PDA

View Full Version : Leadership...and grenade weapons. Questions.



blue chicken
2007-11-19, 10:28 AM
Yes, I know. Two totally unrelated concepts, but in the never-ending struggle to make a low-level bard sort of useful, I've hit upon a situation that involves both of them. Let's look at leadership first.

We're working with a gnomish bard with a charisma of 20 (well, 18, but that Cloak of Charisma is pretty much standard equipment.) His leadership score should be level 6 + charisma 5 = 11. What's the community's opinion on "special powers?" Are there enough skilled bards in the world that the magic power of music and spells doesn't count as special? That would add a +1 to the leadership score...which is, in turn, probably negated by the -1 from "moving around a lot" that a travelling bard/alchemist/fire work performer suffers from. Leaving "Fairness and generosity" out of it entirely, we'll assume a score of 11.

So cohorts have to be at least two levels below the character they follow. That's 4 levels...or can it be hit dice? This is where I'm really confused. If a bard is taking this feat specifically to attract an awesome mount, does it have to be something with a human-like intelligence and class levels? Or can it be a monster which advances with HD...a dire bat, say? Or a spider eater? A hippogriff?

If the character were level eight, you could solve the problem by taking a Giant Eagle/Owl and advancing it from that point according to a PC class because of it's high Int. But what about what I've mentioned? Low-level ridable cohorts? What say you?

And for the second part of my question: Alchemy and grenades.

Leaving aside the viability of the build and the attack roll modifiers involved, assuming the gnome puts that +2 alchemy to good use and spends a lot of his spare time brewing stuff up, what are the rules/common house rules for alchemical weapons, as it were?

Sure, fire and acid do 1d6 damage/flask. But they only weigh 1 pound apiece. What's there to stop you tying 2-3-4 of them together and then tossing them to stack the damage? In some of my old campaigns we've taken this approach to create explosives we've set off on the ground...but as weapons? What do you think?

Thank you in advance for any good ideas you all can present. I appreciate your time and input.

Yeril
2007-11-19, 10:44 AM
For the cohort thingy Im sure there is some chart or somthing in the Dms guide which has like alternative cohorts, allowing for say, a Hippogriff cohort instead of a 6th level cohort, or a Young green dragon instead of a 16th level cohort, and i'd assume you could have a young green dragon who is a 2nd level barbarian for a 18th level cohort.

not sure what page though.

Seerow
2007-11-19, 10:57 AM
here I was hoping for a discussion on the merits of a Troll Blackguard with leadership using gnomes as grenade weapons.. (they splat on impact if you throw them hard enough!)

blue chicken
2007-11-19, 11:00 AM
Mmmm...okay, just found the chart for cohorts. Still need info about the grenades, though.

tainsouvra
2007-11-19, 01:30 PM
Sure, fire and acid do 1d6 damage/flask. But they only weigh 1 pound apiece. What's there to stop you tying 2-3-4 of them together and then tossing them to stack the damage? In some of my old campaigns we've taken this approach to create explosives we've set off on the ground...but as weapons? What do you think? The rules are not specifically given for this, and as a DM I would not allow it to stack that way. Logically, it wouldn't work--a direct hit with acid (the 1d6 rather than splash damage) is already pretty much covering everything you could hit with a thrown flask, so hitting them with two tied together really doesn't have the potential for greater effect, since you're hitting approximately the same area. At the most, I would impose a penalty on any applicable saving throws after a successful attack roll, due to a greater volume that must be dealt with, but damage would be unchanged, and I would almost certainly add an attack roll penalty (as you guessed) for throwing a bundle.

The only exception I would make is in the highly unusual situation that you can keep an opponent completely immersed for an entire round. Certainly more than a few, or even a dozen, flasks could accomplish, but if you did, then full-immersion damage would kick in.

daggaz
2007-11-19, 02:05 PM
Making bigger alchemical grenades is venturing into Homebrew, which is fine by me.

1d6 + 1 splash is piddley, so I cant really see much harm in allowing you to up it, especially considering the cost will double/triple accordingly. And the cost is already a bit high as is.

As for the whole volume argument...meh. It doesnt say that you are entirely covered in the substance, its a pretty weak fluff argument in the face of an already weak mechanic. And at the very least, adding volume should increase splash damage.

Now I would say that making them bigger than double is going to risk a penalty to range and attack bonus. Probably a -1 to hit for a triple bomb, if you are too low of str, could limit the range to only five feet, putting you in danger of splash damage.

Still, there are FAR better things, mechanically, you can do with your gold and your actions.

tainsouvra
2007-11-19, 02:18 PM
As for the whole volume argument...meh. It doesnt say that you are entirely covered in the substance, its a pretty weak fluff argument in the face of an already weak mechanic. And at the very least, adding volume should increase splash damage. Regarding your final statement in this quoted portion--why? It doesn't work that way in reality, why should it work that way in D&D?

Hzurr
2007-11-19, 02:54 PM
As far as grenade weapons go, I had a player a while back who wanted to make an alchemist, and had some of the same questions.

The solution we came up with was to increase the craft DC to make more "potent" alchemist fires or acid. So yeah, harder & more expensive to make, but they did more damage. I don't remember the exact rules we came up with, but it was something like an extra d6+1 for every 10 points he increased the craft DC.

Also, there's some good stuff in Complete Adventurer for alchemy

tainsouvra
2007-11-19, 03:00 PM
The solution we came up with was to increase the craft DC to make more "potent" alchemist fires or acid. This does make more sense, although beyond a certain potency it would almost certainly have to be including supernatural materials.

Thiel
2007-11-19, 03:12 PM
Regarding your final statement in this quoted portion--why? It doesn't work that way in reality, why should it work that way in D&D?

But it DO work that way.
Since I don't know the chemical make-up of human flesh I'll use this simple reaction as a substitute.
HCl + NaOH -> H2O + NaCL
HCl is the acid and NaOH substitutes for flesh.
I'll argue that the supply NaOH is, for our intend and purpose, unlimited since a human has more 'flesh' molecules than a flask of acid has acid molecules.
The supply of acid is, on the other hand, comparatively limited.
That means that the amount of acid is the limiting factor since we can't make a reaction occur without it.
That means that if we double the amount of acid, we double the amount of reactions.
Or in DnD terms double the damage.

Hzurr
2007-11-19, 03:27 PM
This does make more sense, although beyond a certain potency it would almost certainly have to be including supernatural materials.

Good point. Although if someone was pulling off craft DCs of 40-50, I'm guessing that getting supernatural materials wouldn't be too difficult.

blue chicken
2007-11-19, 03:57 PM
Heh. See...the way it's shaping up, the character is going to be a bard/alchemist who travels in the company of a sorcerer/entertainer and ranger who serves as the guide.

As we in my home group are picturing it, it's sort of a travelling business, if you will. The bard and sorcerer combine their illusion magics, high charisma, music, and scientific skills to produce a Gandalf the Gray roadshow type deal. Basic fireworks, magically narrated stories...you get the idea.

Alchemy substituting for the science involved in making the explosive fireworks, of course.

Mostly they wander far from the cities, catering as bearers of news and tellers of tales to the more primitive/tribal cultures, and as such have to be mainly self-sufficient as far as their supplies go.

Homebrew is right; it's kicking in here. I'd definately agree with an attack roll penalty the more of these flasks you stick together, but in my opinion, dousing someone with a pint of burning napalm is likely going to do more damage than just a cup. So damage will stack, to a point.

Looking at it from a mechanical standpoint...this gnome is going to have a lot of explosive strapped to him, and so will, of course, be at some risk of taking...incendiary damage if he gets hit.

I do need to address the crafting aspect of it all, though. The ranger is all out of skill ranks, being the one who basically takes care of the other two in the wild. The gnome has ranks in alchemy, and the sorcerer has ranks in Profession: Travelling Magician.

What if he were to also have ranks in, say...mining, or some such? I don't mean the tunnel-digging type, so perhaps we could change it to prospecting? Minerology, ha? Regardless of the exact name I'm hoping to come up with a profession that will allow him to (with some investment of time and effort) procure at least some of the supplies Gnomo the Amazing Pyromanic Bard needs to make his potions/fireworks.

Think I should just use the standard profession/gold exchange rules? I don't want to SERIOUSLY limit this character because of the expense of his potions, but I do want it to be a factor on the actions he takes. Say Sorcero the Prospecter has a check modifier of +10 in his profession. A week's worth of prospecting (taking ten) would result in a check of 20, or half that in gold pieces (ten.) The cost of brewing one flask of crafted acid uses 3 (ish) gold in raw materials. So...a week of dedicated prospecting work to collect enough reactive minerals/saltpeter/TNT to create three flasks of acid or (approximately) one flask of Alchemist's Fire.

Sound good? It would make them accountable for how they use valuable explosives without meaning they could never have any nice things at all, ha.

tainsouvra
2007-11-19, 04:05 PM
But it DO work that way.
Since I don't know the chemical make-up of human flesh I'll use this simple reaction as a substitute.
HCl + NaOH -> H2O + NaCL
HCl is the acid and NaOH substitutes for flesh.
I'll argue that the supply NaOH is, for our intend and purpose, unlimited since a human has more 'flesh' molecules than a flask of acid has acid molecules.
The supply of acid is, on the other hand, comparatively limited.
That means that the amount of acid is the limiting factor since we can't make a reaction occur without it.
That means that if we double the amount of acid, we double the amount of reactions.
Or in DnD terms double the damage. Except that really isn't what happens in the first place. There is a massive error in your example situation.

There isn't an unlimited supply of human flesh, there is only as much human flesh as the impact/splash makes direct physical contact with and to which the acid can soak before contact is lost. The area that would be impacted/splashed is not significantly increased by using two vials that strike the same location at the same time, and the amount that is actually absorbed is practically unchanged--you can test this with vials of water if you like, you'll see that throwing two attached vials instead of one has a fairly trivial effect on how big an area on the target you soak. Thus, the human flesh is the limiting element, not the acid's volume--most of the acid actually just drips to the ground and flies in a spray with a single vial. Using twice the volume on one location would just make a bigger mess rather than cause more absorption.

Your situation relies on a specific "test-tube" situation that could not be adequately modeled without some rather gruesome qualifiers being added. Basically, your example would only hold true in the case of a person who has been ground up and put in a vat to which acid is added. That gives you the unlimited exposure situation that your example requires. Throwing a vial is a completely different situation.

Quietus
2007-11-19, 04:09 PM
What if he were to also have ranks in, say...mining, or some such? I don't mean the tunnel-digging type, so perhaps we could change it to prospecting? Minerology, ha? Regardless of the exact name I'm hoping to come up with a profession that will allow him to (with some investment of time and effort) procure at least some of the supplies Gnomo the Amazing Pyromanic Bard needs to make his potions/fireworks.

Think I should just use the standard profession/gold exchange rules? I don't want to SERIOUSLY limit this character because of the expense of his potions, but I do want it to be a factor on the actions he takes. Say Sorcero the Prospecter has a check modifier of +10 in his profession. A week's worth of prospecting (taking ten) would result in a check of 20, or half that in gold pieces (ten.) The cost of brewing one flask of crafted acid uses 3 (ish) gold in raw materials. So...a week of dedicated prospecting work to collect enough reactive minerals/saltpeter/TNT to create three flasks of acid or (approximately) one flask of Alchemist's Fire.

Sound good? It would make them accountable for how they use valuable explosives without meaning they could never have any nice things at all, ha.



He's got ranks in Survival, right? Use that. If he can make a Survival check equal to whatever DC, he can find the appropriate plants/berries/whatever to create alchemist's fire from. DC to find those objects = the craft DC of the alchemical item, perhaps.

Fawsto
2007-11-20, 03:18 PM
Alchemical fire solves it all.

What deals more damage? Being exposed to a campfire for 6 seconds or being exposed to a full fledged forest fire? Obviously, the second hurts much more, since you will be engulfed by the flames.

Meaning, more fire = more damage. So a bigger flask of alchemist fire deals more damage than a smaller one.

Simple like that.

The chemistry explanation is pretty good, IMO. :smalltongue:

tainsouvra
2007-11-20, 03:55 PM
Before I begin, what you are referring to are the full-immersion rules, which are separate from the rules for attacks in the first place. I'll ignore that for the sake of argument and focus on contact area vs liquid volume.
Alchemical fire solves it all.

What deals more damage? Being exposed to a campfire for 6 seconds or being exposed to a full fledged forest fire? Obviously, the second hurts much more, since you will be engulfed by the flames. This is true, but this is also where the flaw in your understanding shows--what you are discussing is affecting a larger portion of the person, not using a larger amount of the substance on the same area. Throwing two vials at the same location puts more on the same area, most of which will fall to the ground because only so much of it will cling/soak during the moment of impact. Throwing two vials at different locations (in D&D terms, two separate attacks) would work similarly to what you're getting at, but that's because it's two separate areas being affected.
Meaning, more fire = more damage. So a bigger flask of alchemist fire deals more damage than a smaller one.

Simple like that. Simple, but wrong. More fire only causes more damage by burning a greater portion of the person, which cannot feasibly be done by two vials striking the same location at the same time. I recommend you try the same "vials of water" test I mentioned earlier so you can see the effect I'm talking about. You just make a bigger mess, you don't soak more water into the target.
The chemistry explanation is pretty good, IMO. :smalltongue: You believe that because, as I indicated above, you missed the point of my refutation of that explanation. While soaking more of the target does cause more damage, throwing a bigger vial at the same location generally doesn't soak more of the target, and thus isn't generally able to cause more damage.

blue chicken
2007-11-20, 10:39 PM
^There's really no need for you to stalk the thread and shoot down everyone who doesn't agree with you.

Personally, I liked the chemistry equation as well. Flesh is, indeed, the limiting reactant in the equation presented. After dissolving a set amount of flesh, (1d6 ish worth) a given vial of acid is denatured. If there's twice as much, or even 1.5 times as much in the same area, the reaction can continue for longer and thusly inflict more damage.

No one is going to go and throw vials of water at something. I doubt you've ever played that little game yourself; why would you, or anyone else?

Additionally...if you don't think more fire does more damage...try holding your hand over a candle flame for five seconds as opposed to holding it over a burning methane torch. (Don't, of course. Just like vials of water, not necessary.) Intensity of the flame is what matters in that case, despite the area being affected being the same. In the case of alchemical fire, the flame would NOT be more intense, so the analogy isn't necessarily valid...but if you use a double-sized vial, it's the difference between being hit in the chest with a small water balloon and being drenched by an impact from a large one.

Your point is valid in that once ENOUGH fluid hits, you get to the point where more can't feasibly be delivered from a thrown vessel in one dousing. That would simulate having a bucket of fire/acid thrown on you, coating EVERY surface on the affected side. Taking the wicking effect of clothing into effect, you could spread a good deal of offensive substance around on a target with multiple hits.

So...yeah. If you get hit in the left pectoral and the right pectoral with water balloons at the same time, you get more wet than when you get hit with one. If you get socked with one massive water balloon, you still catch more water than with a regular sized one. Even if you get hit by two normal-sized water balloons in the same place one after the other, the random spray patterns and absorption from your clothing will, in the end, result in more wetness on your person.

And hence, in the question presented, more flesh dissolved.

Jack Zander
2007-11-20, 11:05 PM
^There's really no need for you to stalk the thread and shoot down everyone who doesn't agree with you.

Personally, I liked the chemistry equation as well. Flesh is, indeed, the limiting reactant in the equation presented. After dissolving a set amount of flesh, (1d6 ish worth) a given vial of acid is denatured. If there's twice as much, or even 1.5 times as much in the same area, the reaction can continue for longer and thusly inflict more damage.

No one is going to go and throw vials of water at something. I doubt you've ever played that little game yourself; why would you, or anyone else?

Additionally...if you don't think more fire does more damage...try holding your hand over a candle flame for five seconds as opposed to holding it over a burning methane torch. (Don't, of course. Just like vials of water, not necessary.) Intensity of the flame is what matters in that case, despite the area being affected being the same. In the case of alchemical fire, the flame would NOT be more intense, so the analogy isn't necessarily valid...but if you use a double-sized vial, it's the difference between being hit in the chest with a small water balloon and being drenched by an impact from a large one.

Your point is valid in that once ENOUGH fluid hits, you get to the point where more can't feasibly be delivered from a thrown vessel in one dousing. That would simulate having a bucket of fire/acid thrown on you, coating EVERY surface on the affected side. Taking the wicking effect of clothing into effect, you could spread a good deal of offensive substance around on a target with multiple hits.

So...yeah. If you get hit in the left pectoral and the right pectoral with water balloons at the same time, you get more wet than when you get hit with one. If you get socked with one massive water balloon, you still catch more water than with a regular sized one. Even if you get hit by two normal-sized water balloons in the same place one after the other, the random spray patterns and absorption from your clothing will, in the end, result in more wetness on your person.

And hence, in the question presented, more flesh dissolved.

Wrong, wrong, wrong wrong, wrong.

If you aren't going to do experiments yourself, don't hypothesize on their outcomes.

Your fire experiment works, but only because the flames are as you said a different intensity. Different intensity does not equal more fire. Hold your hand over two burning candles compared to one. It's not any hotter, but the area does increase some. With alchemists fire, the area is already maxed out. Adding more of the same temperature does not increase intensity, it simply makes the area fuller and harder to avoid.

Likewise with acid. If you add more, it will not burn the skin for longer. Acid is a liquid that does not stick to things. The excess will drip off the skin quickly, leaving only a thin layer soaked into the target which burns. Sure, if you laid them down and poured them with it it may burn longer since it is not dripping all over the ground in the process, but that is very different from hurling a flask at a standing, moving combatant.

A bigger water balloon and two regular ones are not the same. Two regular water balloons thrown right after each other are not the same as two tied together and thrown. Inevitably, one of the ballons will hit first and block the effect of the other balloon if they are thrown at the same time.

Killing catgirls aside, it shouldn't be allowed anyway for game balance. If my character can't tie two swords together for more damage, his character should be able to either with his weapon.

Helgraf
2007-11-20, 11:16 PM
As far as grenade weapons go, I had a player a while back who wanted to make an alchemist, and had some of the same questions.

The solution we came up with was to increase the craft DC to make more "potent" alchemist fires or acid. So yeah, harder & more expensive to make, but they did more damage. I don't remember the exact rules we came up with, but it was something like an extra d6+1 for every 10 points he increased the craft DC.

Also, there's some good stuff in Complete Adventurer for alchemy

See also the Arms & Equipment guide. A lot of stuff in there never got re-released for 3.5. Some of it made it into CAdv. And some of that stuff was actually _good_.

Also, NWN 2 allowed for more potent Acid/Alchemist Fire/Thunderstones, et cetera and it didn't seem to unbalance that game. I don't see why you couldn't make up a set of reasonable potency rules. Perhaps lower the Craft DC for basic acid & alc fire and find an appropriate scaling level.

Jack Zander
2007-11-20, 11:27 PM
See also the Arms & Equipment guide. A lot of stuff in there never got re-released for 3.5. Some of it made it into CAdv. And some of that stuff was actually _good_.

Also, NWN 2 allowed for more potent Acid/Alchemist Fire/Thunderstones, et cetera and it didn't seem to unbalance that game. I don't see why you couldn't make up a set of reasonable potency rules. Perhaps lower the Craft DC for basic acid & alc fire and find an appropriate scaling level.

Increasing potency is the way to go.

Voyager_I
2007-11-21, 12:03 AM
^There's really no need for you to stalk the thread and shoot down everyone who doesn't agree with you.

Personally, I liked the chemistry equation as well. Flesh is, indeed, the limiting reactant in the equation presented. After dissolving a set amount of flesh, (1d6 ish worth) a given vial of acid is denatured. If there's twice as much, or even 1.5 times as much in the same area, the reaction can continue for longer and thusly inflict more damage.


If flesh is the limiting reactant, then adding more acid to the same amount of flesh will have no effect on the reaction. Since it can't really be argued that more liquid can adhere to the same area, the crux of the issue is therefore whether or not two vials tied together cover more area than one vial.

The flame arguments, especially the candle/torch analogy, are irrelevant, since they don't even come close to approximating the situation. Likewise, the two balloons approach doesn't work, since being hit by two separate balloons in two different places models two different attacks, not one combined blow. It all basically comes down to the thrown vials experiment, which has currently been satisfactorily proven by neither side (although the pro-vial argument of "That doesn't sound like it should work" certainly isn't carrying much weight).

Pictures, anyone?

blue chicken
2007-11-21, 12:37 AM
*headdesk*

My bad. I meant the acid was the limiting reagent, seeing as how there's more flesh than acid...I guess when I think of acid, I see it as more of a white phospohorus burning-into-the-target kind of acid and not so much as your laboratory grade HCL. If you're thinking of it as having the density of water, then I certainly see your point, and extra would just dribble off the outside of the target. If, on the other hand, you assume it sort of tunnels in as it bakes the flesh (pitting, etc...your slimy, bubbling green goo sort of fantasy "acid") then maybe having more would allow it to burn further before it denatured? I don't know. Makes sense to me. The viscosity of liquid in question matters a bit, as does density and the like...but oh well. "Acid," taken verbatim, seems to be evoking a thinner substance than I originally had in mind when I was thinking of it...but the scientific details aren't critical to me at this point, and certainly not the player in question. None of us are thrown vial experts, sounds like...and I'm not really concerned about that either, in any case.

Ah, well. To avoid further nasty tone and psuedoscience we can't prove, the point of the question was not science OR RaW. We're going for homebrew here, seeing as how I established it'll probably be this bardic performer/alchemist's primary weapon in battle. The group suggestion for scaling damage so far seems to be in increasing the potency of the acid by increasing craft checks. Now...to me, this doesn't quite make sense. If it WAS HCL, all you'd have to do to increase the potency was increase the molarity...by decreasing the total volume or by increasing the amount of solute in the solution itself. This is a relatively simple chemical process, and it seems like a practicing alchemist could scale it pretty much according to tastes, within reason. I suppose the higher check is modeling the increasing difficulty of making fine adjustments and handling the reactive substance safely?

Honestly, I'm not an expert with crafting :( Any suggestions for that would be appreciated. I'm not worried about PERFECT game balance, just something reasonable. What are some suggested craft DC changes? Cost alterations?

Jack Zander
2007-11-21, 12:50 AM
Maybe add 1 to the save DC for every 5 points you beat the check by and add 1d6 damage for every 10 points you exceed the check.

If you exceed the check by 15, you'd deal +1d6 damage and increase the save DC by 3.

Note that these numbers were all taken out of my butt. You might want to play around with them a bit if they don't work for you.

blue chicken
2007-11-21, 01:41 AM
Hmmmmm...lemme crunch real quick.

Level 20 character = 23 ranks +5 (hypothetical) ability mod + 2 gnome + 2 lab +2 misc = 34. Taking ten, that would be a check of 44. It beats the creation DC of acid (15) by 29. So that way at level 20 an average batch of acid, would deal, on average...9 damage, +1 for the splash. (I guess you could throw in Skill Focus and some other misc bonuses, but they don't come to mind easily right now)

Or did I botch that, somehow? I really am liking the idea of scaling the acid...but more according to the actual DC check generated, rather than shooting for beating the DC of 15 by X amount. Like...DC 18 acid does so much damage, and DC 21 acid does so much damage...see what I mean?

Is there a more common/lower-level solution than increasing the DC's by 10? Five would work, but that still results in a product hardly worth spending a round to use even if you find it as loot, letting alone investing ranks and money and time in BREWING it.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-11-21, 02:15 AM
I apologize if it has been mentioned already, but Races of the Dragon has a few Kobold grenades that might serve as inspiration.

Jack Zander
2007-11-21, 04:07 AM
It actually deals an average of 10.5 damage and 3 splash damage (up the splash damage by 1 also). Not to mention the DC to save against it is now 18 I think.

If you think it should deal more, make the damage scale for every 5. Then it'd be dealing 6d6 + 6 splash at that level (average 21).

You seem to want it to scale every 3 levels. Then it'd be doing 10d6 + 10 splash (average 35) at level 20. Not really overpowered especially when these are expensive one use items. I'd increase the cost too.

Fawsto
2007-11-21, 12:36 PM
I still think that more acid/fire in contact with the same area can deal more damage or at least cause a persistent damage.

Imagine a small cup of liquid red-hot lead, if someone throws it at someone else, the guy would cry in pain and probably get a very nasty third degree rigth to the bones burning that would have a mid chance of killing (direct headshot or right over the chest or back, but not lethal on arms and legs). Now, drop a 2L bottle of the same red-hot liquid lead in the same person. She would probably die instantly, or in horredous pain after a few hours.

3 situations:

More Potent Substance deals more damage and/or do it for longer.
More Substance covers more of the body delaing more damage
More substance deals damage for longer.

tainsouvra
2007-11-21, 01:11 PM
^There's really no need for you to stalk the thread and shoot down everyone who doesn't agree with you. I haven't just been shooting people don't blindly, I've stated an opinion, backed it with evidence, and given a way for anyone else to verify it easily. The problem is that nobody has actually tried the verification (until after your post--it sounds like Jack Zander gets it!), they've been assuming an outcome that is isn't backed by actual results.

Also, if you don't like hearing someone disagree with you even when they do it diplomatically, but you're posting on an internet forum...get used to disappointment. :smallwink:
No one is going to go and throw vials of water at something. I doubt you've ever played that little game yourself; why would you, or anyone else? Doubt all you want, I've done it and it's fun.
try holding your hand over a candle flame for five seconds as opposed to holding it over a burning methane torch. (Don't, of course. Just like vials of water, not necessary.) Intensity of the flame is what matters in that case, despite the area being affected being the same. In the case of alchemical fire, the flame would NOT be more intense, so the analogy isn't necessarily valid. Why on earth are you trying to refute a point with one that you know isn't valid? :smallconfused:
---

A bigger water balloon and two regular ones are not the same. Two regular water balloons thrown right after each other are not the same as two tied together and thrown. Inevitably, one of the ballons will hit first and block the effect of the other balloon if they are thrown at the same time. Exactly. In general, you don't soak the target better that way :smallcool:
---
Regarding pictures, I might be able to do that in a couple days if anyone's still interested at that point. Busy time of year right now, or I'd have them today :smallsmile:
---

I guess when I think of acid, I see it as more of a white phospohorus burning-into-the-target kind of acid and not so much as your laboratory grade HCL. If you're thinking of it as having the density of water, then I certainly see your point, and extra would just dribble off the outside of the target. If, on the other hand, you assume it sort of tunnels in as it bakes the flesh (pitting, etc...your slimy, bubbling green goo sort of fantasy "acid") then maybe having more would allow it to burn further before it denatured? I don't know. Makes sense to me. The viscosity of liquid in question matters a bit, as does density and the like...but oh well. "Acid," taken verbatim, seems to be evoking a thinner substance than I originally had in mind when I was thinking of it. Remember that, in D&D, we're talking about an acid that's liquid enough to splash like a water balloon when it hits a target. We already know, based on that effect, that our fantasy acid is very similar to water in consistency. A thick, sticky "acid" wouldn't splash like that, so we know D&D isn't using one.

Btw, it's not important for our current point, but as an aside--white phosphorus is an incendiary when fired at a target. The burning reaction creates phosphorus pentoxide, which does make phosphoric acid as a byproduct, but that's the cloud that hangs in the air rather than the actual target burn. White phosphorus burns its target by intense heat, the acid cloud is a byproduct.

Jack Zander
2007-11-21, 03:51 PM
I still think that more acid/fire in contact with the same area can deal more damage or at least cause a persistent damage.

Imagine a small cup of liquid red-hot lead, if someone throws it at someone else, the guy would cry in pain and probably get a very nasty third degree rigth to the bones burning that would have a mid chance of killing (direct headshot or right over the chest or back, but not lethal on arms and legs). Now, drop a 2L bottle of the same red-hot liquid lead in the same person. She would probably die instantly, or in horredous pain after a few hours.

3 situations:

More Potent Substance deals more damage and/or do it for longer.
More Substance covers more of the body delaing more damage
More substance deals damage for longer.

Dumping red hot liquid on someone is very different than splashing them with a vial. Now if you had a larger vial, maybe. Not if you tie two together and throw them.

Really though, vials of acid aren't small little test tubes. They are designed to splash with the greatest volume they can. A larger vial will still just make a bigger mess in this case.

blue chicken
2007-11-21, 04:30 PM
*sigh* I know what white phosphorus is, and what it does. I've already said that I was perhaps mistakenly thinking of DnD acid as a phosphorus-like substance rather than a drippy sort of HCL. Forgive any semantical confusion my ambiguous statement may have generated. Honestly, it's not important to the topic at this point.

Regardless of whether vials will or will not perform as advertised, the only thing I personally am still interested in is help with the homebrew scaling. Vials aren't necessary at all. Any more suggestions for crafting alterations?

tainsouvra
2007-11-21, 05:28 PM
I would only reiterate that the suggestion to allow crafting more potent weapons, by using more exotic/expensive materials and a higher craft DC, is a good one.