Alchemical item bonus to hit

[Ghost0]

This might be a stupid question, but I was wondering if, when a character uses an alchemical item, you add in half your level like a regular attack?

If I'm 4th level and I throw a level 1 Alchemist's Acid at a target, the item says it has a +4 bonus to attack vs. Reflex. It doesn't have any other keywords than Consumable and Acid, but if its an attack, like all attacks, wouldn't you add half your level to the bonus to hit?

Thanks, sorry i Know this is a rules question and not an extensive conversation thread or anything...

 

[fba827]

no modifiers added. if it says +4 vs reflex. +4 is all you get, regardless.

(the +4 already accounts for the level of the item itself)

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

There are some items that will help though, Alchemist's Gloves give +2. Alchemist theme also gives a bonus. There's a PP that also gives another bonus. You can actually get a pretty effective to-hit bonus with a bit of optimization. Enough to make the items effective, if not startlingly good options. Mostly the alchemical attack items are pretty meh. They can be handy if you say lack certain attack options and need them for some specific reason. The non-attacking type items are more interesting.

 

[King_Mushi]

I'm going to go against the grain and say you should add your 1/2 level to the attack. Since the addition of magic ammunition in AV2, using only the bonus listed on the stat block effectively makes these items extremely sub-par.

I threw a few examples together, comparing magic ammo to alchemical items. I'm using a ranger as the class using the magical ammo, the class of the alchemical thrower is moot since are no benefits that any base class gains. (Note: I don't play Eberron/Dark Sun so I'm not aware of any classes from those campaigns)

The reason I chose a ranger is because from what I've seen on other posts, there is concern that adding 1/2 level can be abusive to the fact that players would mass purchase level 1 items and spam them. This of course assumes that they can carry all those items (probably, with a bag of holding) and that they would spend their encounters burning minors (to equip) and standards (to throw) rather than actually using any of their at-will / encounter / utility / daily powers. It also assumes at least 1 free hand to keep grabbing all these items.

My point here is not to state whether the rules say you should or shouldn't add the bonus (which I still can't find absolute proof either way given how the alch powers are written). I'm just showing how attacks and damage would play out if you did add 1/2 level, and how that comparably stacks up against another ranged player.

For damage on the arrow, I'm assuming a basic at-will of 1(W), and 2(W) at level 21. Bow damage (Long Bow) = 1d10.

For ammunition, I chose a Freezing Arrow vs. Alchemical Frost since they both do relatively the same effect.

In the end, decide for yourself:

Examples: Level 1 w/lvl 3 ammo
Lvl 1 Ranger
1/2 lvl = 0
Dex 18 = +4 mod
Bow = +2 prof
Lvl 3 Freezing Arrow = +1 atk/dmg, and if you hit do 1d6 cold per plus and is slowed.

Total bonus to hit = +7
Range = Range of Bow
Benefit: Can use the arrows property with bow property AND with an attack power.

cost per arrow = 30g

Examples: Lvl 1 w/lvl 1 alch item
Lvl 1 Alchemist
1/2 lvl = 0
Lvl 1 Alch Frost = +4 atk, and if you hit target takes 1d10 cold and is slowed, miss = half dmg.

Total bonus to hit = +4
Range 5/10
Benefit: No additional benefits

cost per alch item = 20g

WINNER @ Lvl 1:
Attack = Arrow
Damage = Arrow
Range = Arrow
Miss = Alch

------

Examples: Level 21 w/lvl 3 magic ammo
Lvl 21 Ranger
1/2 Level = +10
20 Dex = +5
Bow = +2 prof
Lvl 3 Freezing Arrow = +1 atk/dmg, and if you hit do 1d6 cold per plus and is slowed.

Total bonus to hit = +18
Range = 20/40
Benefit: Can use the arrows property with bow property AND with an attack power.

cost per arrow = 30g


Examples: Lvl 21 w/lvl 3 alch item
Lvl 21 Alchemist
1/2 lvl = +10
Lvl 3 Alch Frost = +4 atk, and if you hit target takes 1d10 cold and is slowed, miss = half dmg.

Total bonus to hit = +14
Range 5/10
Benefit: No additional benefits

cost per alch item = 20g

WINNER @ Lvl 21:
Attack = Arrow
Damage = Arrow
Range = Arrow
Miss = Alch

------

Examples: Level 21 w/lvl 18 ammo
Lvl 21 Ranger
1/2 Level = +10
20 Dex = +5
Bow = +2 prof
Lvl 18 Freezing Arrow = +4 atk/dmg, and if you hit do 1d6 cold per plus and is slowed.

Total bonus to hit = +21
Range = 20/40
Benefit: Can use the arrows property with bow property AND with an attack power.

cost per arrow = 3,400g


Examples: Lvl 21 w/lvl 21 Alch Item
Lvl 21 Alchemist
1/2 lvl = +10
Lvl 21 Alch Frost = +24 atk, and if you hit target takes 3d10 cold and is slowed, miss = half dmg.

Total bonus to hit = +34
Range 5/10
Benefit: No additional benefits

cost per Alch Item = 9,000g

WINNER @ Lvl 21:
Attack = Alch
Damage = Arrow (2d10+4d6+4 vs 3d10)
Miss = Alch

----------------------

Adding 1/2 level with low level items, the magical ammunition is superior in attack, range, and damage. In addition it can be used in conjunction with attack powers, the crit bonuses (if any) are additive, and you can use weapon powers (but not enhancements)

Adding 1/2 level with appropriate level items, the alchemical items begin to outshine the magical ammunition in terms of attack bonus. However, Ranged items still win in range, and damage. Magical ammunition also still win for additive powers / property effects which stack on the attack power, weapon, and ammunition.

So using low level alchemy items to become a ranged player, you'll never be more powerful or accurate than a true ranged class. At best, you'll be on-par with a caster class using a low level implement, doing less damage, and having to spend money for each attack. At high levels with high level items, alchemy will be pretty damn accurate, and pretty damn expensive. By comparison magic ammo would also be expensive, have less of chance to hit, but have the potential for multiple effects, much improved range, better damage, and the flexibility of using within appropriate attack powers. In my eyes that's a fair trade-off, rules be damned regardless of whether they allow it or not.

This also somewhat fixes alchemical 'ammunition', since you'd trade off higher damage, attack power/property benefits for a greater chance to hit.

In closing, I'll reiterate my opener and say add it in. If you're spending the feat / class power to become an Alchemist, spending money on regeants, crafting and carrying these things, you may as well get your money's worth.

 

[mneme]

@King_Mushi : I simply don't think that's the right answer I mean, there are really two reasons not to have alch items scale with level:
1. The rules say so (this one is pretty compelling). You don't have Eberon, so you can be forgiven for not knowing this, but this is very clear in the text.
2. Alchemical attack items, by letting everyone in your party "be a controller" for just the cost of tiny amounts of gold, have the potential to get out of hand if not given signficant constraints. It's not spamming them that's of concern (although if you make ammunition items (or worse, ammunition modifier items, which are rather like amunition but better when they're useful -- stuff like Inferno Oil) rather than the slightly cheaper thrown items, you should get to load the item for free unless the GM makes you apply the item in combat, and even then you're back to 3.5 pre-combat buffing), but the ability to relatively cheaply have a variety of effective effects on hand to deal with more or less any situtation -- being able to buy your way into being a controller.
EDIT: Ok, 3 reasons:
3. IMO, AV2 amunition -is- a problem. Much of it is situationally overpowered (Dispelling Bolt, Forbiddance bolt, Bolt of Clumsiness), and having up to -5 to attack and damage isn't really enough of a balancing factor. However, if one plays with the (broken) rarity rules, ammunition is all uncommon, which at least lets the GM give out ammunition as valued treasure rather than letting all archers play Green Arrrow and turn into controllers able to end zones, prevent teleportation, and lock down enemies for the defender at will.
4. Alchemical items are normally attacking NADs. Ammunition is normally attacking AC.

 

[King_Mushi]

Good points, all of them.

However I'll counter that in actual practice I find it hard to believe there would be substantial abuse.

What I mean is, when I try to put a working scenario where this would be abused, I have trouble. I can't imagine more than 1-2 people in the party using them consistently, and if so they're gonna be behind in the +hit unless they're using the quality stuff. Not to mention penalty to damage. So they're now behind in both attack and damage for some versatility... Well if that's what they want that sounds fair to me... Isn't that what PMC is?

Also, which classes in today's 4e don't already have controlling abilities? In my party every player has several abilities which can either blind, daze, mark, push, pull, stun, add penalties, add ongoing damage, etc... There's a few oddities in the Alchemy volatiles, but not enough to say that they overpower what any regular character can do without them.

Lastly, you need a free hand to operate this stuff. Is the fighter going to keep a free hand so he can do this? Or the ranger? The classes 'most' suited to alchemy are casters, who normally have a free hand, but they already have tons of controlling abilities. Now you could say that alchemical ammunition could be used by rangers... but are they going to NOT use their at-will/encounter/daily plus their bow property (I'll skip ammo property) in place of a minor ability?

In my campaign we enforce some ammo limits, usually to about 2 quivers/bolts per character. Normally during a short rest they can retrieve their arrows 100%, except for magic/alchemical which are expended, or if they're fighting in areas which would prevent it. This factor at least for us, makes that type of ammo more valuable, since if you use it you're absolutely out a piece of ammo. We are able to purchase magic ammo, but only from special dealers so again we have some limits on acquiring them.

Overall though, I'd wager if you gave out free items to the whole party at 1/2 level to hit bonus, maybe 1 character will figure a way to implement it consistently. The rest would toss one or two every now and then, then realize they have much better things in their own power arsenal. Again that's just a guess, the only facts I have on this is the copious vials of unused holy water that our party likes to keep safe (and unused) in their rucksacks.

Also, I agree completely that magic ammo (and alch items) are broken as they are today. One is too powerful, the other is not powerful enough. All my suggestion was trying to do was level the playing field.

 

[DracoSuave]

Well, look at the level of the individual items.

Level 1 item has +4 to hit. Level 1 characters have +0, +4 from attribute, no bonus... yeah that's about right. Level 1 item is underleveled for Level 2+... as it should be.

Level 6 item has +9 to hit. Level 6 characters have +3, +2 enh, +4 from attribute, again, the item is stacking up.

Later, the bonus on the item will exceed your expected bonus for each level. Now, let's see how this can be redicuous.

That same level 6 item, with half your level, is +12 to hit, at a level where +9 is epxected. +3 to hit with an ability that's a little above an encounter power that only costs money? Underpowered? Really?

The level 26 item with +29 to hit would be +42 instead. Orcus has a reflex of 46... I don't think 'Having items only have a 15% chance to miss Orcus' was ever in the design intent for these things.

 

[Squire James]

I guess when they designed alchemical items, they didn't want the user to rely on one particular attack stat, since most of the people likely to make them didn't exactly build their characters with Dexterity in mind. On the other hand, a level 1 item that makes a level 30 thrower a total klutz doesn't make much sense either. The damage ratings are also such that at-will attacks are often a better option because of the static modifiers that those attacks allow that alchemy explicitly does not. Being an expendable item that costs money means, in my opinion, the attack should be somewhere between at-will and encounter level of power.

So, my quick house-rule fix would be to set attack bonuses to character level +3 (or +5 for items that attack AC), and set damage so it is roughly 25% higher than page 42 at-will damage guideline for the item's level. I'd probably just use what the items already state for damage, and add a static bonus to bring it up to the guideline for that item's targeting (for instance, the guideline is different for single and multiple targets).

That way, a level 1 item thrown by a level 30 character will have a decent chance to hit, but it still do poor damage (thus the motivation to use actual epic-level alchemical items).

 

[King_Mushi]

[MENTION=71571]DracoSuave[/MENTION] -

Very valid. Again I think the math is right but in practice it would be fine.

Let's look at your level 6 example. Assume combat per encounter is five rounds. The cost per lvl 6 item is 75g. That's 375g per person that plans to bomb the whole encounter. Comparing that to level 6 parcels, that comes to a significant portion of the earnings.

So let's look at the damage. Level 6 Alch Fire is 2d6. Alch Frost is 1d10. A longbow is 1d10. A waraxe is 1d12. The latter two can be added to attack powers, which usually add in ability modifiers for damage, plus additional effects. There's also a ton of feats which can modify the latter. Again to me they look pretty comparable, especially when you start factoring in price per turn and the additional bonuses you can apply to raw weapons.

I'll also look at your Orcus example. For my example, I'll assume a party of five decides to all come with lvl 26 Alch Fire (+29 to hit, 4d6 fire damage) to use on him. That's +42 to hit and Orcus only has 46 Ref. I'll also assume every throw is a crit here.

Damage per person 4d6 = 24 fire dmg
Players in Party = 5
Damage per Turn to Orcus = 120 dmg

Cost per person per round = 45,000g
Cost per party per round = 225,000g

Orcus has 1525 hit points.

The fastest time to drop him would be 13 rounds using Alch Fire. That's assuming he's alone and the party has sufficient ammo. In reality with heals this would take longer, but let's assume a well defended party:

Number or Rounds = 13
Total Alch Fire required = 13 per person, 65 total
Cost per Round = 225,000g
Total Cost = 2,925,000g

Also, he gets resistance 10 to 3 different abilities. Let's say he choose fire.

Damage per person 4d6 = 24 fire dmg / 2 = 14 fire damage
Players in Party = 5
Damage per Turn to Orcus = 70 dmg

The fastest time now increases to 22 rounds using Alch Fire, assuming the same criteria.

Number or Rounds = 22
Total Alch Fire required = 22 per person, 110 total
Cost per Round = 225,000g
Total Cost = 4,950,000g

Of course Orcus could probably leave, wasting all those precious resources.

I'm not going to do the math to see how long a party would take if they used non-alch items, since the variables are too great. However if I applied the 'crit on every hit' as I did above, the damage done for a level 30 party using weapons could easily surpass the Alch party, since most lvl 29 magic items have 6d6+6 bonus damage before you factor in the attack power, feats, and other properties.

Now I'll pick a character that's not Orcus but still high level. Say Doresain the Ghoul King:

Elite Skirmisher - lvl 27
Ref: 41
HP: 508

So again you're gonna hit pretty much every time for the cost of 45,000g. It would take the party about 5 rounds to drop him, assuming they crit on every item and he's alone.


Number or Rounds = 5
Total Alch Fire required = 5 per person, 25 total
Cost per Round = 225,000g
Total Cost = 1,125,000g

Now since this is not a solo, he's not alone. There'll be about 3 other equally leveled creatures to deal with, maybe more.


So I'll concur - you're right. The +hit is dramatically higher when you use high level alch items and add in your level bonus. There's a pretty big cost to use and reduction in damage that you take for that +hit however.

 

[Balesir]

I agree entirely that not adding the 1/2 level is the intended rule, but I think this post overstates the value of the alchemical item:

Level 1 item has +4 to hit. Level 1 characters have +0, +4 from attribute, no bonus... yeah that's about right. Level 1 item is underleveled for Level 2+... as it should be.

Except that a level 1 character will often have an expertise bonus of +1 (even though this came along only with Essentials, I know). And the damage for the item is pretty low and you have to spend resources on it that would be far better saved for a permanent item that will cover the one remaining advantage of the alchemical item (added keywords) on all attacks...

Level 6 item has +9 to hit. Level 6 characters have +3, +2 enh, +4 from attribute, again, the item is stacking up.

And the level 6 character would have had (most likely) an additional +1 for Expertise even pre-Essentials. Plus the better damage and the cost factor.

Alchemical attack items were never worth the cost assigned to them, sadly, and it has only got worse.