4
\$\begingroup\$

Sometimes enemies are spaced out with empty space between them. According to what I can find on the SRD,

You can instead target a specific grid intersection. Treat this as a ranged attack against AC 5. However, if you target a grid intersection, creatures in all adjacent squares are dealt the splash damage, and the direct hit damage is not dealt to any creature.

But if you have monsters standing like so:

X| |X
-----
 |X|

Any given intersection can only hit 4 squares. If a monster had been standing between the two Xs, I could hit him for the direct damage, and hit all three other monsters with splash damage. Can I aim my splash weapon there, forgoing the direct damage to hit all three with splash?

Edit to add: I've just noticed that the sidebar on the d20pfsrd talking about what happens when you MISS with this attack has the following image:

enter image description here

If "T" means "Target", does that mean I actually target a square? Or is the image wrong? But if I only splash 4, how can I roll a d8 to determine which square I actually land in?

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
8
\$\begingroup\$

RAW, no. If you're not hitting someone you can only go for an intersection and splash 4, even though if you hit a creature you could possibly splash 8.

Quoting:

You can instead target a specific grid intersection. Treat this as a ranged attack against AC 5. However, if you target a grid intersection, creatures in all adjacent squares are dealt the splash damage, and the direct hit damage is not dealt to any creature. You can't target a grid intersection occupied by a creature, such as a Large or larger creature; in this case, you're aiming at the creature.

It's easy enough to house rule - I can see an argument that hitting the floor isn't as "splashy" as hitting an actual thrashing above the ground dude, but I can also see an argument that bah who cares. In our games we just let someone splash the larger area because, seriously, splash damage.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, I kind of figure if I'm giving up 2d6 for a flat 5, that's already a drawback enough to justify doing it, but I wanted to see if I'd overlooked something \$\endgroup\$
    – Yamikuronue
    Sep 22, 2013 at 3:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ I just noticed: in the link you posted, the sidebar FYI talks in the text about "targeting a grid intersection" but the diagram for miss chances indicates that the "T" (Target, I assume) is a square, not a corner of a square. Does "grid intersection" mean "square"? \$\endgroup\$
    – Yamikuronue
    Sep 23, 2013 at 15:33
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Yamikuronue Not just the sidebar, but the actual rules text itself talks about the intersection. As for the diagram, I assume they mean for when you are targeting a creature (and thus T is the target creature), but even if they do mean a square, I’m reasonably certain Pathfinder maintains the 3.5 rule for contradiction between different rules sources: the main text trumps a sidebar (or splatbook), and text trumps a diagram or table. I’m firmly with mxyzplk that this should be houseruled, though; my groups have always allowed square-targeting, not even realizing the rules said otherwise. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Sep 23, 2013 at 15:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .