Splash Damage Question
- Thread starter Borthos
- Start date
Celebrim
Legend
I would generally say no. He's more likely to get splashed, but he doesn't get additional splash damage any more than he gets hit multiple times by a fireball just because he's standing in more squares.
If you want a 'realism' explanation for that, it is because burn damage isn't proportional to area, but to the percentage of your bodies surface area that is burned. A smaller creature might be completely dowsed by the flames/acid, etc., where as a larger creature though occupying a larger area as a percentage takes less damage because they are not completely covered.
SuperJebba
First Post
I would have to agree with Celebrim.
My group plays it where splash damage does occure and do damage but, the splash damage is useless against a outsider. Why? Each square of a splash should be considered a separate attack therefore the outsiders energy resistance to acid and fire 5 comes into play.
Otherwise you can get an extra 3 points of damage on a large and 3 points on a corner hit of something bigger or 5 if on an edge.
If you want to maximize this attack form take the Grenadier feat from PBH II page 79. You get a +1 to hit and +1 to damage. You apply the extra damage to primary and splash damage.
Celebrim and Borthos, fireballs do not cost you gold for every hit. Acid flask cost you 10 gp every attempted attack and Alchemist fire costs 20 gp. The extra splash damage is only 1 hp per square or 2 per square if you want to spend a feat. It's not that much and if a player abuses it they will not have the gp for other permanent magic items that can be more abusive to a game.
Otherwise you can get an extra 3 points of damage on a large and 3 points on a corner hit of something bigger or 5 if on an edge.
If you want to maximize this attack form take the Grenadier feat from PBH II page 79. You get a +1 to hit and +1 to damage. You apply the extra damage to primary and splash damage.
Celebrim and Borthos, fireballs do not cost you gold for every hit. Acid flask cost you 10 gp every attempted attack and Alchemist fire costs 20 gp. The extra splash damage is only 1 hp per square or 2 per square if you want to spend a feat. It's not that much and if a player abuses it they will not have the gp for other permanent magic items that can be more abusive to a game.
Celebrim
Legend
This is a gamist explanation for changing the rules. That's going to be more convincing at some tables than others.
But, at least as I'm reading the rules, that's not how they are intended to work and speaking as a programmer that's used to reading literally rather than by intent I can find no reading that gets them to work that way. The only literal reading of the rules that gets you close to that I can see is that a target hit directly by a grenade like weapon always takes both the direct damage and the splash damage, but there is nothing in the text that makes size matter in that interpretation or causes splash damage to stack.
While I'm about the last person to tell you to respect the rules just because, I'm not convinced by your reasoning. Still, you are right, it's not going to be unbalancing if you change the rule as you suggest.
Unless you play an alchemist who can make stuff for 1/3 of the price. Not game breaking, but I wanted other people's opinions. My guy's the alchemist, we're playing PF and I checked splash weapon rules b/w 3.5 and PF, they are the same. no one answers me in the PF board.
I get to add my int mod to splash weapons and bombs, including splash damage. so that alchemist fire I just threw? if splash plays against each square a creature occupies? He takes 1d6+4 initial and 5 extra per square if we change it like Tanis says.
Or if splash damage just applies once to a large or bigger creature? 1d6+9 (+4 int, +1 splash, +4 int added to splash). not that bad at level 4 is it? especially when I can throw 2 with TWF at 4th, 3 at 5th (rapid shot and TWF) and deal 3d6+30 (assuming my intelligence goes up by 2 at that point and splash damage applies only once per large creature.) fire resistance 5? oops, you only took 3d6+25. Oh wait, I threw acid? or Liquid Ice? oops, no resistance.
NVM finally got an answer in PF boards. Sorry, been kinda grumpy lately.
And, I take issue with the fireball comparison. Fireball doesn't deal splash damage at all. Not the same thing.
I get to add my int mod to splash weapons and bombs, including splash damage. so that alchemist fire I just threw? if splash plays against each square a creature occupies? He takes 1d6+4 initial and 5 extra per square if we change it like Tanis says.
Or if splash damage just applies once to a large or bigger creature? 1d6+9 (+4 int, +1 splash, +4 int added to splash). not that bad at level 4 is it? especially when I can throw 2 with TWF at 4th, 3 at 5th (rapid shot and TWF) and deal 3d6+30 (assuming my intelligence goes up by 2 at that point and splash damage applies only once per large creature.) fire resistance 5? oops, you only took 3d6+25. Oh wait, I threw acid? or Liquid Ice? oops, no resistance.
NVM finally got an answer in PF boards. Sorry, been kinda grumpy lately.
And, I take issue with the fireball comparison. Fireball doesn't deal splash damage at all. Not the same thing.
Last edited:
Celebrim
Legend
Not at all, especially with you getting double damage to swarms and especially since it gives continuous damage over time.
However, I should note that the ruling you seem to have become happy with is probably not the intention of the rules. Though I admit that the rules could be read such that a creature directly hit by a grenade like splash weapon takes both the damage for a direct hit and the splash damage (since technically the creature is 'within 5' of the point of impact'), I do not believe that that is the intention of the rules. I believe the intention of the rules is that you take either the direct damage hit or the splash damage but not both. However, do what works for your table and I'm not that worried about this on a gamist level because it opens up area of effect damage to a greater number of classes.
Just for the record though, resistance doesn't work like that. The resistance would be applied against each attack, so if you have to apply -5 to the direct damage AND -5 to the splash damage. So in fact, you'd only be doing 3d6 damage versus something with fire resistance 5. Still, even that's not be bad considering this is a very bad case for you (equivelent to melee attacking a target that has DR you can't overcome).
Yes, that would be the superior strategy.
That's why I wanted to ask here, cause it does not address hitting anything bigger than a medium creature. I wanted your opinions on the matter as well.
Hm...I thought it worked just against the first 5 points of fire damage it takes per turn. Oh well, that's why I have other stuff.
I would not apply any bonus damage, like the INT bonus or the +1 for the Grenadier feat, to a second round of damage that Alchemist fire gets. You get the extra damage by knowing how to make it burn hotter or hitting the right spot, but it runs low on fuel to burn or it spreads in an uncontrollable manner in the second round.
Not worry about the double damage against Swarms; in the long run you will face non-swarms creatures far more often.
Here is why I argue this way. To quote the SDR:
"Every creature within 5 feet of the point where the flask hits takes 1 point of fire damage from the splash."
Goods And Services :: d20srd.org
If you, a large creature, get hit by the primary attack you are still within the splash area because you are "a creature within 5 feet of the point where the flask hits." So you take splash damage.
Honestly, this is a situation where logic can be use to support either side because the rules do not expensively exclude either interpretation. As such it needs to be something you need to talk to you DM about before springing it on him/her.
I have trained in computer logic, as in how the logic gates work, both electronically and logically, and have some training in programing.
