Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psifon" data-source="post: 339026" data-attributes="member: 3171">Kreynolds, my respect for you is deminishing daily.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> Every time I make an assertion about how this thing works, you say that it doesn't work that way.  When I ask you why, you simply find a different thing to "pick appart" without answering my question.Again.  Why won't a shrunken object break just like a normal sized object?If you can't answer this question then stop griping, stop changing the subject, and admit that you have lost this arguement.There are two (and only two) reasons why this might not work.  Both of them are up to the DM (NOT YOU) to nerf:1) The damage for alchemist fire could use a different progression than the one I am using.  You state that this is a house rule.  I agree.  But it is a house rule using the EXISTING rule for the damage progression of larger than normal weapons found in the core rules.  The only "house rule" part of it is that it is applied for each doubling of volume of the liquid.  So it is not a huge leap to apply this to the volume of a grenade-like weapon.  In fact, one could argue that a larger volue IS a larger weapon.  Anyway, as I said, this is a DM's call.  Note that if you don't do this you end up with 2 gallons of alchemist fire doing 16d6 over two rounds for a total of 32d6 of damage! 2) The phrase "toss on a solid surface" may or may not be fullfilled by being shot from a crossbow.  This is not so much a house rule as a DM's interpretation.  Yes of course DM's may vary in their interpretation, but that is why we play D&D and not Diablo: because the other humans make the game more fun.If you want to say my trick doesn't work because of one or both of these reasons, fine.  If you want to say it is broken because it doesn't cost enough money, you are entitled to your opinion, although that has NO bearing on whether or not it is legal.But, if all you want to do is make up new rules so that you can argue that they are the reason my trick doesn't work, then I suggest that YOU go to a new forum.  Because I am not the one inventing rules here!.  If the only reason that you can come up with to nerf this trick is the rule that you made up, then I really don't want to argue with you any more.</blockquote>

Verification