Barrel of Alchemist's Fire

[Creamsteak]

Scrolls costs 25 gp * level * spell level to create, right? I could be recalling this incorrectly, but that is certainly nowhere near 5k for a single scroll.

You could fire off a 9th level spell with a 20th caster level for 4500 gp or some-such.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But a scroll is a spell completion device. You have to fulfill some important prerequisites to use it (like being able to cast the spell in question, have a sufficient caster level and intelligence/wisdom/charisma).

So, it is more like a potion, that anybody can use, doubling its cost.

Still I just saw that I screwed up my calculation before - 5.000 gp would be equivalent to 6th level caster level 17 spell or something along those lines...
Well, maybe more damage would be balanced, but I doubt it would be that realistic...

 

[Zappo]

For a cost of 6000, it deserves to be a nasty weapon. Let's see, a meteor swarm costs 3825 from a scroll. However, anyone can use a BoAF while only few can use a scroll. However, throwing a barrel effectively is a lot harder than casting a spell, which is more like point'n'click. Plus, lugging it around may be a problem in itself. So, I think it should be substantially more powerful than a meteor swarm.

Ignoring Epic rules, we can extrapolate scroll costs and find that an 11th level scroll would conceivably cost 5775. So, let's make the BoAF comparable to an empowered meteor swarm (which deals 12d6 damage plus 24d6 fire damage). A bit less powerful than that, to account for the fact that anyone can use it and it works against antimagic fields, spell resistance, whatever. First of all, the barrel damage - getting hit by a barrel is no fun, but by the rules you would have to hit normal AC rather than touch AC to deal damage with a thrown object. So let's just ignore it and make the damage entirely fire-based. 11d6 in the first round, 9d6 in the second, 7d6 in the third, 5d6 in the fourth, 3d6 in the fifth, 1d6 in the sixth. Total 36d6 damage. You can roll around to put it off, but the DC is 26 (11th level spell, INT 21, ignoring the fact that empower doesn't raise spell level). Jumping into a lake or using quench or similar puts it off immediately. Alternatively, the DC is 15 but the only result you obtain is to decrease the "dice counter" by 2 (ie, make one save and you take 7d6 in the second, 5d6 in the third, etc; make two saves and you take 3d6 in the fifth, 1d6 in the fourth, and the it's off).

Whaddya say?

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

First up - that thing is dangerous to carry around - 1 flaming adamantine arrow could really ruin the carriers day!


I'd be more inclined to make it reasonably cheap and do less damage.

I'm guessing you pay a premium on the flasks to have them made airtight individually. Cheaper to make a whole barrel?

At the 20D6 end of damage, from a purely metagame POV, it'd really suck to be an evoker or a blasting sorceror? Unless you get a bag of holding, several barrels of this stuff, featherfall (yay! - weighs as much as a feather) and mage hand?

So I'd go for about 5D6-6D6 - nasty - more 'reliable' than magic, but less dangerous. Make the price up in line with that. IMO, that make it useful, fun and not game dominating?

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm more stingy / cautious than everyone else.

I'd rule that a casket of alchemists fire wouldn't do any more damage, but would certainly cover a much wider area with "1d6 fire" and might stay on a target for longer (say 1-4 rounds of extra burning).

So a creature with DR 10/fire wouldn't be bothered by it.

However, trying to take a more rules-based look at it, the information about environmental hazards - lava is probably quite instructive. e.g.

Lava or magma deals 2d6 points of damage per round of exposure, except in the case of total immersion (such as when a character falls into the crater of an active volcano), which deals 20d6 points of damage per round.

Alchemists fire seems to be half as hot as magma, so the maximum possible damage it could do is 10d6 per round of immersion (although being immersed in alchemists fire doesn't actually hurt you since it is only the bit exposed to air that burns... it won't be hot inside the flask/barrel.

It could be argued that being "covered in" is more than "exposed to" and less than "immersed in" thus giving a figure for dice of damage somewhere between the two.

I'd still go with the large area of effect instead though. (otherwise beware the wizards telekinetically throwing a dozen sacks full of alchemists fire at big enemies and other silly requests)

 

[Shallown]

I guess I'm Missing the Explosive part. Why would it explode. Alchemist fire burns on contact with air but to my knowledge does not explode. I admit a barrel of the stuff is a heck of a lot of splash but no fireball like explosion. Only the part of alchemist fire exposed to air burns not the whole barrel at once. I think of it like gasoline burning. Gas doesn't burn its vapors do so only the surface of a puddle of gas burns. Spreading it makes for the dangerous part. PArt of why a fireball may still be superior offense.

Now as a seige weapon it would be very nasty since it would have a decent splash radius if launched (versus thrown) from a seige engine so that he effect of the weapon, the splash, is spread out allowing more alchemist fire to make contact with the air and people.

I would think the most dangerous part of Alchemist fire is if it is anything like grease throwing water on it (versus submerging the fire completely) would make it very explosive. If I remember its becuase the interaction of the oxygen released from the water is explosive. (been a while since fire fighting school though the display of a cup of water dumped in a grease fire about 2-2 feet and flames shooting 60-70 feet in the air was impressive enough not to forget)

I think every one is thinking bomb versus a barrel of flaming pitch. The alchemist fire would be more effective than pitch since igniting it or keeping it ignited is not a concern.

Just a few thoughts. Don't want to interject too much reality in my fantasy but sometimes real world mechanics can bring the fantastic back into game balance.

Later

 

[tensen]

Something to consider...
Is the damage from the alchemist's fire coming from a blast, or from the flaming contents?
I always thought it was from the flaming contents, and it didn't create an explosion.

My line of thinking means that the impact of a barrel splatters the stuff futher... and perhaps more of it gets on a person. Not more damage, but the longer the stuff coats you and still burns. Perhaps I'd give more damage at the start for a quick burst...
Oh.. and don't forget the damage from the barrel... thats a hefty thing.

 

[Out Cold]

On a side note, here what we do in my game when a player whant to throw a large quantity of alchemical components bound in a single bag.

RULE CLARIFICATION :

Player1 - I throw my Alchemical bag at the bad guy !
DM- All of It ?
Player1 - Yes, and Player2 will then throw a fireball at it !
Player2 - Right on ! There must be about twenty alchemist fire in that bag ! Its gonna blow big time !
DM - Ok, let me figure the various save and rules to resolve this. (Dam, forgot they had so much stuff )
Player1- Don't forget to take in account the five acid flask, three thunderstone, two tanglefoot bag, fifty tintertwig and eight smokestick also in there.
DM- Man, this is going to take some time?

What happen when whole bag of explosive substances are throw at the face of the enemy ? Pure game mathematics suggest you resolve each attack independently without consideration of the whole. Although game wise this may sound accurate, it is time consuming and somewhat unrealistic, as a larger quantity of dangerous material usually make a greater effect than a single once of it. Here is some clarification and house rule to simulate the circumstances when the player ?Throw the Whole bag? at a target.

1- Distance : Bag and container usually don?t have great aerodynamics qualities, otherwise arrow would be bag shaped. Usual bag or container (Backpack, sack, jug, chest, saddlebag, etc) will have a reach increment of 5 ft. Bag with a long strap that can be whirled for greater momentum (haversack, belt along with belt pouch, bandolier, satchel charge) have a 10 ft reach increment.

2- What?s in the bag : Try to eliminate any component of the bag that will be destroyed by explosion or mixing of content. Acid will be destroyed by almost any other liquid, thunderstone won?t explode if not throw by themselves against a hard surface, holy water will be spoiled by acid, etc. The winner of any explosion are usually gunpowder and alchemist fire. If you want to use real chemistry notion and precise physic in your game that?s fine by us, but for a quick rule, simply assume that the substance present in the largest amount in the bag will decide of the final effect of the impact, all other substance in the bag being lost in the blast

3- Effect ? For Damaging item (Acid, Holy water, Alchemist fire, ect) each time you double the amount of item present, add one time its damage value and 5 ft to the spread of the area it affect
Example ?
1 Alchemist fire - 1d6 5 ft area
2 Alchemist fire - 2d6 10 ft area
3 Alchemist fire - 2d6 10 ft area
4 Alchemist fire - 3d6 15 ft area
5 Alchemist fire - 3d6 15 ft area
6 Alchemist fire - 3d6 15 ft area
7 Alchemist fire - 3d6 15 ft area
8 Alchemist fire - 4d6 20 ft area
16 Alchemist fire - 5d6 25 ft area
32 Alchemist fire - 6d6 30 ft area

Status inducing Items (Thunderstone, Tanglefoot Bag)
Use a progression similar to Damaging item, Increasing save DC and duration accordingly (each time the amount present is doubled, add one to the save DC and one unit of time to duration (either being it round, minute, hour or day)

DM - The bag explode with a mighty bang, sending fire and various alchemical substance all around, throw 5d6 additional fire damage in that fireball ! 25 ft of smoke also fill the area
Player1 - What about the other stuff I had in the bag ?
DM- The Thunderstone did not break, as you must throw them hard against a surface and the bag cushioned their landing, the acid was to thinly spread by the explosion to cause any effects and the tanglefoot bag where incinerated by the fire once they burst. Sorry.
Player 2- Nah, its cool, Those 5d6 where totally worth it and we can collect the stone afterward. Teach us for throwing all our stuff without consideration.

While the above may not help with the specific of a barrel of alchemist fire, it may be usefull for your average alchemical bag.

 

[erian_7]

I agree that the damage is from the burning, not explosions (thus my initial low "blast" diamater). I don't think a radius bigger than 10-15' would be in order. As for the amount of damage, however, I still see the person suffering a direct hit taking far more damage (beyond the 5d6 bludgeoning I mentioned--getting smacked by a 400 lb barrel just ain't fun) than from being hit by a single flask, as that person would be covered on a far larger portion of their body than if hit by a single flask. 15d6 still seems about right, with damage continuing for 1d4 rounds (borrowing that mechanic from lava). Going with my earlier 3d6 or 4d6 for the splash damage, it would average 70 points of damage on a direct hit, plus another 14 points of damage over 1-4 rounds while those in the splash average about 14 points of damage, with another 3.5 the next round. Any takers on figuring out how big a pool this would make? I'd see it as creating an area that inflicts 1d6 fire damage to anyone entering it for a period (maybe 1 round, maybe 1d4). Perhaps the pool would just be a % of the burst diameter.

Also, keep in mind this is a plot device, not an item readily available to PCs (or most NPCs, for that matter). It was commisioned by a ruler with a lot of free gold and ready access to material components looking for a new seige weapon. I think a DM making something like this common enough to fall into PC hands (which it would if commonly used by NPCs) would be making a serious mistake. I plan on tightly controlling its presence IMC.

 

[Out Cold]

Darn Double Post

Double Post, Sorry