Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 6940689" data-attributes="member: 6669384">So &quot;Agree to disagree&quot; isn't your thing, eh?&nbsp; Okay.A &quot;2 5 square burst&quot;?&nbsp; Meaning, it's centered on a square, and covers that single square only?So it's essentially single target, no attack roll called for and probably a reflex save for half?&nbsp; (Saves are an aspect that has been pointedly ignored up until now.) Note that most area affects start at the corner of a square, not the square itself.&nbsp; Minor quibble.&nbsp; How big a pressure wave were you anticipating?&nbsp; You did ask for a &quot;bull rush&quot; effect, if I recall.&nbsp; What strength score, what area?&nbsp; Mechanically, how much air/flour mixture will you expect to get when the square is occupied by someone/something?&nbsp; Another minor quibble, but a one-square area is kind of tiny for a dust explosion.&nbsp; That starts to resemble the &quot;flour in the campfire&quot; things on Youtube:&nbsp; Flash effect, little or no damage.By the way, you asked why I keep comparing it to a Fireball.&nbsp; You just quoted a good source for that idea.All in all, my objection stands:&nbsp; You're trying to give a PC (your PC) a no-hit-roll attack that's not accounted for in the rules.&nbsp; It consumes a few coppers worth of flour, so it's cheaper than Alchemist's fire.&nbsp; You say it should be greater than Burning Hands, which is more than Alchemist's fire.&nbsp; In terms of game balance, it's a bad idea, no matter how the backstory is rationalized.&nbsp;&nbsp; Your rationalization of how the PC came to research this is strained at best, there are no game mechanics that allow for such research, nor are there game mechanics for the special attack itself.&nbsp; You say you aren't trying to &quot;beat the system&quot;, but that doesn't line up with the substance of your argument.&nbsp; You want more for less, with use limited only by the amount of flour you can carry.&nbsp; How is this not adding an imbalance to the lower levels of a game that already suffers that problem at high levels?Or, to put it more succinctly, how is allowing this not a bad idea?Sure you don't want to &quot;agree to disagree&quot;?&nbsp; The offer still stands. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greenfield, post: 6940689, member: 6669384"] So "Agree to disagree" isn't your thing, eh? Okay. A "2 5 square burst"? Meaning, it's centered on a square, and covers that single square only? So it's essentially single target, no attack roll called for and probably a reflex save for half? (Saves are an aspect that has been pointedly ignored up until now.) Note that most area affects start at the corner of a square, not the square itself. Minor quibble. How big a pressure wave were you anticipating? You did ask for a "bull rush" effect, if I recall. What strength score, what area? Mechanically, how much air/flour mixture will you expect to get when the square is occupied by someone/something? Another minor quibble, but a one-square area is kind of tiny for a dust explosion. That starts to resemble the "flour in the campfire" things on Youtube: Flash effect, little or no damage. By the way, you asked why I keep comparing it to a [I]Fireball[/I]. You just quoted a good source for that idea. All in all, my objection stands: You're trying to give a PC (your PC) a no-hit-roll attack that's not accounted for in the rules. It consumes a few coppers worth of flour, so it's cheaper than Alchemist's fire. You say it should be greater than [I]Burning Hands, [/I]which is more than Alchemist's fire. In terms of game balance, it's a bad idea, no matter how the backstory is rationalized. Your rationalization of how the PC came to research this is strained at best, there are no game mechanics that allow for such research, nor are there game mechanics for the special attack itself. You say you aren't trying to "beat the system", but that doesn't line up with the substance of your argument. You want more for less, with use limited only by the amount of flour you can carry. How is this not adding an imbalance to the lower levels of a game that already suffers that problem at high levels? Or, to put it more succinctly, how is allowing this not a bad idea? Sure you don't want to "agree to disagree"? The offer still stands. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification