, hence sneak attack.
Conor
| |
Sanity is a one trick pony, my friend, . . .but when you're good and crazy the sky is the limit.
http://www.maxminis.com/hwlist.asp?user=mrfurious
braman@che.utexas.edu | |
|
Link
Warrior
314 Posts
Netherlands
| | 10/12/2005 3:20 AM |
| MrFurious,
I see your point, but I don't quite agree with the analogy: A torch has two ends: you hold it with one end, and in that way you can aim the other, fiery end exactly where you want it. With alchemist's fire you aim the flask (as several people on this thread already argued). The flask may burst on someone's head, but you can only try to determine where the substance in it will land. The really interesting question is: can a character succesfully determine this or is the outcome still depending on luck for the greater part?
And Iksander: I appreciate your input, but for me discussions like this are part of the fun of playing this game. It is certainly not spoiling it for me, and most of the players in my group agree. To each his own, right? And 1d6 more or less can mean the difference between a dead orc and an alive one. Quite significant during the fist few levels. | |
trade reference thread
(30 completed trades, 1 pending)Vindicated Champion of the Noble Salamander | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |