Does this tactic work by RAW?

[killem2]

So I'm slowly going through Three Faces of Evil with a scalpel and making the adjustments need to give my higher level players a challenge for this place.

There is a room with fanatic worshipers. Now the scaling advice says just give them levels of fighter, but I had something a little more sadistic and appropriate.

Could I give them an Alchemist fire in each hand, have them charge towards the party, and as a free action drop the potions at their feet. The result of this I assume would be an automatic 1 damage to each person and them selves in a 5 ft radius.

Now my other question is, since these are fanatics, I plan on this being suicidal. If they generate an attack of opportunity and will most likely die in one hit, do they drop the Alchemist fire at their feet, for the same effect?

[Dimers]

There is a room with fanatic worshipers.

I misread that as "fanfic worshippers". But thanks to my cultural training, that's much scarier.


since these are fanatics, I plan on this being suicidal. If they generate an attack of opportunity and will most likely die in one hit, do they drop the Alchemist fire at their feet, for the same effect?

You do drop whatever's in your hands when you fall unconscious, including when you die. Looks RAW from here.

[Starbuck_II]

Could I give them an Alchemist fire in each hand, have them charge towards the party, and as a free action drop the potions at their feet. The result of this I assume would be an automatic 1 damage to each person and them selves in a 5 ft radius.

Now my other question is, since these are fanatics, I plan on this being suicidal. If they generate an attack of opportunity and will most likely die in one hit, do they drop the Alchemist fire at their feet, for the same effect?

Yes you can drop as free action, but dropping flask doesn't say they explode.

[BowStreetRunner]

Yes you can drop as free action, but dropping flask doesn't say they explode.

If you use something that is considered a splash weapon, the rules state that "A splash weapon is a ranged weapon that breaks on impact" so dropping would cause it to break, triggering the effect. I think the key difference here is a substance in a container designed to break on impact is different than a normal container taking falling damage.

[Xervous]

Well, you could just strap them in vests lined with highly explosive alchemical compounds, give them a few levels in rogue, and send them running at an unaware group....

[Keld Denar]

Our just have them all chug Elixers of Death Throes, a relatively cheap single use consumable wondrous item. Have them labeled as "Potions of Fanatical Power".

[Slipperychicken]

Could I give them an Alchemist fire in each hand, have them charge towards the party, and as a free action drop the potions at their feet. The result of this I assume would be an automatic 1 damage to each person and them selves in a 5 ft radius.


Why can't they just throw the flasks at the PCs' squares? Ranged touch attack vs. AC 5, and they're not guaranteed to die.

Suicide is cute thematic, but not always necessary.


EDIT: Fine, I changed it.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Why can't they just throw the flasks at the PCs' squares? Ranged touch attack vs. AC 5, and they're not guaranteed to die.

Suicide is cute, but not always necessary.

Outside of this context, this is a really disturbing quote....

[killem2]

It seems like an iffy ruling on if they break. To me, it seems like they would, I mean they are flasks, you don't want them sturdy enough to resist breaking.

The suicide is not needed I agree, but it is for the flavor. Besides, their entire purpose is basically to just take up time for guards to get into place, they are expendable.

[ThiagoMartell]

Throwing the flasks at the player's squares + using the elixir of death throes seems like the most fitting, most optimal and most sadistic use.
Also, tanglefoot bags are awesome.

[Novawurmson]

If you REALLY want the most bang for your psychotically devoted henchman, might I recommend the Pathfinder Implant Bomb (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/implant-bomb) feat, either as-is or for inspiration.

[Zdrak]

Yes you can drop as free action, but dropping flask doesn't say they explode.
A glass flask has 1 hit point and a hardness of 1. When its owner dies, consider it dropped from a height of, oh, let's say, 5'. It should take 1d3 damage (half of 1d6) - a roll of 2 or higher breaks it.

[Novawurmson]

A glass flask has 1 hit point and a hardness of 1. When its owner dies, consider it dropped from a height of, oh, let's say, 5'. It should take 1d3 damage (half of 1d6) - a roll of 2 or higher breaks it.

From the SRD:


The basic rule is simple: 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet fallen, to a maximum of 20d6.

Falling less than 10 feet does not deal damage to anything per RAW; the DM is eligible to fudge the rules, but he/she did say "Does this tactic work by RAW?" in the title.

[Zdrak]

Falling less than 10 feet does not deal damage to anything per RAWThis one goes directly to the Dysfunctional Rules Thread :smallsmile:

[BowStreetRunner]

Throwing the flasks at the player's squares + using the elixir of death throes seems like the most fitting, most optimal and most sadistic use.

I keep seeing this reference to 'elixir of death throes' and am wondering if someone can provide a source. Otherwise, since the spell 'death throes' in SC is a 5th level spell and Brew Potion only works on spells up to 3rd level, this would not normally work.

[tyckspoon]

I keep seeing this reference to 'elixir of death throes' and am wondering if someone can provide a source. Otherwise, since the spell 'death throes' in SC is a 5th level spell and Brew Potion only works on spells up to 3rd level, this would not normally work.

'Elixir' is generally the term the rules use for 'a potion-like item created as a Wondrous Item.' Strictly speaking it's a custom magic item, but it's also one of the most straightforward and least abusive ways of using those rules, similar to making scrolls of assorted non-PHB spells.

[Zdrak]

So it's basically a potion created from a spell that specifically is not allowed to be made into a potion. Not a first time the item creation rules have been abused, and not the last.

[Slipperychicken]

So it's basically a potion created from a spell that specifically is not allowed to be made into a potion. Not a first time the item creation rules have been abused, and not the last.

Not only is the spell higher than 3rd level and thus ineligible for potion-crafting, it would also cost 1125gp for 9d8 (40.5 average) Force damage, single-use. That's a really bad deal, considering you can just have minions read Explosive Runes for free and deal 6d6 (21 average) Force damage. As a 3rd level spell. For free. And you don't even need to worry about the PCs disabling them nonlethally and wasting your gold and effort.

Using the same spell slot as the Death Throes, you can slap Empower onto the Explosive Runes for 31.5 average damage. Again, for no cost beyond the loser devoted follower you just wasted. On that thought, just use summons to deliver the payload, and spare your cultists for another day.

[nedz]

So it's basically a potion created from a spell that
specifically is not allowed to be made into a potion. Not a first time the item creation rules have been abused, and not the last.

Elixirs may look like potions, but they are not potions.
Elixirs are Wondrous Items and so follow a different set of rules.

[Zdrak]

I do understand there's a RAW justification. That doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

[Medic!]

Depending on the level of your henchmen, they could always take Fiery Ki Defense and run in to grapple the PCs like little flaming saibamen. Not quite suicidal, but then again the only better for a fanatical cult member than martyring himself is getting the job done without dying. Of course being NPCs, their fate is to become a charred corpse regardless....these are Adventurers we're talking about after all.

[Psyren]

From the SRD:



Falling less than 10 feet does not deal damage to anything per RAW; the DM is eligible to fudge the rules, but he/she did say "Does this tactic work by RAW?" in the title.

While you are correct, damage is actually not required here. All splash weapons "break on impact" by RAW, therefore the exact height/damage of the fall is irrelevant.

"Impact" is not defined anywhere in the rules, thus it is up to the DM to decide whether a given situation qualifies.

[BowStreetRunner]

"Impact" is not defined anywhere in the rules, thus it is up to the DM to decide whether a given situation qualifies.

DM: "As you reach into your pack, your hand impacts against a flask of alchemical fire..."

PC: "$#!&...I hate it when that happens!"

[Dusk Eclipse]

DM: "As you reach into your pack, your hand impacts against a flask of alchemical fire..."

PC: "$#!&...I hate it when that happens!"

Considering some horror stories I've heard about terrible DMs, I am sure that something like this has happened to someone.

[Psyren]

DM: "As you reach into your pack, your hand impacts against a flask of alchemical fire..."

PC: "$#!&...I hate it when that happens!"

As with all DM interpretations, Rule -1 plays a key role. (Everyone is there to have fun, not just you.)

[Emperor Tippy]

Give each of them a craft contingent maximized Maw of Chaos. The mook get's in range, triggers it, and the group get's boomed.

It's tons of fun to load mooks down with Craft Contingent spells set to trigger if they die, take damage, fall unconscious, etc.

[TuggyNE]

Give each of them a craft contingent maximized Maw of Chaos. The mook get's in range, triggers it, and the group get's boomed.

It's tons of fun to load mooks down with Craft Contingent spells set to trigger if they die, take damage, fall unconscious, etc.

... let's try this again, but this time without the one-round TPK, all right? :smalltongue:

[Kazyan]

... let's try this again, but this time without the one-round TPK, all right? :smalltongue:

Acid Fogs or something.

[Emperor Tippy]

... let's try this again, but this time without the one-round TPK, all right? :smalltongue:

*bah*
One round TPK's are just fine. I didn't hit the mooks with Magic Aura or Nondetection so Detect Magic or Arcane Sight will show that they are highly magical. PC's that get in close contact with highly magical individuals without taking precautions deserve to be boomed.

[Invader]

Our just have them all chug Elixers of Death Throes, a relatively cheap single use consumable wondrous item. Have them labeled as "Potions of Fanatical Power".

Can you tell me where to find this please?

[Eugenides]

So, while people are pointing out that if you drop it when you die, they will break, I would like to argue from a physics standpoint that they wouldn't have the same effect. Do understand that you could probably pull off what you want from RAW. (I know, RAW and physics get along about as well as matter and antimatter, but I'll try it anyway.)

Anyway, have you ever dropped a water balloon vs. thrown a water balloon? You'll notice the thrown one has a MUCH larger splash. Kinetic energy and all that. If I drop a glass vial full of liquid, it may break, but it's not going to splash everyone in a 5 ft radius. Hell, it won't even FILL my 5 foot square.

[Kane0]

Why stop at two little vials?

- Carry in a flask or other larger container for more alchemist fire!
- Strap a whole bunch of vials to yourself and have a friendly mage cast shatter on you when you're in position!
- Modify slings to be able to launch globes of alchemist fire!
- Have a friendly mage cast enlarge person on you and carry in two kegs instead of two vials!

You get the idea.

[nedz]

Why stop at two little vials?
- Carry in a flask or other larger container for more alchemist fire!
- Strap a whole bunch of vials to yourself and have a friendly mage cast shatter on you when you're in position!


Interesting use of the word friendly.

For bonus points give the suicide-mooks evasion, from two levels of rogues perhaps, so that they can dodge their own conflagration.

[Slipperychicken]

Anyway, have you ever dropped a water balloon vs. thrown a water balloon? You'll notice the thrown one has a MUCH larger splash. Kinetic energy and all that. If I drop a glass vial full of liquid, it may break, but it's not going to splash everyone in a 5 ft radius. Hell, it won't even FILL my 5 foot square.

And there's a good chance the balloon won't break at all if you just drop it without applying more force (like with throwing). With a glass container, it would depend on the surface it falls on.


But it's unlikely to splash 5ft if every direction if you just drop it without really throwing it. Which is why I suggested just chucking the vials instead, and preferring to use summons to deliver the Death Throes.

[Psyren]

So, while people are pointing out that if you drop it when you die, they will break, I would like to argue from a physics standpoint that they wouldn't have the same effect. Do understand that you could probably pull off what you want from RAW. (I know, RAW and physics get along about as well as matter and antimatter, but I'll try it anyway.)

Anyway, have you ever dropped a water balloon vs. thrown a water balloon? You'll notice the thrown one has a MUCH larger splash. Kinetic energy and all that. If I drop a glass vial full of liquid, it may break, but it's not going to splash everyone in a 5 ft radius. Hell, it won't even FILL my 5 foot square.

Teensy flaw in your logic - if that glass vial full of liquid contained nitroglycerin, then it certainly would affect a 5ft. square if not more. Splash weapons like Alchemist's Fire typically contain unstable substances to begin with, so the energy of the impact itself is not the only energy at play here.

[Twilightwyrm]

Why can't they just throw the flasks at the PCs' squares? Ranged touch attack vs. AC 5, and they're not guaranteed to die.


Well the thing is, simply being caught on fire (a la alchemist's fire) is unlikely to kill them in a single hit. They are more likely to take some damage, then catch fire. The benefit here is that, the next round, they can try and grapple their enemies, but now with the benefit of being on fire, so that simply being in contact will deal damage to their foes (even as it damages themselves). They can then sit there, struggling with a person that might be on fire themselves, until they die, at which point their still flaming corpse falls at the person they were grappling, ensuring the person will take at least one more round of 1d6 damage before getting out of there. As suicidal tactics go, it is both strangely effective, utterly suicidal (as per the AoO is generates), and demonstrates singular devotion to their cause in their ability to continue grappling even as they burn to death. (More effective w/ one level of Barbarian on each cultist)
This is also both hectic, unnerving, and particularly thematic for the players, since the situation goes from fighting off bombs that deal minor damage, to something more akin to frantically fighting off fanatical, burning zombies, desperately slashing back to keep themselves from getting dog piled, and burnt to death.

[Eugenides]

Teensy flaw in your logic - if that glass vial full of liquid contained nitroglycerin, then it certainly would affect a 5ft. square if not more. Splash weapons like Alchemist's Fire typically contain unstable substances to begin with, so the energy of the impact itself is not the only energy at play here.

While I see where you're coming from, I feel that if merely dropping it would set it off, then so would being struck in melee if you had it in your gear, or doing a tumble check, or being tripped, struck by a trap etc...

Though, to be fair, I had always thought of alchemist's fire more as...napalm than an explosive. Nitroglycerin is specifically an extremely unstable explosive. You wouldn't just carry it around. Napalm, on the other hand, is a sticky, burning substance that doesn't really explode so much as more tenaciously burn. You can shake it all you want however, making it ideal for transport.

To back this up:
Alchemist's Fire is a sticky, adhesive substance that ignites when exposed to air.

This doesn't seem to be a nitro-glycerin typed explosive, or an explosive at all. It seems to be more like a liquid that you splash on people to set them on fire, but a fire that's nasty and hard to put out.

Edit: It's also a splash weapon, which indicates that it splashes, not explodes.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Can you tell me where to find this please?

It's not an already published thing. It's a custom magic item using the love potion or elixir of fire breath from the DMG as a template.

Should look something like this:

Feats: Craft wondrous item, and brew potion

Spells: death throes (duh)

Market Price: 2250gp (SL X CL X potion constant) (5X9X50)

Cost to create: 1125gp, 90xp

[nedz]

Elixirs don't require Brew Potion, and your price looks wrong - but you might actually be correct.

Examples, from the DMG:
Elixir of Vision (True Seeing, 250 gp, Cleric 5 or Wiz/Sorc 6, CL 2)
Elixir of Truth (Zone of Truth, 500 gp, Cleric 2, CL 5)

Costings from DMG Table 7-33 p285, Spell Effect, Single use, Spell completion
Elixir of Vision 25x5x2
Elixir of Truth 25x2x5
ERROR (in the DMG)
I think that the cost multiplier should be 50x for use activated in which case the Elixir of Vision is a bargain.
BTW: Nothing in the Errata about this.

[Psyren]

While I see where you're coming from, I feel that if merely dropping it would set it off, then so would being struck in melee if you had it in your gear, or doing a tumble check, or being tripped, struck by a trap etc...

Though, to be fair, I had always thought of alchemist's fire more as...napalm than an explosive. Nitroglycerin is specifically an extremely unstable explosive. You wouldn't just carry it around. Napalm, on the other hand, is a sticky, burning substance that doesn't really explode so much as more tenaciously burn. You can shake it all you want however, making it ideal for transport.

To back this up:

This doesn't seem to be a nitro-glycerin typed explosive, or an explosive at all. It seems to be more like a liquid that you splash on people to set them on fire, but a fire that's nasty and hard to put out.

Edit: It's also a splash weapon, which indicates that it splashes, not explodes.

Just because it's not explosive doesn't mean the reaction needs a lot of external force to spread quickly. For all we know, it's hot enough to briefly ignite the very air once released. For all its similarities to napalm, it's still a fantastic substance, after all.

As for it not going off in your backpack, that's a gameplay convenience, not a scientific statement on the strength of the flask or the potency of its reaction. We don't have rules for scrolls ripping in our bags, choking on a hastily chugged potion in the middle of a fight, or our cloaks of resistance getting caught on doornails either; it keeps things simple.

[The Random NPC]

As for it not going off in your backpack, that's a gameplay convenience, not a scientific statement on the strength of the flask or the potency of its reaction. We don't have rules for scrolls ripping in our bags, choking on a hastily chugged potion in the middle of a fight, or our cloaks of resistance getting caught on doornails either; it keeps things simple.

We do, however, have rules for dropping things. Nowhere does it say it breaks, to my knowledge.

[TopCheese]

Well if you want suicidal... And cost is no option... AND you want to scare the bajeebus out of your players....

Bag of Holding + Portable Hole

Have the first minion have this (the rest can have whatever you want from the previous post) and have him run into a group of NPCs that are with the party... The are erased from the material plane as the rest of the fanatics charge in. The party will now respect the minions fanatical attacks and be careful... Only the low Int warrior will rush in (or that jerk who thinks you have to kill everyone that isn't a PC...)

Now if you want a TPK then yeah give them all these items. If not then one minion should be fine to get the point across.

Please note I'm an evil bastard sometimes...

[Psyren]

We do, however, have rules for dropping things. Nowhere does it say it breaks, to my knowledge.

ALL splash weapons break on impact - this has been quoted several times upthread. However that must be justified to make sense (the vials are made of sugar glass maybe?) the RAW is clear.

[Slipperychicken]

Please note I'm an evil bastard sometimes...

I still like the idea of horses (summoned by Mount for the duration) with Explosive Runes banners on the sides (so they can be read from far away) amounting to a magical terrorist attack. No suspects, no body to cast Speak With Dead on, no loot, nothing. Just 6d6 points of nigh-irresistible damage, and lots of casualties.

EDIT: Also requires nothing more than a 5th level caster and some way to remotely expose the banner in a crowd, like using the "clothlike substance" option on Shrink Item, then hooking it onto the horses' saddle.

[Eugenides]

ALL splash weapons break on impact - this has been quoted several times upthread. However that must be justified to make sense (the vials are made of sugar glass maybe?) the RAW is clear.

You keep flip-flopping. You try to hold me to precise chemistry, but when I point out other flaws in the physics behind your system, you eschew it with convenience and RAW, which I had already pointed out wouldn't be happy with my observation.

[Psyren]

You keep flip-flopping. You try to hold me to precise chemistry, but when I point out other flaws in the physics behind your system, you eschew it with convenience and RAW, which I had already pointed out wouldn't be happy with my observation.

Then why are you making it? This is a RAW thread; arguments along the lines of "why would they break from just any impact" and "why would they splash if not thrown forcefully" and "why don't they break in your pack when attacked" may be logical, but nevertheless have no place here.

[Eugenides]

Then why are you making it? This is a RAW thread; arguments along the lines of "why would they break from just any impact" and "why would they splash if not thrown forcefully" and "why don't they break in your pack when attacked" may be logical, but nevertheless have no place here.

To add to the conversation? The question had been answered. No need to get so grumpy and aggressive.

[Psyren]

To add to the conversation? The question had been answered. No need to get so grumpy and aggressive.

Apologies if I came off that way, it wasn't my intention at all.

But I wasn't flip-flopping - merely pointing out that even from a scientific standpoint, the unique behavior of alchemist's fire could be reasonable depending on what exactly the stuff is made out of. (In other words, the simplest answer to the question "why doesn't it act like napalm?" is "it's not napalm.")

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Then why are you making it? This is a RAW thread; arguments along the lines of "why would they break from just any impact" and "why would they splash if not thrown forcefully" and "why don't they break in your pack when attacked" may be logical, but nevertheless have no place here.

Because, logic and physics are all we have if RAW doesn't define a term. Obviously, break on impact means it breaks whenever its thrown, but we don't have a RAW definition of "impact" that either restricts it to "only at the terminal point of throws" nor do we have a definition that expands it to "any drop or fall including those that would not normally do damage" so our only options are logic or dealing fall damage to the flask, but falls under 10ft only do damage at DM's discretion, in other words, when the DM thinks logic, physics etc dictate it.

[Psyren]

Because, logic and physics are all we have if RAW doesn't define a term. Obviously, break on impact means it breaks whenever its thrown, but we don't have a RAW definition of "impact" that either restricts it to "only at the terminal point of throws" nor do we have a definition that expands it to "any drop or fall including those that would not normally do damage" so our only options are logic or dealing fall damage to the flask, but falls under 10ft only do damage at DM's discretion, in other words, when the DM thinks logic, physics etc dictate it.

I don't really see the difficulty though - a 5-foot fall or even 2-foot fall onto a hard surface would logically count as "impact" to most reasonable DMs.

[only1doug]

Psyren, I hearby appoint you defender of catgirls.

Everyone else, please won't you think of the catgirls?

[Sutremaine]

I didn't hit the mooks with Magic Aura or Nondetection so Detect Magic or Arcane Sight will show that they are highly magical.
You need to be CL11 to take Craft Contingent Spell and Magic Aura is a 1st-level spell that lasts 1 day/level, so why wouldn't a wizard of that level add that extra layer of trickery? Or even employ low-level wizards to renew the Magic Aura spells as necessary?

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I don't really see the difficulty though - a 5-foot fall or even 2-foot fall onto a hard surface would logically count as "impact" to most reasonable DMs.

I guess I'm not a reasonable GM then and neither is the OP since he asked about the RAW of it. Seems like a coin flip kinda situation to me, unless you got especially fragile vials for specifically this purpose, but then we're homebrewing fragile vials rather than using RAW.

[Psyren]

I guess I'm not a reasonable GM then and neither is the OP since he asked about the RAW of it. Seems like a coin flip kinda situation to me, unless you got especially fragile vials for specifically this purpose, but then we're homebrewing fragile vials rather than using RAW.

Apples and oranges - he was asking if there was an explicit rule that covered his situation, not if dropping a glass bottle containing magic napalm would be reasonable. (Obviously he thinks it is, since he planned the encounter that way.)

How fragile the vials are depends, again, on how you define impact.

[Slipperychicken]

You need to be CL11 to take Craft Contingent Spell and Magic Aura is a 1st-level spell that lasts 1 day/level, so why wouldn't a wizard of that level add that extra layer of trickery? Or even employ low-level wizards to renew the Magic Aura spells as necessary?

I assume because then there would be no reasonable precaution the PCs could take to be aware of the threat, and the game would devolve into session after session of divinations the PCs take before walking out of the demiplane, to determine the exact events of the entire three weeks ahead of them. In play, it would be functionally identical to saying:

"An ordinary person walks up to you, no magic, no Evil, he doesn't detect as anything..." [rolls dice]

"Rocks fall you die."

[Threadnaught]

RAW? Naw, but sometimes you have to as a DM just say "screw the rules, this makes more sense." Remember, just as alignment isn't a straitjacket, neither are the rules.
If something doesn't make sense to you, you're allowed to work around it as long as you don't have a rules lawyer ready to point out why he should be allowed to "play" as Punpun.

[Emperor Tippy]

You need to be CL11 to take Craft Contingent Spell and Magic Aura is a 1st-level spell that lasts 1 day/level, so why wouldn't a wizard of that level add that extra layer of trickery? Or even employ low-level wizards to renew the Magic Aura spells as necessary?

Because I feel like giving the PC's a chance. If they have Detect Magic or Arcane Sight up (like they should) then they should notice the odd auras and take precautions. If the mooks are protected from those divination's then extreme paranoia becomes necessary. While that is fine with me, most people find the level of paranoia I expect from my players as standard to be a bit too much. Hence I posted the easy mode version.

If the DM feels like playing Craft Contingent to it's potential then it's down right nasty.

[killem2]

Wow guys, this thread turned out to be amazing. I think I will just rule 0 it up. :) It's not THAT much off and I think overall it'll make for great flavor :).