# Is Wraithstrike the wrong level?



## wildstarsreach (Jan 5, 2007)

I've been having a dicussion on another list and with my gaming group.  I play a Duskblade and of course Wraithstrike from the complete adventurer has come up.  One of the other playercame up with that wraithstrike is most similar to True Strike.  This is a first level spell.  Wraithstrike is a swift action which is akin to a quickened spell.  Theoretically this should be a 5th level spell alone.  Now Wraithstrike affects a whole series of attacks, not just the next attack role as True Strike does.  Touch AC's are anywhere from 5 to 40 lower standard AC's.  Should this spell be realistically at about 6th or 7th level for correct estimation of spell power or does someone have a good defense of why it should be as it is at 2nd level?


----------



## Stalker0 (Jan 5, 2007)

I think 5th level is a good place to start. Remember, true strike does negate concealment and such as well.


----------



## Sejs (Jan 5, 2007)

> Spells - Is Wraithstrike the wrong level?




*Yes.*

It should be somewhere around 4th or 5th level.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 5, 2007)

Wraithstrike is not just the wrong level--it is simply broken at any level against a wide variety of opponents (particularly big dragons).  It _might_ be acceptable at 8th or 9th level, but that just means the Eldritch Knight takes longer to break it.


----------



## Evilhalfling (Jan 5, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Wraithstrike is not just the wrong level--it is simply broken at any level against a wide variety of opponents (particularly big dragons).  It _might_ be acceptable at 8th or 9th level, but that just means the Eldritch Knight takes longer to break it.




Or when used by big dragons - do you want to face a young adult red power attacking for +15-19 on 5 attacks? every round?


----------



## Kmart Kommando (Jan 5, 2007)

Or even worse, using Improved Combat Expertise and still dumping some into Power Attack, netting a hefty chunk to AC and still hitting with everything...hard. 

Did I mention Arcane Strike too?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 5, 2007)

Kmart Kommando said:
			
		

> Or even worse, using Improved Combat Expertise and still dumping some into Power Attack, netting a hefty chunk to AC and still hitting with everything...hard.
> 
> Did I mention Arcane Strike too?



 That's also partially a problem with ICE for high-HD creatures.  For instance, an intelligent T-Rex with ICE instead of one of some of those worthless Toughness feats can pump its AC to unreachable levels for its supposed CR while still hitting with its bite.

Still, definitely agreed on the Wraithstrike-for-dragons part


----------



## Sejs (Jan 5, 2007)

Kmart Kommando said:
			
		

> Did I mention Arcane Strike too?



So, for some reason I thought Arcane Strike was a swift action to activate, and thus would have some saving grace regarding possible interaction with Wraithstrike.  But I wasn't sure, so I thought it best to check.

Upon checking.. nope, free action.  *shakes head, boggles*  Wait a second.. free action, untyped bonus, only the to-hit bonus is capped.  Uh, am I crazy here, or is there the possibility that someone with Arcane Strike can just go thermonuclear and vent like mad?

Now granted, no DM in their right mind would let that fly, but still.  Can't believe that one slipped under my radar up until now.


----------



## Sejs (Jan 5, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> That's also partially a problem with ICE for high-HD creatures.  For instance, an intelligent T-Rex with ICE instead of one of some of those worthless Toughness feats can pump its AC to unreachable levels for its supposed CR while still hitting with its bite.




Corollary - any intelligent T-Rex with ICE is required to wear a top hat and a monocle.

And possibly spats.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 5, 2007)

Sejs said:
			
		

> Corollary - any intelligent T-Rex with ICE is required to wear a top hat and a monocle.
> 
> And possibly spats.



 You have to admit, that'd be pretty cool.


----------



## Darklone (Jan 5, 2007)

T-rexes need Power Attack? Or ICE?

The last two T-rexes I had DRANK the PCs without ICE. Gulp.


----------



## Brother MacLaren (Jan 5, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> That's also partially a problem with ICE for high-HD creatures.  For instance, an intelligent T-Rex with ICE instead of one of some of those worthless Toughness feats can pump its AC to unreachable levels for its supposed CR while still hitting with its bite.



Hmm.  I wonder what the CR of a 13-Int T-Rex should be.  As in Awakened?  Maybe a +2 CR adjustment?

Even at CR 8, the thing can get to a maximum AC of 27, by taking its attack down to a +7. IME, secondary fighters (clerics, bards, rogues) can get up to double their level in attack bonus (say at 8th level +3 from Inspire Courage, +2 weapon, +3 ability, +6 BAB, and +2 flanking or charging).  Plus maybe Prayer, Haste, or Weapon Focus.  Primary fighters do quite a bit better.

Now, Combat Expertise for a Stone Giant or Elder Xorn (also CR 8, but with a MUCH better AC) makes them nearly impossible to hit.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 5, 2007)

Brother MacLaren said:
			
		

> Hmm.  I wonder what the CR of a 13-Int T-Rex should be.  As in Awakened?  Maybe a +2 CR adjustment?
> 
> Even at CR 8, the thing can get to a maximum AC of 27, by taking its attack down to a +7. IME, secondary fighters (clerics, bards, rogues) can get up to double their level in attack bonus (say at 8th level +3 from Inspire Courage, +2 weapon, +3 ability, +6 BAB, and +2 flanking or charging).  Plus maybe Prayer, Haste, or Weapon Focus.  Primary fighters do quite a bit better.
> 
> Now, Combat Expertise for a Stone Giant or Elder Xorn (also CR 8, but with a MUCH better AC) makes them nearly impossible to hit.



 Ah, I must have been working with an Advanced Awakened T-Rex then.  I think it was CR 12 (may have been 13) and had ACs in the mid-30s using ICE.  It certainly works better with a Stone Giant or Elder Xorn, though, admittedly.


----------



## starwed (Jan 5, 2007)

> Wait a second.. free action, untyped bonus, only the to-hit bonus is capped. Uh, am I crazy here, or is there the possibility that someone with Arcane Strike can just go thermonuclear and vent like mad?



It's definately RAW.  But I'd suggest making it a swift action.


----------



## green slime (Jan 5, 2007)

Yes, it is the wrong level, by far.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 5, 2007)

Wraithstrike should be stricken from the game.  As is, it is broken and not fixable IMO.  It is just too problematic to convert attacks from non-touch to touch.


----------



## Darklone (Jan 5, 2007)

T-rex AC is pretty meaningless if you're inside.


----------



## szilard (Jan 5, 2007)

Sejs said:
			
		

> So, for some reason I thought Arcane Strike was a swift action to activate, and thus would have some saving grace regarding possible interaction with Wraithstrike.  But I wasn't sure, so I thought it best to check.
> 
> Upon checking.. nope, free action.  *shakes head, boggles*  Wait a second.. free action, untyped bonus, only the to-hit bonus is capped.  Uh, am I crazy here, or is there the possibility that someone with Arcane Strike can just go thermonuclear and vent like mad?
> 
> Now granted, no DM in their right mind would let that fly, but still.  Can't believe that one slipped under my radar up until now.




Yes. This is a ridiculous combo. In the over-the-top-anything-goes gestalt game I was playing in, my character (primarily Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple with some Paladin levels) would take on the big bads by shapechanging into a Leonal, charging (pounce) with Wraithstrike and swap out a 9th level spell for arcane strike. Haste (via boots of speed) and a full power attack... and maybe a Smite Evil just for fun. He'd regularly do around 1000 points of damage in a round.

-Stuart


----------



## Darklone (Jan 5, 2007)

Well. Some 9th level spells can do that without the rest, right ?


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 5, 2007)

Evilhalfling said:
			
		

> Or when used by big dragons - do you want to face a young adult red power attacking for +15-19 on 5 attacks? every round?




You PC will almost never have an AC that the dragon can't hit with reasonable certainty.  It might make a difference of 2 attacks at most that didn't hit.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jan 5, 2007)

If Wraithstrike only applies to one attack that would be something, but I'd still make it higher level.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jan 5, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Wraithstrike is not just the wrong level--it is simply broken at any level against a wide variety of opponents (particularly big dragons).  It _might_ be acceptable at 8th or 9th level, but that just means the Eldritch Knight takes longer to break it.




QFT.

The problem I have with Wraithstrike is that it doesn't just give a bonus to hit, it completely negates certain types of AC.  Sometimes it nets +5 to hit, but it can also net a +500 to hit.  I thought we learned that open-endedness like this was bad from 3.0 Harm, but apparently WotC forgot about that somewhere along the line.

That, and quickened True Strike is 5th level, and pretty well balanced.  I hate the idea of low level swift action spells to begin with.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 5, 2007)

szilard said:
			
		

> Yes. This is a ridiculous combo. In the over-the-top-anything-goes gestalt game I was playing in, my character (primarily Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple with some Paladin levels) would take on the big bads by shapechanging into a Leonal, charging (pounce) with Wraithstrike and swap out a 9th level spell for arcane strike. Haste (via boots of speed) and a full power attack... and maybe a Smite Evil just for fun. He'd regularly do around 1000 points of damage in a round.
> 
> -Stuart




Only one swift/quickened/immediate action per turn.  Wraithstrike is a swift action which stacks unfortunately with free actions such as Arcane Strike.  This is better than the Arcane Channeling (Full Attack) that the Duskblade get at 13th.  Arcane Channeling a spell still only affects one attack that you channel the spell through.

Somehow, Arcane strike strikes me that this should be a standard of immediate action at best.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 5, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> You PC will almost never have an AC that the dragon can't hit with reasonable certainty.  It might make a difference of 2 attacks at most that didn't hit.



 There's a difference between being able to hit your PC with a reasonable certainty on all attacks and being able to hit your PC with a reasonable certainty even at +15-19 power attack on all attacks.  With 6 attacks, that's at least 90hp of extra damage per round.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 5, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> If Wraithstrike only applies to one attack that would be something, but I'd still make it higher level.




I was thinking that there should be a succession of 4 spells starting at 5th to 8th in which each level of spell would allow one additional attack.  5th would be the next attack, 6th would be the next 2 attacks and so on.  This would at least be more consistant.


----------



## SteelDraco (Jan 5, 2007)

I'm playing a character right now with Deep Impact, which is a psionic feat similar to Wraithstrike - it lets you expend your psionic focus to make a single melee attack as a touch attack. You can pick it up starting at 5th level, with one feat prereq (Psionic Weapon). It's a useful ability, but it's not gamebreaking, even with my beatstick of a gestalt fighter/psychic warrior.

The problem with Wraithstrike is that it's for ALL attacks in the round, including things like Cleave attacks, and any extra attacks you may be able to pick up. If it was just one, like Deep Impact, I wouldn't have a problem with it at 2nd level. As written, however, I'd never allow it in my games. I probably wouldn't allow it even at 4th or 5th level. I might consider one of two alternate versions, however.

1. A 2nd level, swift action spell that only affects one attack.
2. A 3rd or 4th level spell that isn't a swift action, that affects next round's attacks. This rewards groups with Spellcraft and cooperation, as the party's casters yell to the warriors, "Get away from that dragon! Something bad's going to happen if you don't!" It also requires more tactical play, as the character tries to set up a full attack against a target that might be aware of what's going on.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 5, 2007)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> Sometimes it nets +5 to hit, but it can also net a +500 to hit.  I thought we learned that open-endedness like this was bad from 3.0 Harm, but apparently WotC forgot about that somewhere along the line.



 Where were you in the thread on the monk's belt?  I needed your help then.


----------



## Mort (Jan 5, 2007)

Changing the level of wraithstrike isn't really the solution, because it only breaks at high levels. 

2 easy fixes:

1) Only 1 attack in the round that wraithstrike is cast and any other attacks (AoO's for example) are not considered touch attacks. This put's the spell in line with the ToB manuever and the feat deep impact.

2) Keep it as a swift spell but add the wording: No strength based damage (including power attack) applies when wraithstrike is active.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 5, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Changing the level of wraithstrike isn't really the solution, because it only breaks at high levels.
> 
> 2 easy fixes:
> 
> ...




That would indeed take the teeth out of the wonky brokenness of the spell.  It is also an assassin 2 to make assassins more effective.  Being more finesse is more in line with what this spell should be.  I like that idea.


----------



## The Grackle (Jan 5, 2007)

I'd say it's way, way too low.  Low enough to fit into a Wand of Wraithstrike.


----------



## Mort (Jan 5, 2007)

The Grackle said:
			
		

> I'd say it's way, way too low.  Low enough to fit into a Wand of Wraithstrike.




Actually, this wouldn't do much - activating a wand is a standard action, and since it's a self only spell, you would get no attacks that turn. The only possible benefit would be for AoO's you  get before your next turn.


----------



## Vanye (Jan 5, 2007)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> The problem I have with Wraithstrike is that it doesn't just give a bonus to hit, it completely negates certain types of AC.  Sometimes it nets +5 to hit, but it can also net a +500 to hit.  I thought we learned that open-endedness like this was bad from 3.0 Harm, but apparently WotC forgot about that somewhere along the line.




_brilliant energy weapons_ still exist....and they are a more permanent form of the _wraithstrike_ spell in many ways.  Not quite as effective, since they can't affect non-living things, but very similar.


----------



## Boondoggle (Jan 5, 2007)

Ahh, but brilliant energy does *not* ignore natural armor, and has a cost magnitudes more than a 2nd level spell.

I think as a 3rd level spell that affected only the next attack, it would be balanced.


----------



## Slaved (Jan 5, 2007)

Brilliant energy is also very overcosted for any game I have ever been in.

If it only worked on the next attack on the same round it was cast it could be brought down to first level I think. It is melee only right? If so then you are most likely looking at needing to cast it defensively and then you get a bonus ranging from +0 up to something potentially pretty high against specific foes. By comparison true strike always gives a +20, ignores certain modifiers, works on a greater range of attacks (ranged attacks, can be put into wands, and so forth), but takes more time to cast.

That does not seem terribly out of line to me. 1st level, swift action, only next attack this round, melee attack only, makes it a touch attack.

I would even like it as an offensive spell that someone would cast on a creature so that the next attack on them was a touch attack, so long as it happened within a very short time frame. Possibly even with no save or SR but close range. Later on have cone effects and longer durations. I like it, I may have to suggest something to the dm about it.


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 6, 2007)

Wraithstrike meets advanced Will-o-wisp swarm...


----------



## IanB (Jan 6, 2007)

Wraithstrike may be better than brilliant energy during its duration, but it should still probably be lower level than that spell that makes a weapon brilliant energy for 1 rd/level, which is something like 6th or 7th level I think. (No books handy. It was in... Complete Mage? Maybe?)

That still leaves a lot of room for upping the level, of course.

Another possibility is that perhaps it should be removed from the Sor/Wiz list and left only on prestige class lists. It can't be 5th level for an assassin anyway.


----------



## Kmart Kommando (Jan 6, 2007)

If you use class defense, then Wraithstrike is no longer the mad power ninja spell that it is in a standard no-variant game.  Everyone's touch AC (or pretty much everyone's) is going to be higher, so getting to swing at their touch AC isn't going to be broken.
Class Defense variant + Wraithstrike at 2nd level looks balanced on paper.


----------



## molonel (Jan 6, 2007)

We took Wraithstrike out of our game because it was simply too good not to cast. Why cast a spell that gives you a bonus to-hit when you can cast a spell that bypasses armor, shields, enhancements on armor, enhancements on shields, natural armor and just about everything except for dex bonuses, deflection and insight bonuses?


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 6, 2007)

A. Not true. Even a core rules only fighter with Combat Expertise and a Tower Shield can get an AC that CR 20 dragons need to roll decently in order to hit. A character who uses non-core options to optimize AC can make the dragon actually unlikely to hit at all--and without reaching the heights of Pun Pun ridiculousness.

B. Even against a normal AC, the dragon will only hit reliably if it not Power Attacking



			
				wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> You PC will almost never have an AC that the dragon can't hit with reasonable certainty.  It might make a difference of 2 attacks at most that didn't hit.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 6, 2007)

Wraithstrike is absolutely heinous, especially when combined with pretty common fighter/mage tactics. Wraithstrike, meet contingent improved blink (or contingent blink at lower levels or just straight-up blink at mid levels). Whatever you're facing, unless it has Uncanny Dodge, or See Invisibility/True Seeing (and your DM rules that it helps against blinking foes--blindfight doesn't), its AC=10+deflection mod+/-size mod. At level 15, that's a Cornugon dead in one round with attacks left over. At level 16, that's an angel of decay dead in one round with attacks left over. (By the time the character hit level 17, the campaign had banned the spell).

Full disclosure means that I probably should mention that I also arcane striked a top level spell, Power Attacked for full, and had a wounding weapon (which made a difference against the Cornugon, though I didn't try to argue that touch attacks bypass DR so maybe it canceled out).

Putting it and arcane strike on an otherwise core rules only NPC with meager equipment, meant that, every round, he took an fully prepped and healed PC from full hit points to nearly dead with unlucky rolls and from full to dead with average ones.

Now for the real question--is a spell that is that good for the people who actually use it (you know, fighter/mages with power attack, Arcane Strike, and good weapons and defensive spells) appropriate at any level? I think not.


----------



## satori01 (Jan 6, 2007)

The spell, frankly is stronger in the hands of the DM than it is for players.  I am quite sure I can take almost any giant, add 4 levels of non associated class: Sorcerer, take Wraithstrike, and full power attack with a 2 handed weapon, and with Cleave, and Great Cleave kill most groups.

Wraithstrike was from Complete Multiclassing err.. I mean Complete Adventurer and is clearly meant to make up for horrible Wizard/Fighter BAB  Of course a 16 level Eldritch Knight is only 3 points of BAB behind a warrior class, and Touch AC for many creatures is more than 3 points away.

Part of me wonders if there was no 2 for 1 Power Attack, if the spell would be that much overpowered?  Part of me also thinks that unless you are fighting a creature that has SR you just can not beat, that dropping a high level spell into Arcane Strike may not be the best way to go.  

Damage from Power Attack is obviously less randomized than a handful of D6s , and you can Crit with a weapon more easily, but when you can cast Implosion, is it truly better to be Wraithstriking, Power Attacking, Arcane Striking?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 6, 2007)

satori01 said:
			
		

> The spell, frankly is stronger in the hands of the DM than it is for players.  I am quite sure I can take almost any giant, add 4 levels of non associated class: Sorcerer, take Wraithstrike, and full power attack with a 2 handed weapon, and with Cleave, and Great Cleave kill most groups.
> 
> Wraithstrike was from Complete Multiclassing err.. I mean Complete Adventurer and is clearly meant to make up for horrible Wizard/Fighter BAB  Of course a 16 level Eldritch Knight is only 3 points of BAB behind a warrior class, and Touch AC for many creatures is more than 3 points away.
> 
> ...



 Yes, actually.  Yes it is.  There are _very_ few level-appropriate enemies that would fail a save against Implosion.


----------



## Votan (Jan 6, 2007)

It depends a lot on what opponent you are facing.  

Consider three cases:

1) Ancient Blue Dragon.  Base AC 38.  Touch AC 6.  Net benefit for casting this spell + 32 to hit.  

2) Will-o-wisp.  Base AC 29.  Touch AC 29.  Net benefit for casting this spell +0 to hit

3) Hybrid Form Werewolf.  Base AC 16.  Touch AC 12.  Net benefit for casting this spell +4 to hit.


It is an interesting spell as it seems to do more at high levels and fails against a lot of opponents.  A Quickened True Strike is usually much better except vs. very high level and high AC opponents.  

So long as the spell is only being used by Eldritch Knights at medium levels it is fine; if these attacks (even paired with Arcane Strike) are competing with disintegrate spells and Destruction spells than it is a fine and balanced option.  

But 2nd level has a few big problems:

1) It is eay to get with a few levels of dipping (Abjurant Champion with one level of wizard or sorcerer; get Nerveskitter and Wraithstrike plus Shield to qualify, use nothing else but these spells and still be very happy for the loss of one point of BAB)

2) Extra Spell can be a problem if Rangers/Paladins/Duskblades/Clerics can use it to select this spell.  

3) Not pinnacle; casting second level spells, except at very low levels, is not a significant resource drain.  So the character can save pinnacle spells for more dangerous things.  

Making it a 3rd or 4th level spell would be an enormous step forward.  I think 5th is too high as a Quickened True Strike is a better overall spell.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 6, 2007)

Why do you say a Quickened True Strike is usually much better?  It only applies to a single attack, and your first attack at that, which was probably going to hit anyway.  Wraithstrike affects them all.  Quickened True Strike is actually almost never better.  Admittedly, for certain opponents that have no armour, shield, or natural armour bonus, Wraithstrike doesn't work, but just because it doesn't auto-assassinate every enemy in the game doesn't mean it isn't broken.


----------



## Votan (Jan 6, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Why do you say a Quickened True Strike is usually much better?  It only applies to a single attack, and your first attack at that, which was probably going to hit anyway.  Wraithstrike affects them all.  Quickened True Strike is actually almost never better.  Admittedly, for certain opponents that have no armour, shield, or natural armour bonus, Wraithstrike doesn't work, but just because it doesn't auto-assassinate every enemy in the game doesn't mean it isn't broken.




True, Wratihstrike is too good because of what it works against.  

But, what I like about Quickened True strike is that it is utterly relaible.  It does not depend on the opponent that you are facing.  In addition, especially at lower levels, the bonus to hit is a lot better for most CR-appropriate foes.  

If given at the same level, I would always pick QTS over Wraithstrike.  However, the fact that iWratihstrike is competitive with a 5th level spell that I'd actually prepare is a warning that, whether you agree with me about it being weaker or not, 2nd level is probably too low.


----------



## Nail (Jan 6, 2007)

The Tome of Battle: Book of 9 Swords has a 2nd level maneuver called Emerald Razor, which is a standard action of one melee attack that's treated as a touch attack.

At 2nd level, it's *maybe* balanced.  Maybe.  But only because it's restricted to a Standard Action.


----------



## Mort (Jan 6, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> The Tome of Battle: Book of 9 Swords has a 2nd level maneuver called Emerald Razor, which is a standard action of one melee attack that's treated as a touch attack.
> 
> At 2nd level, it's *maybe* balanced.  Maybe.  But only because it's restricted to a Standard Action.




I had mentioned that earlier. Similarly, The Expanded Psionics handbook has deep impact, which allows your next attack to be a touch atttack if you expend your focus (notice this is a little  better, because you can do it as part of a full attack).

Allowing 1 attack as a touch attack is good, but hardly broken. 

The problem is because ALL attacks for the round (including AoO's) are touch attacks, which gets ridiculous at high levels. Heck I think I could make a jade phoenix mage with 13 touch  attacks in one round; which is just too much. Of course you can do nearly the same thing with stormguard warrior, but that's another discussion.


----------



## Darklone (Jan 6, 2007)

Huhm, Dervish with a thousand cuts... 16 attacks or more? Not counting AoOs yet?


----------



## The Grackle (Jan 6, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Actually, this wouldn't do much - activating a wand is a standard action, and since it's a self only spell, you would get no attacks that turn. The only possible benefit would be for AoO's you  get before your next turn.




Yeah, that occured to me later on.  Oh, well.  Brokenness averted.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 7, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> I had mentioned that earlier. Similarly, The Expanded Psionics handbook has deep impact, which allows your next attack to be a touch atttack if you expend your focus (notice this is a little  better, because you can do it as part of a full attack).
> 
> Allowing 1 attack as a touch attack is good, but hardly broken.
> 
> The problem is because ALL attacks for the round (including AoO's) are touch attacks, which gets ridiculous at high levels. Heck I think I could make a jade phoenix mage with 13 touch  attacks in one round; which is just too much. Of course you can do nearly the same thing with stormguard warrior, but that's another discussion.




But eventually you'll run out of spell slots to cast Wraithstrike (esp of you are Arcane Striking in conjunction), and you can continue to use Emerald Razon and Deep Impact all day long.


----------



## Mort (Jan 7, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> But eventually you'll run out of spell slots to cast Wraithstrike (esp of you are Arcane Striking in conjunction), and you can continue to use Emerald Razon and Deep Impact all day long.




Of course, which is why I said wraithstriking for only 1 attack is not in the least bit broken.

Being able to have multiple touch attacks (that allow all damage bonuses) in the same round is orders of magnitude better than only having one touch attack, being limited in the number of times you can do it doesn't change that.


----------



## Darklone (Jan 7, 2007)

And don't forget that the Psywar with Deep Impact needs to refocus all the time (at least a ME action), needs a feat (or two for ME refocus) and still needs to succeed at all those Concentration DC20 checks. So yes, 1 attack per round if everything works fine.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 7, 2007)

Darklone said:
			
		

> And don't forget that the Psywar with Deep Impact needs to refocus all the time (at least a ME action), needs a feat (or two for ME refocus) and still needs to succeed at all those Concentration DC20 checks. So yes, 1 attack per round if everything works fine.



 Isn't it three feats?  I thought DI required Psionic Weapon?


----------



## EyeontheMountain (Jan 7, 2007)

Darklone said:
			
		

> And don't forget that the Psywar with Deep Impact needs to refocus all the time (at least a ME action), needs a feat (or two for ME refocus) and still needs to succeed at all those Concentration DC20 checks. So yes, 1 attack per round if everything works fine.




Yes, Refocus makes for a great limitation on this feat, why I consider it balanced. Jsut to note, Deep impact says nothing about your NEXT attack being a touch attack, you choose, which is great for your last attack.

Also it is the third feat in a chain (considering Psychic mediatation part of the chain.) Taht helps balance it also.


----------



## Darklone (Jan 7, 2007)

Thanks. 

Well... so wraithstrike is better than a strong ability that needs 3 feats to be used properly without being sure that it works all the time. 

Byebye wraithstrike.


----------



## Votan (Jan 7, 2007)

Darklone said:
			
		

> Thanks.
> 
> Well... so wraithstrike is better than a strong ability that needs 3 feats to be used properly without being sure that it works all the time.
> 
> Byebye wraithstrike.




Interestingly enough, the spell pretty much balances if you amke the casting time a move action now that I think about it.  A few abusive things for the spiked chain tripper with combat reflexes but nothing really all that bad.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 7, 2007)

Votan said:
			
		

> Interestingly enough, the spell pretty much balances if you amke the casting time a move action now that I think about it.  A few abusive things for the spiked chain tripper with combat reflexes but nothing really all that bad.



 Actually it doesn't balance at a Move Action--because you can then Quicken it and get the regular Wraithstrike back as a level 6 spell, and it is still overpowered at that level.


----------



## Nifft (Jan 7, 2007)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> Wraithstrike should be stricken from the game.  As is, it is broken and not fixable IMO.  It is just too problematic to convert attacks from non-touch to touch.




I mostly agree.

A spell that allows ONE melee attack as a touch attack? Not broken. But a full attack? Broken.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Votan (Jan 7, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Actually it doesn't balance at a Move Action--because you can then Quicken it and get the regular Wraithstrike back as a level 6 spell, and it is still overpowered at that level.




This I would disagree with.  Wraithstrike is strong but not so strong that it is better than a 6th level spell. It gives a huge bonus to hit because it is a touch attack.  

However, 6th level makes some things change:

1) Low level dips can no longer acquire it.  You need a focused Fighter/mage to acquire this spell requiring 11 levels of casting.  This is becoming a good boost for an Eldritch Knight (at least 13th level for this class combination assuming it is based on wizard).  

At 13th level the Wizard is casting Finger of Death, Reverse Gravity and Forcecage.  Heck, even distintegrate is likely to do as much damage as a full attack action.  

2) One of the nice things about Wraithstrike is that it comes out of spells that are rarely used but remains highly effective at high levels.  Unenhanced second level spells are rarely effective uses of an action at 10th level.  Wrathstrike was a notable exception to this rule.  

3) Other metamagic competes.  Using of Energy Substitution (to avoid energy resistence) and Empower on Scorching Ray is a 5th level spell.  The 6th level equivalent is Maximize or Twin.  Doing 24d6 (twinned) damage as a ranged touch attack at 50 feet plus (by this level) is generally easier to pull off than a full attack that requires getting close and is less investment than a charge based Wraithstrike.  

4) Adding this spell to other lists (for example, via Extra Spell should you beleive that works) is no longer a complete no brainer for Paladins and Rangers.  Only full casters with Quicken spell as a feat will see this as a potentially worthwhile investment.  


It is still a decent use of a 6th level spell.  But, now, it appears that there are choices that might be equally good or there is a requirement for a lot of investment in a particular strategy.  I don't mind if careful investment can provide good options for a character.  In particular, once multiple feats start to make sense then I think that the character is picking an option.  That is good.  

Once there is choice the spell starts to balance.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 7, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Of course, which is why I said wraithstriking for only 1 attack is not in the least bit broken.
> 
> Being able to have multiple touch attacks (that allow all damage bonuses) in the same round is orders of magnitude better than only having one touch attack, being limited in the number of times you can do it doesn't change that.




Yeah, maybe if you only have 1 or 2 encounters a day.  Often PCs can't choose when and where they would like to rest to get their spells back, or if they get attacked at night.  So the PC that drains all his spells on Wraithstrike will be SOL to the character that can continue to do touch attacks on later encounters.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 7, 2007)

Votan said:
			
		

> This I would disagree with.  Wraithstrike is strong but not so strong that it is better than a 6th level spell. It gives a huge bonus to hit because it is a touch attack.
> 
> However, 6th level makes some things change:
> 
> ...



 @Twinned Scorching Ray: If you're Energy-Subbing on the fly, then you're a sorcerer (and you can only Energy Sub to one element anyway, unless you took it multiple times), otherwise you were blindly guessing.  The 24d6 is distributed in 6 discrete packages, which means that even Energy Resistance 10 is going to bring your average down from 84 to 24.  And even at 84, that's much less than a crazy Wraithstrike Full Attack, and it allows SR.

Wraithstrike (used correctly on a Power Attacking full attack, of course) is clearly superior to both Finger of Death and Disintegrate because it does not allow a Fortitude Save.  Take a look at the Fort saves on most critters, and you'll see why, unfortunately.


----------



## Mort (Jan 7, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Yeah, maybe if you only have 1 or 2 encounters a day.  Often PCs can't choose when and where they would like to rest to get their spells back, or if they get attacked at night.  So the PC that drains all his spells on Wraithstrike will be SOL to the character that can continue to do touch attacks on later encounters.




Arguing that something is balanced because it can be used only a few times per day has  flaws:

First - the ability can be used quite a few more than "a few" times:

At 10th level+
 A sorcerer fighter mage will have this spell available 6+ times per day, which means when they need it they will have it. A wizard fighter/mage will likely only devote 2 of his 5-6 slots to it, but that also means, if they need it they will have it (plus 2nd level pearls of power are well worth it for this kind of situation).

Second – It’s not just a question of how many times per day you can do something, but what you can do, not all encounters per day require large amounts of resources. Kind of the – we need to kill this thing RIGHT NOW, option. It’s pretty big when the “right now” option is available as a 2nd level spell.  As I said above, the balance differential is huge. 1 touch attack is nice but at high levels the psiwar or sword adept has several options that are better. The fact that the high level fighter/mage has a 2nd level spell as one of his best options seems odd. But again let's look at the balance differential (I'll use 15th level because the difference is really shown once 3+ attacks are involved and at this level both the characters have 3+ attacks)


Ok – quick analysis 15th level psychic warrior’s deep impact vs. fighter 1/wizard 6/Eldrich knight 8 using wraithstrike (I’ll try to balance the builds, but must admit psionics is not my strong suit I have little experience with it). 

Psychic Warrior 15: BAB: +11/+6/+1, STR: 16 other stats irrelevant at this time. 
Feats: Weapon Focus: greatsword, psionic weapon, power attack, dodge, speed of thought, mobility, spring attack, deep impact.
Weapon: greatsword +3, to hit: =18/+13/+8
Damage: 2d6+7

Fighter/mage 15(ftr 1/Wiz 6/EK 8): BAB +12/+7/+2 STR: 16 other stats irrelevant at this time.
Feats: Weapon Focus: greatsword, power attack, arcane strike, others not that relevant (gets 7 others I believe).
Weapon greatsword +3, to hit +19/+14/+9
Damage: 2d6+7

Opponent – standard Nalfeshnee Demon (picked out of CR 14 MM monsters (initially did a 14th level comparison))
AC: 27/touch 9 HP:175

Psychic Warrior using deep impact:
Average damage per round: 34.2 (not counting criticals, damage arrived by using full power attack and all three attacks). The psychic warrior can do this, at best, every other round. I’m sure the psychic warrior has some better options than this damage output.

End result: not much other than an angry demon that you are now standing right next to (get around this with a spring attack instead of full attack at minimal cost). Even if the attack came late in the round, the Nalfeshnee is likely still up. I would like to know if there is anything that can add a lot to this combo.

Fighter/mage using wraithstrike.:
Average damage per round (not counting criticals): 81.7, the fighter/mage can do this several consecutive rounds if necessary. That’s  almost 2.5 times better than the psychic warrior for the round.

But that’s not the kicker. As I said the true power comes from the “I need to kill this now” potential. If the fighter/mage needs to, he can arcane strike up to a 6th level spell 2 or so times per day (3 if a specialist). This puts average damage up substantially (partially from the increased chance of any given attack hitting): 98.8 from weapon damage and 39 from arcane strike: total average damage: 137.8. I’m not sure the fighter/mage has a better option available (disintegrate, on the off chance the demon fails its save has an average damage of 105 at this level).

End result: One seriously hurt demon. If the psychic warrior (above) attacked 1st the Nalfeshnee is almost dropped.

P.S. this was all done rather fast and I can’t vouch for the math being perfect, but it’s pretty close.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 8, 2007)

I think the Nalfeshnee is probably dead. After all, the fighter/mage probably has a belt of giant strength to boost his strength to 20 or so and a +1 holy greatsword that's greater magic weaponed up to +3. That will earn him an additional 20 points of damage per hit (including the penetration of DR in the equation). A normal fighter/mage will probably also have boots of speed or bracers of the quick strike for use with that "I need to kill it now" option to really boost the damage.


----------



## Votan (Jan 8, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> @Twinned Scorching Ray: If you're Energy-Subbing on the fly, then you're a sorcerer (and you can only Energy Sub to one element anyway, unless you took it multiple times), otherwise you were blindly guessing.  The 24d6 is distributed in 6 discrete packages, which means that even Energy Resistance 10 is going to bring your average down from 84 to 24.  And even at 84, that's much less than a crazy Wraithstrike Full Attack, and it allows SR.
> 
> Wraithstrike (used correctly on a Power Attacking full attack, of course) is clearly superior to both Finger of Death and Disintegrate because it does not allow a Fortitude Save.  Take a look at the Fort saves on most critters, and you'll see why, unfortunately.




I can see the argument that Wraithstrike may not be necessarily balanced if it took a move action to cast because of Quicken.  However, as a sixth level spell, casting a Quicekend Wraithstrike is a significant use of resources until the very highest levels.  I think that the status of Wraithstrike as a second level spell is extremely telling given that a cogent argument can be made for it to be strong at sixth level.  

Banned, increased casting time or raised in level; I think we could argue the fine details but I do think that this argument supports Wraithstrike as being as too strong for level 2 as written.  

Wraithstrike does fail against some opponents (those with very high touch ACs) and so, like many spells, it can be stronger because it is less reliable.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 8, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Arguing that something is balanced because it can be used only a few times per day has  flaws:
> 
> First - the ability can be used quite a few more than "a few" times:
> 
> ...




6 times a day is basically 6 rounds of combat.  Hardly game breaking.  And again, the kind of character that is using Wraithstrike will also have other spells they'll want to take advantage of as well, so not every 2nd lvl+ slot will be used on Wraithstrike.  And then you factor in Arcane Strike and that will also mitigate it's use.



			
				Mort said:
			
		

> Second – It’s not just a question of how many times per day you can do something, but what you can do, not all encounters per day require large amounts of resources. Kind of the – we need to kill this thing RIGHT NOW, option. It’s pretty big when the “right now” option is available as a 2nd level spell.  As I said above, the balance differential is huge. 1 touch attack is nice but at high levels the psiwar or sword adept has several options that are better. The fact that the high level fighter/mage has a 2nd level spell as one of his best options seems odd. But again let's look at the balance differential (I'll use 15th level because the difference is really shown once 3+ attacks are involved and at this level both the characters have 3+ attacks)
> 
> Ok – quick analysis 15th level psychic warrior’s deep impact vs. fighter 1/wizard 6/Eldrich knight 8 using wraithstrike (I’ll try to balance the builds, but must admit psionics is not my strong suit I have little experience with it).
> 
> ...




I understand your point.  But as I have said (and as your post here demonstrates), once that demon is dead (even if it takes only a round or two to kill), what is your fighter/mage going to do against his mooks or other encounters later in the day?


----------



## shilsen (Jan 8, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> 6 times a day is basically 6 rounds of combat.  Hardly game breaking.  And again, the kind of character that is using Wraithstrike will also have other spells they'll want to take advantage of as well, so not every 2nd lvl+ slot will be used on Wraithstrike.  And then you factor in Arcane Strike and that will also mitigate it's use.




Since you can use higher level spell slots to cast wraithstrike, and doing so will often be better than casting spells of those levels, the character will be able to use it a lot more often.



> I understand your point.  But as I have said (and as your post here demonstrates), once that demon is dead (even if it takes only a round or two to kill), what is your fighter/mage going to do against his mooks or other encounters later in the day?




See above.


----------



## Votan (Jan 8, 2007)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Since you can use higher level spell slots to cast wraithstrike, and doing so will often be better than casting spells of those levels, the character will be able to use it a lot more often.




Here is where a Spontaneous caster really outperforms a prepared caster.  A Wizard needs to decide to devote these high level slots in advance.  A Sorcerer does not but retains the ability to convert spells to Wraithstrike.  

Since Arcane Strike remains a free action instead of a Swift action as far as I can tell, then you could mix the two together for some real fun.  But this is the beginning of a rather serious investment.


----------



## Mort (Jan 8, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> 6 times a day is basically 6 rounds of combat.  Hardly game breaking.  And again, the kind of character that is using Wraithstrike will also have other spells they'll want to take advantage of as well, so not every 2nd lvl+ slot will be used on Wraithstrike.  And then you factor in Arcane Strike and that will also mitigate it's use.?




6 rounds of *extremely* high damage potential is not easy to come by for any class. Remember this is only a 2nd level spell, the fighter/mage will have plenty more where that came from, and barring that plenty of escape options.





			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> I understand your point.  But as I have said (and as your post here demonstrates), once that demon is dead (even if it takes only a round or two to kill), what is your fighter/mage going to do against his mooks or other encounters later in the day?




You've just taken out the BBEG with one 2nd level spell (and maybe 1 other spell if needed) you've got plenty of ammo left for the mooks and later encounters (though the BBEG is often the last encounter so you probably won't need much more) much more than you would have had without wraithstrike.  
Further, since you've taken out the encounter quickly, not only have you saved your own resources, but the cleric probably doesn't have to spend curing resources, the barbarian didn't have to rage, the rogue didn't have to UMD a scroll or a wand, etc. etc. This is likely a large net savings in actual resources.

Resource management is always in issue in 3e, wraithstrike lessens the problem it doesn't make it worse.


----------



## Kmart Kommando (Jan 8, 2007)

If the target of that Wraithstriking Power Attacking Gish has the Elusive Target feat, then the extra damage from Power Attack doesn't count.  Not a complete fix, but it helps.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 8, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> @Twinned Scorching Ray: If you're Energy-Subbing on the fly, then you're a sorcerer (and you can only Energy Sub to one element anyway, unless you took it multiple times), otherwise you were blindly guessing.  The 24d6 is distributed in 6 discrete packages, which means that even Energy Resistance 10 is going to bring your average down from 84 to 24.  And even at 84, that's much less than a crazy Wraithstrike Full Attack, and it allows SR.
> 
> Wraithstrike (used correctly on a Power Attacking full attack, of course) is clearly superior to both Finger of Death and Disintegrate because it does not allow a Fortitude Save.  Take a look at the Fort saves on most critters, and you'll see why, unfortunately.




Agreed.
Let's trick out a 20th level F2/W7/Spllswd1/Eld knt10.  Has about a 100-125 HP.  BA +16/+11/+6/+1.  Str+Magic +9, Misc +3. Arcane Strike 9th lvl spell +9/hit +9d4 dam, Power attack 16/32 with enlarged greatsword.  Of Course haste.

+22/+22/+17/+12/+7 to hit, Damage 3d6(10)+12+32+9d4(23)=77 points on average.

385 points a round if all 5 attacks hit.  An average of 3 1/2 his gives 269 points a round.  Most large to colossal creatures will be hit except on a 1.  It is too good in it's current form.  The spell needs to be changed or baned.  As a player, I want this spell.  That doesn't mean I don't recognize that this spell isn't or shouldn't be baned or changed dramtically.


----------



## Venator (Jan 8, 2007)

never mind.


----------



## brendan candries (Jan 8, 2007)

Wraithstrike is not on the Duskblade's spelllist.


----------



## Seeten (Jan 8, 2007)

Wraithstrike is too good for full attack. It ought to be errata'd to a single attack.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 8, 2007)

brendan candries said:
			
		

> Wraithstrike is not on the Duskblade's spelllist.




Okay, but the way the spell is written and designed it should be.  Personally I think that it should be only your next attack.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 8, 2007)

I think Wraithstrike is fine where it is, and this is once again a case of people thinking it is overpowered without actually experimenting with it in a game to see if it really IS overpowered.  It's only good for a certain type of character (which is not a Duskblade as has been pointed out), and that character often has so many other flaws that it balances things out just fine.

8th or 9th level spell?  Now that is just plain overreacting.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 8, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> Okay, but the way the spell is written and designed it should be.




In my opinion, that was the point.  It's a personal spell, and only on the spell list of classes with low AC, low HP, some low saves, and low BAB.  In other words, it's a melee combat spell usable by classes that are not very good at combat unless built like a Gish, which raises other issues that balance it out.


----------



## Votan (Jan 9, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I think Wraithstrike is fine where it is, and this is once again a case of people thinking it is overpowered without actually experimenting with it in a game to see if it really IS overpowered.  It's only good for a certain type of character (which is not a Duskblade as has been pointed out), and that character often has so many other flaws that it balances things out just fine.
> 
> 8th or 9th level spell?  Now that is just plain overreacting.




I think that making it apply to a single attack will do nothing to overpower it for the classes that have access to it (Sorcerer and Wizard) as they will rarely iterate attacks anyway.  

The other class that has it (Assassin) can certainly use the boost.  

The big issues are with other classes getting access to it (Extra Spell) or to Fighter/mages (who are a specailized build) plus a few strange corner cases (Sublime Chord prestige classed Bard seem able to really appreciate this being added to their spell list).  

But as a second level spell applying to a single attack (or taking a move action to cast) or as a 4th level spell nearly all of my objections are gone.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 9, 2007)

Votan said:
			
		

> I think that making it apply to a single attack will do nothing to overpower it for the classes that have access to it (Sorcerer and Wizard) as they will rarely iterate attacks anyway.
> 
> The other class that has it (Assassin) can certainly use the boost.
> 
> ...




A quickened True Strike which gives +20 to the next strike and also negating cover is a 5th level spell.  This still has to be at least 5th if not 6th or 7th.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 9, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> A quickened True Strike which gives +20 to the next strike and also negating cover is a 5th level spell.  This still has to be at least 5th if not 6th or 7th.



 True strike negates concealment, not cover or total concealment.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 9, 2007)

If the question is about the combination of spells and feats coupled for max impact to create almost insurmountable damage then consider, off the the top of my head,... a rogue/sorcerer w/ hold person.  He can deliver a coupe de grace. Sure the spell has a save but vs. the martial types he would use this against (fighter/barbarian/paladin/ranger/psy warrior) there is a 75% (+/-) of failure, the sneak attack is then done vs. no dex, no shield w/ a +4 to hit and all damage is critical. Then the victim must fort save 10+damage dealt or die, this again would be on average troll impossible to save against.


this just showing equality of overpowering tactics

Bye bye fighter

Blightersbane


----------



## shilsen (Jan 9, 2007)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> True strike negates concealment, not cover or total concealment.



 True Strike does negate total concealment, but you need to pick the right square to attack into.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 9, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> If the question is about the combination of spells and feats coupled for max impact to create almost insurmountable damage then consider, off the the top of my head,... a rogue/sorcerer w/ hold person.  He can deliver a coupe de grace. Sure the spell has a save but vs. the martial types he would use this against (fighter/barbarian/paladin/ranger/psy warrior) there is a 75% (+/-) of failure, the sneak attack is then done vs. no dex, no shield w/ a +4 to hit and all damage is critical. Then the victim must fort save 10+damage dealt or die, this again would be on average troll impossible to save against.
> 
> 
> this just showing equality of overpowering tactics
> ...



 This requires them to fail two Will saves (they get another the next round), takes two rounds to set up, and then gives a Fort save (all the classes you picked as targets have good Fort).  I also find it highly unlikely that a Paladin will fail a save vs Hold Person "75%" of the time with +Cha to saves and Wisdom as their casting stat.  This is a fair tactic--you take a big chance and it may pay off well.  With Wraithstrike against many sorts of opponents, you don't take a chance (well, you take a 95% chance because 1 is an auto-fail)--you just succeed.


----------



## Nail (Jan 9, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> If the question is about the combination of spells and feats coupled for max impact to create almost insurmountable damage then consider, off the the top of my head,... a rogue/sorcerer w/ hold person.



Oooo....bad example.  Hold Person + Coup de Grace has been shown time and again to be only a moderately good tactic at best. It was one of the early topics in the roll out of the 3.5e edition.


----------



## Brother MacLaren (Jan 9, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> Oooo....bad example.  Hold Person + Coup de Grace has been shown time and again to be only a moderately good tactic at best. It was one of the early topics in the roll out of the 3.5e edition.



That's just because of Hold Person's multiple saves, right?.  The save against CdG is nearly impossible to make if the attacker is anywhere near the victim's level.  Basic 1st-level dwarven fighter: 3d10+12 or so, for a Fort DC near 40.


----------



## Mort (Jan 9, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> If the question is about the combination of spells and feats coupled for max impact to create almost insurmountable damage then consider, off the the top of my head,... a rogue/sorcerer w/ hold person.  He can deliver a coupe de grace. Sure the spell has a save but vs. the martial types he would use this against (fighter/barbarian/paladin/ranger/psy warrior) there is a 75% (+/-) of failure, the sneak attack is then done vs. no dex, no shield w/ a +4 to hit and all damage is critical. Then the victim must fort save 10+damage dealt or die, this again would be on average troll impossible to save against.
> 
> 
> this just showing equality of overpowering tactics
> ...




As stated, this is not nearly as powerfull as it sounds, too many saves involved. But yes there are certainly combos out there that can get as nasty as wraithstrike. 
For example a fighter/barbarian with power attack, combat brute and the ability to pounce (you can get it from the Bo9 swords but it'll cost around 3 feats, don't have the book with me for exact count) can get pretty close to the same amount of damage. Then again, I don't think I would allow combat brute in my game, just as I would probably not allow an unmodified wraithstrike.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

Retort #
1. A held target can be hit by others as where wraithstrike only benefits 1. 
2. As far as those classes having good fort saves, yes but not here! As per CDG all damage is crit this coupled with the sneak damage even the mighty save king Paladin will drop more often than not.

There exists many “over powering” alternatives, typically involving the combination of spells and/or tactics.

1) A rogue/sorcerer with rope or chain of entanglement ray of enfeeblement = this is just unfair!
2) Party grappler (fighter type specializing w/ grapple chain of feats) + party rogue = a quick kill albeit pretty messy for the grappler





Blightersbane


			
				Nail said:
			
		

> Oooo....bad example.  Hold Person + Coup de Grace has been shown time and again to be only a moderately good tactic at best. It was one of the early topics in the roll out of the 3.5e edition.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

I agree combat brute is a bit much for 1 feat it should be at least 2 feats.



			
				Mort said:
			
		

> As stated, this is not nearly as powerfull as it sounds, too many saves involved. But yes there are certainly combos out there that can get as nasty as wraithstrike.
> For example a fighter/barbarian with power attack, combat brute and the ability to pounce (you can get it from the Bo9 swords but it'll cost around 3 feats, don't have the book with me for exact count) can get pretty close to the same amount of damage. Then again, I don't think I would allow combat brute in my game, just as I would probably not allow an unmodified wraithstrike.


----------



## Nail (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> There exists many “over powering” alternatives, typically involving the combination of spells and/or tactics.



I'm not disputing that.  I am disagreeing that Hold Person + Coup de Grace is one of them.

"Over powering" typically means "much better than other tactics" or "not balanced with respect to the rest of the game".  _Wraithstrike_ fits that definition.  _Hold Person_ + Coup de Grace (that requires one PC to cast and another to be adjacent and full round action)?  Not so much.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 10, 2007)

Who he has played with Wraithsrtike as written, for a reasonable period of time, and found it unbalanced your game?

Raise your hand, and then explain how it unbalanced your game.

I'm just not buying it.  I see a lot of comparisons to other spells, usually other metamagiced spells (which is a bad example because metamagic is a general application to a specific spell which can be tweaked in it's own right in MANY ways, while this is a specific spell without that general application).  I see a lot of theoretical maybes.  I don't see anyone actually coming with experience with this spell over a decent period of time and reporting it had the negative impact on games that so many people seem to be predicting.

In fact, I think not coincidentally, I see some of the same names in this thread claiming a spell is overpowered that I see in virtually every thread in this forum when there is a claim that something is overpowered.  Some people just think a large portion of the rules, and rules intepretations, are overpowered, and will default to that position on virtually any topic.  I don't fault them for consistently making this claim about various rules, but I do think it's worth pointing out so that a false impression is not made that a majority of people think this rule, or all those other rules, are so overpowered.  Sometimes a minority can be very loud.


----------



## two (Jan 10, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> I'm not disputing that.  I am disagreeing that Hold Person + Coup de Grace is one of them.
> 
> "Over powering" typically means "much better than other tactics" or "not balanced with respect to the rest of the game".  _Wraithstrike_ fits that definition.  _Hold Person_ + Coup de Grace (that requires one PC to cast and another to be adjacent and full round action)?  Not so much.




It's more like, this combo requires:

2 pc's, good timing, 1 adjacent to enemy being targeted... AND
Enemy fails 2 saves, enemy is valid target for spell, enemy SR if any overcome, enemy not immune to holding, etc.

I'd say over 90% of the "monsters" in the MM are not a valid target for Hold Person.  Many others have SR or immunities.  Others simply have great saves and won't likely fail the saves. 

I'd say even if you had the PC's in the required (optimal) positions, you won't have the enemy fail 2 saves more than one time in 5, at best.  And maybe 1 in 3 enemies are a valid target for the spell (and/or you get by the SR or whatever).  So it works about 1 time in 15 vs. 15 average monsters.  I'll be really generous, and say 1 time in 10.

As power combo's go, that is incredibly weak (particularly since you are using up a lot of actions, from 2 PCs).

Wraithstrike, on the other hand... has no saves.  Nothing is immune to melee damage (pretty much).  It takes no action to enable (cast and full attack same round).  You don't need pals around, and don't need the enemy in a particular position.  Hold Person scales up horribly; Wraithstrike actually gets more powerful at higher levels as full round attacks increase and average damage gets crazy.

A non-munchkinized non min/maxxed fighter/mage type could very easily cast his 3rd level spells as Wraithstrikes too...and do 50+ damage a round from level 6 or so up.  That is PLENTY of Wraithstrikes in a day.  If you need more, you would have been dead long ago (Wraithstrike allowed you to survive as long as you have).

Any slightly maximized build would be able to do hundreds of points of damage 10+ times a day.

Is Extended Wraithstrike valid at 3rd level (? 2 rounds of ouch)?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Who he has played with Wraithsrtike as written, for a reasonable period of time, and found it unbalanced your game?
> 
> Raise your hand, and then explain how it unbalanced your game.
> 
> ...



 Mistwell, you're purposely biasing and self-selecting your response when you ask for a group that has played for a 'reasonable amount of time' and found it unbalanced because in this case, it is so atrocious that most groups are going to ban it after only a few sessions if they allow it at all in the first place (and those who don't ban it immediately are going to be groups who don't ban anything and thus will never ban it).  I played with it, and as soon as it appeared in play it was so unbalanced and so obviously unbalanced immediately that everyone in the group wanted it gone).  This is likely the case for most groups that used Wraithstrike, and thus it is only the few groups that don't find the spell unbalanced that will meet your criteria (although I don't know how much time you consider 'reasonable', so maybe I actually do meet it).

My experience was a TPK of the party, except one NPC who ran away, by a Wraithstrike-using NPC gish that was supposed to be a mook encounter (he was the same level as the party and all alone).  He killed the Cleric immediately, survived whatever the Wizard did, the Rogue's non-sneak-attack, and the Barbarian's charge.  He then killed both the Wizard and the Rogue on the next round, and killed the Barbarian on either the following round or the one after. 

I will admit that, for instance, Nail is known for harping on Psionics for being overpowered, and I disagree with him on it, and other people have opinions on what is overpowered and what is not that differs and varies widely.  However, I don't think it is hyperbole to say that out of everything published since 3.5 in supplements by Wizards of the Coast, there are very few (if any) pieces of crunch more universally considered broken than Wraithstrike (note, I didn't say it was completely universal, just more universal than any other.  I also didn't say it was the most broken, just the most-agreed-upon as such).

EDIT: I should probably mention that the horribly-broken problem Wraithstrike happened even after I preemptively made it a Standard, rather than Swift, action (it was Quickened).


----------



## Stalker0 (Jan 10, 2007)

I agree with Rystil, while experience is always the final authority, there are times when you can look at the numbers and find something out of whack.

Let's say I wanted to change fireball to do 2d6 points of damage per level instead of 1d6. With some raw math, you can easily show how fireball is overpowered in this version (basically, it can TPK a 5th level party with one casting).

I'm looking at the numbers, and to me wraithstrike comes out ahead of the game.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I agree with Rystil, while experience is always the final authority, there are times when you can look at the numbers and find something out of whack.
> 
> Let's say I wanted to change fireball to do 2d6 points of damage per level instead of 1d6. With some raw math, you can easily show how fireball is overpowered in this version (basically, it can TPK a 5th level party with one casting).
> 
> I'm looking at the numbers, and to me wraithstrike comes out ahead of the game.



 Yes--for what it's worth, Wraithstrike taught me that whenever I get a hunch like that, I need to playtest the rule extensively first before allowing it.  After doing so with Wraithstrike, I can confidently say that in playtest scenarios, Wraithstrike will let a casual non-optimised gish with Power Attack and Arcane Strike win virtually 100% of battles with a single CR-appropriate opponent (and many opponents with such high CR that they should have beaten you badly) who attacks you with damage (virtually in this case means that it doesn't work against the few critters that get all their AC from something touch won't help with, although you can still win against Monks without using Wraithstrike because they're Monks).  You might lose against something with a save-or-die if you lose initiative and fail your save.  In a party, you're even better off because the enemy might not target you first, not realising you are going to be killing them instantly once you get next to them.  Other than human targets and perhaps buffs if they have time or healing if you're fighting so many things that they actually get to hit you, the party contributes nothing to you because you can kill everything yourself (unless the GM puts in things so strong that they would wipe everyone else away, the eternal dilemma with a broken character).


----------



## shilsen (Jan 10, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Who he has played with Wraithsrtike as written, for a reasonable period of time, and found it unbalanced your game?
> 
> Raise your hand, and then explain how it unbalanced your game.




What about those people who read it, worked out exactly what it would do in the game, and therefore removed it before doing so? Anecdotal evidence is useful to show that people made a mistake in allowing something. That doesn't invalidate the opinions of people who were smart enough to see the problem and not even allow it to occur. 

To turn your question on its head, I'd like to see some anecdotes from people who've used Wraithstrike as written for a reasonable period of time and found it completely acceptable.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

I hear ya! No argument intended. That being said heres my unintended argument. 

Wraithstrike is powerful however only at later levels, heres why. WS is a 2nd level spell so it requires a minimum of a 3rd level Sorcerer or Wizard to cast. In order to be truly effective you need to have multiple attacks with it. As we all know the melee prowess of the arcane casters leaves much to be desired with a meager ½ bab so a straight classes caster will find it hard to benefit from, so multiclassing is the answer, right?  This same multiclassed individual would need to have a bab of 6 or more for a second attack. In order to get a 6 bab and be able to cast WS your looking at a multiclassed 5th level fighter / 3rd level Wizard, that’s an 8th level pc. Over powered not yet! Not until he is an E-Knight or spell sword at about 15th + level where he can really cause some good damage in 1 round. But by then with spells such as save or die in the mix who cares about a guy with limited melee and limited casting ability who can cause good damage for a melee round or two?


Multiclassing is synonomous with compromise which = neither side is truly satisfied in this case nether class is any good

Blightersbane
















			
				Nail said:
			
		

> I'm not disputing that.  I am disagreeing that Hold Person + Coup de Grace is one of them.
> 
> "Over powering" typically means "much better than other tactics" or "not balanced with respect to the rest of the game".  _Wraithstrike_ fits that definition.  _Hold Person_ + Coup de Grace (that requires one PC to cast and another to be adjacent and full round action)?  Not so much.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> I hear ya! No argument intended. That being said heres my unintended argument.
> 
> Wraithstrike is powerful however only at later levels, heres why. WS is a 2nd level spell so it requires a minimum of a 3rd level Sorcerer or Wizard to cast. In order to be truly effective you need to have multiple attacks with it. As we all know the melee prowess of the arcane casters leaves much to be desired with a meager ½ bab so a straight classes caster will find it hard to benefit from, so multiclassing is the answer, right?  This same multiclassed individual would need to have a bab of 6 or more for a second attack. In order to get a 6 bab and be able to cast WS your looking at a multiclassed 5th level fighter / 3rd level Wizard, that’s an 8th level pc. Over powered not yet! Not until he is an E-Knight or spell sword at about 15th + level where he can really cause some good damage in 1 round. But by then with spells such as save or die in the mix who cares about a guy with limited melee and limited casting ability who can cause good damage for a melee round or two?
> 
> ...



 I think you put too much weight on save-or-die.  The crucial part of the picture is that save-or-die is, well, *save*-or-die.  They get a save, and most enemies that are not just NPCs with class levels will make that save.  Wraithstrike is broken because when used to its full potential, it is not save-or-die: it is just die, without a save.

I also think you are underestimating the effects of three attacks (don't forget Haste!) made with Wraithstrike at level 8, but admittedly it gets even more obscene at higher levels.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

Don’t forget with WS a roll to hit is still needed and with split class your bab is going to be lacking sometimes as much as the armor bonus your surpassing via the usage of this spell. Also there are many other ways to buff ones ac other than armor. But I admit at higher levels from a multiclassed pc vs. a armor dependant opponent, in melee range, for 1 round yes this spell can potentially down a strong opponent.

For constant obscene damage try a rogue lycanthrope (tiger) or rogue druid in any big cat form. 4 claw and 1 bite all w/ sneak attack damage + str, assuming success of the sneak attack this overrides dex and related bonuses to ac.

Blightersbane


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> Don’t forget with WS a roll to hit is still needed and with split class your bab is going to be lacking sometimes as much as the armor bonus your surpassing via the usage of this spell. Also there are many other ways to buff ones ac other than armor. But I admit at higher levels from a multiclassed pc vs. a armor dependant opponent, in melee range, for 1 round yes this spell can potentially down a strong opponent.
> 
> For constant obscene damage try a rogue lycanthrope (tiger) or rogue druid in any big cat form. 4 claw and 1 bite all w/ sneak attack damage + str, assuming success of the sneak attack this overrides dex and related bonuses to ac.
> 
> Blightersbane



 You are most certainly not going to be missing more attack bonus than the armour bonus you bypass unless you're fighting something incorporeal or a very underequipped Monk (one who doesn't even bother with Bracers of Armour/Mage Armour or Amulet of Natural Armour).  Until level 15, your basic gish (an Eldritch Knight) is missing 3 attack bonus from a full BAB class.  Afterwards, if she so chooses and eschews more spells, she can continue only missing 3 attack bonus .

And don't forget that you're gaining an attack bonus from Arcane Strike as well.

The Rogue Lycanthrope and Rogue/Druid are once again (like the Hold Person example) examples of significantly weaker choices:  To get the number of attacks you specify, you'll need to charge into a sneak attack (much easier said than done), and the damage is likely to be much less than the Wraithstriker regardless.  

How much do you think the Wraithstriker is doing?  At level 8, unless you can stop her from hitting (and you almost certainly can't afford enough gear to do so by then), she's doing over 123 damage (123 uses a conservative estimate of a vanilla +1 Greatsword, 20 Strength, and no further buffs to damage--just Haste, which is probably less than she'll have).  By 14, it's around 276 (that's with only 22 Strength and a vanilla +3 Greatsword, no further buffs to damage--just Haste). 

If your Rogue-cat example somehow managed a Sneak Pounce and hit with everything (which it won't because it doesn't ignore most of their armour), well, you can't even be a Weretiger or turn into a decent cat at level 8, so we'll have to move directly to level 14 to compare the Weretiger, at which point you'll do 112 Damage assuming 30 Strength.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jan 10, 2007)

One other thing we are forgetting is the inclusion of crits. Increasing the to hit also greatly increases the chance of critical hits, which will do even more damage than basic spells.


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Who he has played with Wraithsrtike as written, for a reasonable period of time, and found it unbalanced your game?
> 
> Raise your hand, and then explain how it unbalanced your game.
> 
> ...




The reason you don't see it come up often is that for it to get truly nasty you need a fighter/mage of 14+ level or so (when they can get 3 attacks per round). Not many campaigns get that high and even fewer have a dedicated fighter/mage.

That said I'm currently playing a fighter/mage. He's currently 10th level and I have wraithstrike, here's the progression:

3rd level (ftr 1/wizard 3): Picked up wraithstrike, tried it out. Only use at this level is because otherwise I can't hit sqaut (+2 BAB +6 with strength/weapon focus and masterwork greatsword).

7th level (ftr1/wizard 5/knight phantom 1): BAB +4 and I have a +1 greatsword(+8 to hit total). wraithstrike can do moderate damage, but I was much better off with scorching ray and slots were better used for things like alter self and false life.

9th level (ftr1/wizard5/knight phantom 3): BAB +6, still same +1 greatsword (+10/+5 to hit, notice two attacks) and picked up arcane strike. Several times at this level managed to get in combat while hasted and blinking. DM got a bit bug eyed when I hit one of his troll-barbarians for 90 HP and did the same to a 2nd one the next round. The same level I took out his BBEG wizard (12th level I believe) when I did approx 114 points of damage (3 attacks, all hit, burned detect scrying into arcane strike since I wasn't using it)(stoneskin? fire/acid/cold resistance? good saves? who cares). As you can see it rapidly escalated at 9th level - and I'm not that optimized. I have a +1 sword and 14 strength. It'll only get higher from here.

Haven't had a chance to use it at 10th level (only combat we've gotten into so far I attacked to subdue).

Make of that what you will, but notice, the lynchpin to the serious damage is the 2nd level wraithstrike.

[edited for proper numbers]


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> One other thing we are forgetting is the inclusion of crits. Increasing the to hit also greatly increases the chance of critical hits, which will do even more damage than basic spells.



 Well, it certainly increases the chance to confirm, but it doesn't really increase crit chance much more than wielding a Blessed weapon, plus I think we want to look at a typical case of Wraithstrike rather than defaulting to chance--there are all sorts of things that will kill the enemy if they roll quite low or you roll quite high, but the key to Wraithstrike's brokenness is that it doesn't require that degree of chance.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 10, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> 9th level (ftr1/wizard5/knight phantom 3): BAB +6, still same +1 greatsword (+10/+5 to hit, notice two attacks) and picked up arcane strike. Several times at this level managed to get in combat while hasted and blinking. DM got a bit bug eyed when I hit one of his troll-barbarians for 90 HP and did the same to a 2nd one the next round. The same level I took out his BBEG wizard (12th level I believe) when I did approx 114 points of damage (3 attacks, all hit, burned detect scrying into arcane strike since I wasn't using it)(stoneskin? fire/acid/cold resistance? good saves? who cares). As you can see it rapidly escalated at 9th level - and I'm not that optimized. I have a +1 sword and 14 strength. It'll only get higher from here.




And how did your other encounters go that day?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> And how did your other encounters go that day?



 Probably pretty well, considering he only needed to use one 4th-level spell (burnt for the AS), one 3rd-level spell (the buff), and one 2nd (Wraithstrike, of course) out of his entire arsenal to kill the Party Level +3 BBEG.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 10, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Probably pretty well, considering he only needed to use one 4th-level spell (burnt for the AS), one 3rd-level spell (the buff), and one 2nd (Wraithstrike, of course) out of his entire arsenal to kill the Party Level +3 BBEG.




Assuming he has the "standard" 4 person party, and they are all the same level...  A single 12th-level character is hardly a challenge for a party of 4 9th-level characters.  Plus we don't know any more specifics (was the BBEG prepared?  Did they sneak up on him?  How did you get to do a full attack on a wizard?  etc. etc.)  If he had mooks with him, or there were encounters before or after him, that is a different story.  Hence my question of "how did your other encounters go that day?"

I'm not arguing that he didn't do a lot of damage, but I don't think he did that much damage for a melee-type of that level.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Assuming he has the "standard" 4 person party, and they are all the same level...  A single 12th-level character is hardly a challenge for a party of 4 9th-level characters.  Plus we don't know any more specifics (was the BBEG prepared?  Did they sneak up on him?  How did you get to do a full attack on a wizard?  etc. etc.)  If he had mooks with him, or there were encounters before or after him, that is a different story.  Hence my question of "how did your other encounters go that day?"
> 
> I'm not arguing that he didn't do a lot of damage, but I don't think he did that much damage for a melee-type of that level.



 Actually, I'm not even arguing he did that much more damage than a melee type of that level *could* do.  I've seen that much damage from a Power Attacking Barbarian of the same level.  The problem lies in the fact that the Wraithstriker's success was basically guaranteed, and the Barbarian only did that much damage becuase he got consistently high rolls.


----------



## molonel (Jan 10, 2007)

We allowed one character in our WLD the ability to manufacture an item. He was our frontline fighter. People around the table perked up and took notice during the first combat he used it. Maybe it was a quirk, says I. Then, after the second combat, everyone said, "Holy s***! I gotta get me one of those!"

That's all the evidence I need. Wraithstrike is banned in all of my games. If that's not sufficient logic for anyone else, oh well.


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> And how did your other encounters go that day?




Those were the "big" encounters on their respective day, the others required significantly less resources (The wizard encounter, between wizard and goons was around CR 15 against our 9-10 level party) as such I had no problem going "full bore" against these encounters. That's not meta-game thinking - it was balatantly obvious to the group that if the wizard encounter was beaten the bad guys were broken and we could be relatively relaxed. This is the true power of having a big gun; when you need it it's there.

Also, you seem to be implying this was some huge spell expenditure. It really wasn't.

As a 9th level specialist (diviner) wizard with 16 int at the time I have: 5/6/5/4/2 for spells. The troll encounter involved 1 scorching ray and 2 wraithstrikes (false life already up, it lasts 9 hours!). I had a huge amount left for anything later.

The wizard encounter involved a large amount of spells. But this isn't some constantly monster generating dungeon; we had plenty of opportunity to retreat and regroup if things didn't go our way (as it stood, I didn't even need the dimension door I had memorized). Also I have scribe scroll, and made sure to be prepared for emergencies (dimension door, expeditious retreat, a few buff spells etc.) later in the day would not have been a problem, even if it came up.


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Assuming he has the "standard" 4 person party, and they are all the same level...  A single 12th-level character is hardly a challenge for a party of 4 9th-level characters.  Plus we don't know any more specifics (was the BBEG prepared?  Did they sneak up on him?  How did you get to do a full attack on a wizard?  etc. etc.)  If he had mooks with him, or there were encounters before or after him, that is a different story.  Hence my question of "how did your other encounters go that day?"
> 
> I'm not arguing that he didn't do a lot of damage, but I don't think he did that much damage for a melee-type of that level.




sigh: as I said it was the 12th level caster plus several goons. I don't have my notes with me but it was something like: 4 Half-Orc barbarians ( 6th level barb/fighters? not sure) 1 human lieutenant (around 6th level?) the human captain (7th) and the mage's apprentice (7th level I think). They were prepared for us (the mages in particular had several protections up), but we had the advantage of position (they had to open a door to get to us).  The true turning point was battlefield control because I managed to get off an Evard’s black tentacles on the lieutenant and captain (off a scroll) and the pixie managed to touch of idiocy the mage’s apprentice. 

The group at the time
Human Ftr 1/Cleric 8
Pixie Sorceress 5 (9th level character)
Me ( human ftr 1/wiz 5/knight phantom 3)
Fighter 8 (He is a pole-arm specialist: previous character became and NPC after succumbing to full lycanthropy, so he came in 1 level lower).

I’d say I was doing significantly more damage than the fighter when necessary in the encounter.

When I ran my ebberron campaign the 10th level barb could easily do 60 per round, if lucky could push 80, but only with a critical on his great axe could he do better than the 114 I mentioned.

Looking at it, if you have a truly optimized fighter, they can approach the damage, but against certain monsters – Dragons, High CR demons/devils where the touch AC is far below the regular AC, they will not be able to get anywhere near it.

edited for clarity and to tone down response


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

continuing along the line of devils advocate 

8th level (5Ftr /3Wiz)
greatsword = 2d6 dam
+5 dam from 20 str 
X 3 attacks assuming haste has been cast and all attacks are successful
= a lot less than the mega damage you quoted? what am I over looking or unaware of in you example?


edit: I JUST SAW USING ARCANE STRIKE ON OTHER POST, STILL IT'S NOW UP TOO 3 SPELLS)

Blightersbaneb


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> continuing along the line of devils advocate
> 
> 8th level (5Ftr /3Wiz)
> greatsword = 2d6 dam
> ...



 You're missing quite a lot, actually.  First, you forgot 1.5x Str bonus to damage on a two-handed weapon.  Next, full Power Attack--Wraithstrike means you hit anyway.  Finally, Arcane Strike brings in the last bit.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

what forms of AC buffs are not effected by wraithstrike? shields, rings, dex, dodge, natural armor? what about fortification armor? I dont have access to books, please advise

Bb


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> continuing along the line of devils advocate
> 
> 8th level (5Ftr /3Wiz)
> greatsword = 2d6 dam
> ...




You're overlooking the wraithstrike spell and Arcane strike, the whole point of discussion.

breaking it down: Ftr 1/Wiz 5/knight phantom 3 (9th level) (going from memory so I doubt it's 100% accurate, but it's close):
3 attacks that hit:
Damage from 3 attacks (2d6 each): 24
damage from strength and weapon (calculated 7, str: was 18 at the time): 21
Full power attack (I'm only trying to hit a touch AC and arcane strike gives me a +4 to hit anyway): 36
Arcane strike 4th level spell 3 attacks:30

Total damage: 111

edit: just to point out that the power attack damage will go up by 2/level for every attack so If you have 4 attacks and are 19th level power attack damage is now an extra 32  per attack (instead of the 12 I was getting) or 128 for 4 attacks.


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> what forms of AC buffs are not effected by wraithstrike? shields, rings, dex, dodge, natural armor? what about fortification armor? I dont have access to books, please advise
> 
> Bb




Wraithstrike = touch AC only -no armor bonus, no shield bonus, no natural armor bonus. If you have blink or invisibility active - no dexterity bonus either. So most of the time you're aiming to hit AC 10-15 even on truly nasty monsters.

Just as an example: standard fire giant regular AC:23, touch AC: 8 
or how about a balor: Regular AC 35, Touch AC: 16. 

It's not a small difference.


----------



## Mystery Man (Jan 10, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Who he has played with Wraithsrtike as written, for a reasonable period of time, and found it unbalanced your game?
> 
> Raise your hand, and then explain how it unbalanced your game.
> 
> ...




It is absolutely, rediculously overpowered. Having firsthand experience with it _in game_ I can tell you that it is unbalancing especially coupled with feats that allow a player to cast it on himself in perpetuity. IE Persistent Spell. This player will overshadow other players and walk through most encounters involving combat far too easily for the CR. I have had first hand experience with this and can without any remorse ban the spell permanently for all time from my game.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 10, 2007)

whats good for the goose....


----------



## Mystery Man (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> whats good for the goose....





Pithy.


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> whats good for the goose....




It's ridiculously easy for the DM to kill the PC's. The goal is to challenge them, not find more ways to kill them.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 10, 2007)

Are you guys almost exclusively fighting stuff with AC's provided by armor and natural armor, instead of dodge bonuses and size and those kinds of defenses?  In my experience, there are a TON of opponants that see little or no harm from wraithstrike.  

In addition, y'all seem to be describing wratihstrike as an auto-hit.  And yet, has anyone ever described ray spells as auto-hits?  Melee touch attacks from other spells as auto-hits? Warlocks use a touch attack as their primary weapon, is that an auto-hit too? Unless your opponant has a lot of armor or natural armor, wraitstrike doesn't even do a whole lot for you, given you have a lower BAB than most melee combatants.

Lots of spells (and other abilities) look very powerful on paper, and rotten in practice.  Use wraitstrike in practice, and I think most people will find it isn't nearly as bad as what it seems.  Same thing that happened with Warlocks...tons of people paniced about them being "overpowered" and didn't allow them in their games because of rumors of them being overpowered.  A few allowed them in for one or two battles and concluded they were overpowered (because it made for new tactics), without giving them a reasonable chance over a period of time.  And only in time was it discovered (by most) that warlocks were not only fine, but perhaps a tad bit underpowered.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 10, 2007)

Mystery Man said:
			
		

> It is absolutely, rediculously overpowered. Having firsthand experience with it _in game_ I can tell you that it is unbalancing especially coupled with feats that allow a player to cast it on himself in perpetuity. IE Persistent Spell. This player will overshadow other players and walk through most encounters involving combat far too easily for the CR. I have had first hand experience with this and can without any remorse ban the spell permanently for all time from my game.





Well of course wraithstrike is overpowered if you allow it to be persisted.  Persistant spell, particularly with divine metamagic, IS the most overpowered combo that is typically allowed in games!

If your conclusions are based on an epxerience involving this spell persisted, then you have not given the spell a fair chance.


----------



## Mort (Jan 10, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Are you guys almost exclusively fighting stuff with AC's provided by armor and natural armor, instead of dodge bonuses and size and those kinds of defenses?  In my experience, there are a TON of opponants that see little or no harm from wraithstrike.
> 
> In addition, y'all seem to be describing wratihstrike as an auto-hit.  And yet, has anyone ever described ray spells as auto-hits?  Melee touch attacks from other spells as auto-hits? Warlocks use a touch attack as their primary weapon, is that an auto-hit too? Unless your opponant has a lot of armor or natural armor, wraitstrike doesn't even do a whole lot for you, given you have a lower BAB than most melee combatants.
> 
> Lots of spells (and other abilities) look very powerful on paper, and rotten in practice.  Use wraitstrike in practice, and I think most people will find it isn't nearly as bad as what it seems.  Same thing that happened with Warlocks...tons of people paniced about them being "overpowered" and didn't allow them in their games because of rumors of them being overpowered.  A few allowed them in for one or two battles and concluded they were overpowered (because it made for new tactics), without giving them a reasonable chance over a period of time.  And only in time was it discovered (by most) that warlocks were not only fine, but perhaps a tad bit underpowered.




Nope sometimes you just see that something is too good in play. As far as auto hit - yes it is because of arcane strike - the whole point is that it lynchpins a really powerful combo not that it's just powerful in itself (for example use blink or improved invisibility and Dex bonus is out too: that big nasty Balor without DEX touch AC of 9, Solar Touch AC 14, 9 without Dex, Titan - touch AC 8).

As for over reacting - hey I'm the one playing the fighter/mage and I just see how ridiculous it will be in a few levels. It's not quite horrible now, but with every level this one second level spell will increasingly be the best option. Heck if I wanted to really break it, I'd take the normally sub optimal extend spell and as a 3rd level spell get the benefits for 2 rounds with every casting.

I'll spell it out: wraithstrike is rotten at low levels but (for ftr/mages) gets progressively better until it's absolutely huge. The main reason is simple: Touch AC's don't scale for most opponents they are just as bad at low levels as high levels; as opposed to regular AC's which go through the roof.  If something actually has a good touch AC, well there are plenty of other good options for the exception.

Other stuff:
Warlock in play - no problem
Warblade in play - much better on paper than in actual play, though quite fun, same goes for the Crusader (though they outperform the warblade).


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 10, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Are you guys almost exclusively fighting stuff with AC's provided by armor and natural armor, instead of dodge bonuses and size and those kinds of defenses?  In my experience, there are a TON of opponants that see little or no harm from wraithstrike.
> 
> In addition, y'all seem to be describing wratihstrike as an auto-hit.  And yet, has anyone ever described ray spells as auto-hits?  Melee touch attacks from other spells as auto-hits? Warlocks use a touch attack as their primary weapon, is that an auto-hit too? Unless your opponant has a lot of armor or natural armor, wraitstrike doesn't even do a whole lot for you, given you have a lower BAB than most melee combatants.
> 
> Lots of spells (and other abilities) look very powerful on paper, and rotten in practice.  Use wraitstrike in practice, and I think most people will find it isn't nearly as bad as what it seems.  Same thing that happened with Warlocks...tons of people paniced about them being "overpowered" and didn't allow them in their games because of rumors of them being overpowered.  A few allowed them in for one or two battles and concluded they were overpowered (because it made for new tactics), without giving them a reasonable chance over a period of time.  And only in time was it discovered (by most) that warlocks were not only fine, but perhaps a tad bit underpowered.



 Uhhh, I think the consensus is that the Warlock's Eldritch Blast basically _is_ an autohit if the Warlock is working at it (Halflings who pump Dex and take Point Blank or Weapon Focus or both, for instance), and a Wraithstrike gish will typically have a higher bonus to the attack than the Warlock by a substantial margin (higher BAB, enhancement bonus to weapon attack rolls, Arcane Strike).  Doesn't mean it's overpowered, though, as it isn't very strong (and it also allows SR if you don't use Vitriolic Blast, which then allows Acid Resist).  For what it's worth, I never for a moment considered Warlocks to be overpowered.  The people who thought they were are like the people who thought Mystic Theurge was overpowered when they saw it on paper.  For both Warlock and Mystic Theurge, I could tell they were perfectly balanced, if not a tad weak.  For Divine Metamagic + Persistant, I could tell it was broken beyond belief.  Same with Wraithstrike.

As for "exclusively fighting stuff with AC provided by armour and natural armour", first, they don't need to get _all_ their AC from those places, since as long as they get a large enough amount of AC from those sources, they're screwed on the Wraithstrike.  Second, if you take a look at the monster books, you'll see that very few creatures, apart from incorporeal ones, have a substantial Touch AC that is also substnatial compared to their total AC (Having a low AC that is all there for Touch doesn't matter--you don't even need Wraithstrike to kill that).  Sure, some of them do, but the vast majority do not.  That leaves NPCs with PC classes such as Monk, but if they're not using magic items that you can cut through with Wraithstrike, you'll hit those anyway.  

The key point, however, is that just because a few things are immune to it doesn't mean it isn't completely broken.  Imagine the Rogue's Sneak Attack instantly killed its target with no save, SR, etc.  The fact that you can't Sneak Attack constructs, oozes, plants, or undead would not stop it from being broken (and the number of monsters that can't be Sneak Attacked is much higher than the number of monsters that aren't screwed when you Wraithstrike).


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 10, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Nope sometimes you just see that something is too good in play. As far as auto hit - yes it is because of arcane strike - the whole point is that it lynchpins a really powerful combo not that it's just powerful in itself (for example use blink or improved invisibility and Dex bonus is out too: that big nasty Balor without DEX touch AC of 9, Solar Touch AC 14, 9 without Dex, Titan - touch AC 8).




Coulding scorching ray and invisibility or blink do you just as well however? Vampiric Touch? Arcane strike plus invisibility makes lots of melee touch attack spells very powerful, but nobody complains about those spells or makes outrageous exagerations like "should be a ninth level spell instead of a second level spell"!



> As for over reacting - hey I'm the one playing the fighter/mage and I just see how ridiculous it will be in a few levels. It's not quite horrible now, but with every level this one second level spell will increasingly be the best option. Heck if I wanted to really break it, I'd take the normally sub optimal extend spell and as a 3rd level spell get the benefits for 2 rounds with every casting.




As it becomes a problem, I strongly suspect you will find it starts to level out.  Just watch.



> I'll spell it out: wraithstrike is rotten at low levels but (for ftr/mages) gets progressively better until it's absolutely huge. The main reason is simple: Touch AC's don't scale for most opponents they are just as bad at low levels as high levels; as opposed to regular AC's which go through the roof.




And I will spell it out...regular ACs don't actually keep up at the rate you seem to think they do.  Normal ACs start to level off, and most nasty things start to use other things to protect themselves than armor and natural armor.  We have long debated this topic on these forums, and I think we reached as much consensus as can be reached that ACs don't scale like attack bonuses scale at higher levels.  

For a while, wraithstrike will seem great.  Eventually, it will become sub-optimal.  Which means for the career of your character, it will not be all that great.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 11, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Uhhh, I think the consensus is that the Warlock's Eldritch Blast basically _is_ an autohit if the Warlock is working at it (Halflings who pump Dex and take Point Blank or Weapon Focus or both, for instance)




No, it isn't.  Not even close.  Almost nobody thinks there is consensus on warlock's eldritch blast being an auto-hit in the overwhelming majority of characters out there.  If you think some perfect combo makes it an auto-hit, that doesn't mean it's an auto-hit abilty, it just means you can create a power combo to make it more powerful (which you can do for just about anything).



> and a Wraithstrike gish will typically have a higher bonus to the attack than the Warlock by a substantial margin (higher BAB, enhancement bonus to weapon attack rolls, Arcane Strike).




Warlock can multiclass just like the wizard or sorceror.  Compare apples to apples.



> Doesn't mean it's overpowered, though, as it isn't very strong (and it also allows SR if you don't use Vitriolic Blast, which then allows Acid Resist).




It's stronger than most weapons that a gish would have, in play.



> As for "exclusively fighting stuff with AC provided by armour and natural armour", first, they don't need to get _all_ their AC from those places, since as long as they get a large enough amount of AC from those sources, they're screwed on the Wraithstrike.




Not really.  We are talking about a relatively small increase.  And increase which is almost porportional to the BAB decrease you experience by doing this trick, and still having enough of these spells to make it a tactic as opposed to a couple of times a day trick.



> Second, if you take a look at the monster books, you'll see that very few creatures, apart from incorporeal ones, have a substantial Touch AC that is also substnatial compared to their total AC (Having a low AC that is all there for Touch doesn't matter--you don't even need Wraithstrike to kill that).




In play, with experience, a LOT of stuff depends on things that wraithstrike doesn't help with.  It might be a dodge bonus, it might be a size bonus, it might be a spell, it might be an ability, it might be movement to somewhere else (full cover, or teleporting, or flight, or burrow, etc...), whatever.  But in practice, armor and natural armor is not really as all-critical as you make it out to be.  Particularly at high levels, which is when wraithstrike is "supposed" to be really useful.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 11, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Coulding scorching ray and invisibility or blink do you just as well however? Vampiric Touch? Arcane strike plus invisibility makes lots of melee touch attack spells very powerful, but nobody complains about those spells or makes outrageous exagerations like "should be a ninth level spell instead of a second level spell"!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 Those spells do not hit for nearly as much as a Power Attacking Wraithstriker, even with Arcane Strike.  Vampiric Touch?  Scorching Ray?  Trivial damage.  It doesn't matter if you're guaranteed to hit.  If all of them hit (and they probably will) Scorching Ray does 42 damage on average at level 11 when you get your third ray, but each of those is subject to SR and Fire Resistance.  This is so far inferior to a Wraithstrike full attack that I simply can't understand your comparison.  You could Twin it, then Quicken another one, and you'd still do less with the Scorching Rays, even without accounting for Fire Resistance and SR.    

As to your assertion that Wraithstrike starts to level out at higher levels, since the one time I used it (and a good deal of my playtesting) was at a higher level, I can most definitely assure you that it only gets worse and worse.


----------



## Mort (Jan 11, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> As it becomes a problem, I strongly suspect you will find it starts to level out.  Just watch.
> .




Huh? the ENTIRE problem with wraithstrike is it gets better and better the higher level you go. Look at the high CR monsters in the monster manual. As a whole - big AC's -  tiny touch AC's, and that's where wraithstrike exells. As you get higher level the damage only gets bigger.

I'm curious, do you have experience with wraithstrike at high levels? Please share.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 11, 2007)

Huh, your arguments about the Warlock are making no sense.  Let me get this straight:



> No, it isn't. Not even close. Almost nobody thinks there is consensus on warlock's eldritch blast being an auto-hit in the overwhelming majority of characters out there. If you think some perfect combo makes it an auto-hit, that doesn't mean it's an auto-hit abilty, it just means you can create a power combo to make it more powerful (which you can do for just about anything).




When the warlock (and to be clear, a Warlock who is trying to be good with Eldritch Blasts, not a Warlock who specialises in other invocations and has 10 Dex or something) shoots an Eldritch Blast, it is expected to hit on the overwhelming majority of cases.  Please point me to someone other than you who doesn't agree with this if you don't agree, or explain why not with examples.



> Warlock can multiclass just like the wizard or sorceror. Compare apples to apples.




Huh?  I don't understand why you would possibly bring that up.  A Warlock that takes levels in Fighter for the BAB so they hit with the Eldritch Blast is being supremely idiotic because they lose out on Eldritch Blast damage by doing so at a rate of 2d6 damage for every +1 BAB.  If you'd like to suggest that I'm somehow robbing the Warlock of its chance to shine by suggesting that it wouldn't multiclass into Fighter for the attack bonus boost, I think you're missing the point.  Sure, a Warlock can multiclass, but the Warlock doesn't _want_ to.  



> It's stronger than most weapons that a gish would have, in play.




Huh?  No it isn't.  I'm trying to understand your reasoning here.  I don't want to ascribe motives for such a statement, but unless you forgot that Eldritch Blast is only one hit, I don't see how you could possibly think that an Eldritch Blast will do more than a full attack that hits with all the attacks.  In fact, your statement is provably false if you compare the damage on Eldritch Blast to the damage on a Power Attack Greatsword full attack at any level (in fact, it is lower than the damage of a _single_ Greatsword attack at full Power Attack at any level).



> Not really. We are talking about a relatively small increase. And increase which is almost porportional to the BAB decrease you experience by doing this trick, and still having enough of these spells to make it a tactic as opposed to a couple of times a day trick.




I think you haven't looked carefully enough at the monsters, then.  The increase for a large number of them is simply huge.  Seriously, take a look.  You will be surprised.



> In play, with experience, a LOT of stuff depends on things that wraithstrike doesn't help with. It might be a dodge bonus, it might be a size bonus, it might be a spell, it might be an ability, it might be movement to somewhere else (full cover, or teleporting, or flight, or burrow, etc...), whatever. But in practice, armor and natural armor is not really as all-critical as you make it out to be. Particularly at high levels, which is when wraithstrike is "supposed" to be really useful.




Dodge bonuses are few and far between (you may mean Dex bonus--that's the main source of AC that avoids Wraithstrike, that and deflection, possibly from a Ring of Protection or its ilk).  Size bonus is negligible if you negate the rest--it is almost certainly no more than +2 (very very few things that matter are Diminutive or smaller).  Moving away is a bit of a cop out option--that suggests that the only way to stop the Wraithstrike PC is to constantly flee, every round if necessary, to prevent a full attack.  And at high levels, even this chicken strategy can be avoided with abilities that add Pounce, etc.

Frankly, despite your calls to everyone else that they need to play with Wraithstrike more at high levels, it is clear that you are the one who has not played with it at high  levels based on some of the comments you make (and you never claimed you did, I know, so it isn't any dishonesty on your part, more of a pot calling the kettle black thing), or if you did, you didn't have anyone using it on a Power Attacking gish.


----------



## Mystery Man (Jan 11, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Well of course wraithstrike is overpowered if you allow it to be persisted.  Persistant spell, particularly with divine metamagic, IS the most overpowered combo that is typically allowed in games!
> 
> If your conclusions are based on an epxerience involving this spell persisted, then you have not given the spell a fair chance.




Yeah I have. Even without it, it's ludicrously overpowered. Ludicrous I tell you!


----------



## Thurbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Could you balance out the spell by saying that the weapon is basicallly immaterial, you don't get any Strength or Power Attack bonuses to damage?


----------



## two (Jan 11, 2007)

*3.0 haste*

This reminds me - a lot - of the old 3.0 haste discussions that raged.

One excellent way to get to the root of it is this... (thinking about haste now):

If 3.0 haste were stripped from 3.0 entirely - never existed - and then suddenly a player came to you with 3.0 haste and asked if it was a reasonable 3rd level spell, what would your line of logic be?

3.0 haste:  no action to cast (as you immediately get another partial)
3.0 haste:  allows 2 spells/round or partial charge/full attack for the fighters

To try to judge an appropriate spell level, what does it take to get 2 spells off in a round.  Quicken, bump up 4 levels, or ... contingency... time stop... various other high level combos.

Yet you cast 3.0 haste and can suddenly cast 2 spells a round with no penalty?  (one is not at +4 spell levels or anything).  

And it lasts X level rounds?  Plus has other effects (partial charge + full attack was always gross for melee guys).

As a GM you would laugh, and call it a level 8 or 9 spell.  Honestly, if 3.0 haste never existed, then was brought in as a level 9 spell, it would STILL be taken fairly regularly by high level casters.  It compares well to time stop:  time stop lets you do it in one round, while haste of course spreads out the pain over X rounds.  Or, haste, THEN time stop... ha ha.

++++++++

So do the same with Wraithstrike.  Act like it never existed. Have a player offer it as a 2nd level spell.  As a GM, do you laugh him out of the room?

You do.

Comparing to Deep Impact (the best parallel) gives a spell level of 4-5 for a single attack; for full attacks... what... 7-8 level?  As an immediate action + full attacks...that's ridiculous.

++++++++

3.0 haste was "slap me in the face" way too powerful, yet some people argued it was ok in "their campaigns."  That's not what we are talking about.  Overall, it was a very poor spell for the game as a whole.  It was used far too much, and it was much too good for any caster not to select.

I feel the same about Wraithstrike.  So trivially easy to abuse and maximize, and the insta-cast feature is absurd.

Plus, there is NO way to avoid TPK vs. dragons at this point.  If the dragons are wise and smart - and they are - they will be using Wraithstrike all the time.  With full power attack.  I mean, really, every round they can.  They will absolutely kill any PC with 2-3 hits, and they WILL hit.  Why would a DRAGON not always cast this spell?  What, he's waiting for the other 3-4 adventuring parties to come attack him?  

Why would a PC NOT cast 3.0 haste? There were times...but overall, combats always featured haste.  Why would a melee PC or monster that COULD cast Wraithstrike (or have it in an item) not use it as often as possible?  No downside.  They would.  

Makes for a very binary game.


----------



## Votan (Jan 11, 2007)

Let us consider some High CR critters and their armor classes.  

1) Great Wyrm Red Dragon: 41 (-8 size, +39 natural), touch 2, flat-footed 41

2) Balor Demon: 35 (-1 size, +7 Dex, +19 natural), touch 16, flat-footed 28

3) Iron Golem: 30 (-1 size, -1 Dex, +22 natural), touch 8, flat-footed 30

4) Colossal Monstrous Spider: 22 (-8 size, +2 Dex, +18 natural), touch 4, flat-footed 20

5) Elder Air Elemental: 27 (-2 size, +11 Dex, +8 natural), touch 19, flat-footed 16

6) Titan: 38 (-2 size, +19 natural, +11 +4 half-plate armor), touch 8, flat-footed 38

7) Dread Wraith: 25 (-1 size, +9 Dex, +7 deflection), touch 25, flat-footed 16

So of seven high CR encounters (ranging from 11 to 20+), only one isn't affected by wratihstrike.  The best 2 ACs (41 and 38) become 2 and 8 with wraithstrike.  

The average "to hit" bonus provided by this spell against this list of challenges is: +19!  

It's not a systematic sample of the MM critters but there is a pretty strong pattern here.  It is also interesting that the cases with weaker benefit often had lower overall AC (Dread Wraith and Air Elemental).  

This is much better than magic swords, for example, even if you split the damage.  Sure, occasionally it fails.  But it is very, very good if the character is able to get the spell in a pure fighter build (extra spell for a Ranger, for example, or imagine a cleric) and even worse persisted.  

What I think balances it for a pure mage is that they are not focused on attack (doing little damage with strikes) and it takes feats to get very powerful (Arcane Strike, Power Attack or Combat Expertise, Extra Spell, Persistent Spell).  

But it does a lot for the Fighter/Mage.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 11, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Huh, your arguments about the Warlock are making no sense...
> ...Please point me to someone other than you who doesn't agree with this if you don't agree, or explain why not with examples...
> ...Huh?  I don't understand why you would possibly bring that up.
> ...I don't want to ascribe motives for such a statement, but unless you forgot...
> ...



*Let's play a game! The name of the contest is "don't rudely challenge other posters or make arguments personal." The winner gets everyone's appreciation, and the loser gets a ticked off moderator.*

Seriously, gang. There's no way for the subject of that post to read it and not get defensive and even more snarky.* It's easy to challenge ideas without taking digs at the people behind them. I'd appreciate it if everyone would work harder on that.

* Mistwell, prove me wrong - when you read it, don't get defensive and even more snarky!


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 11, 2007)

A few points here:

1. Arcane strike works on weapons, not spells. Using arcane strike to power an ordinary touch attack is either the result of a very unusual tactical situation or a player who wants to waste their spells.

2. Vampiric touch and nearly all other touch spells pale in comparison to the amount of damage an arcane striking power attacker will dish out. A near autohit on 35 damage at 20th level? (Subject to spell resistance, etc) Not such a big deal. A near autohit on 200+ damage at 16th level? That's a big deal. (Figure of 400 arrived at by: +4 holy flaming greatsword, 18 strength, Power Attack for 13=53.5 average damage per hit x3 attacks+haste attack). Stack on Arcane Strike and fires of purity for another 35 damage per hit bringing the total to about 340 points of damage. That's a much bigger deal than vampiric touch or any touch attack spell short of 3.0 harm. (Heck, since there's no save, it's probably a bigger deal than 3.0 harm).

3. If you're taking invisibility or blink as the comparison point, neither one will make anything other than a touch attack an auto-hit.
A. Touch attacks are pretty much autohits anyway at high level except in unusual circumstances
B. Touch spells don't do nearly as much damage.
C. The attack bonus benefit that they provide to touch attacks is generally small to moderate--on the order of 0-5 points with 1 or 2 points of bonus being normal. On the other hand, the attack bonus provided by wraithstrike is usually in the neighborhood of +18.



			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> Coulding scorching ray and invisibility or blink do you just as well however? Vampiric Touch? Arcane strike plus invisibility makes lots of melee touch attack spells very powerful, but nobody complains about those spells or makes outrageous exagerations like "should be a ninth level spell instead of a second level spell"!


----------



## BeholderBurger (Jan 11, 2007)

I have a severe problem with wraithstrike. I am running Red hand of Doom and basically a 9th level Sorcerer took out a CR10 red dragon without breaking a sweat due to it. He polymorphed into a hag, cast fly met it in hand to hand and wraithstriked twice. With such a low Touch AC (even with Shield and mage armour) the dragon was easy to hit with all attacks and with rend devestated the dragon. This was with virtually no intervention from the party or their cohorts.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jan 11, 2007)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *Let's play a game! The name of the contest is "don't rudely challenge other posters or make arguments personal." The winner gets everyone's appreciation, and the loser gets a ticked off moderator.*
> 
> Seriously, gang. There's no way for the subject of that post to read it and not get defensive and even more snarky.* It's easy to challenge ideas without taking digs at the people behind them. I'd appreciate it if everyone would work harder on that.
> 
> * Mistwell, prove me wrong - when you read it, don't get defensive and even more snarky!



 My apologies--I was trying very hard to try to be polite and focus on the points here, even though the arguments didn't make sense to me, but I obviously failed handily.  My failure means I should probably stop posting in this thread then, but everyone else has it well in hand, so I'm probably not needed anyways.


----------



## Votan (Jan 11, 2007)

BeholderBurger said:
			
		

> I have a severe problem with wraithstrike. I am running Red hand of Doom and basically a 9th level Sorcerer took out a CR10 red dragon without breaking a sweat due to it. He polymorphed into a hag, cast fly met it in hand to hand and wraithstriked twice. With such a low Touch AC (even with Shield and mage armour) the dragon was easy to hit with all attacks and with rend devestated the dragon. This was with virtually no intervention from the party or their cohorts.




This is a good example, actually.  I had forgotten about Polymorph but the syngergy with Polymorph and Wraithstrike is high.  

I think I am convinced that the spell should affect a single attack.  It could stay a swift action.  At the level it is obtained (3rd for wizards, 4th for Sorcerers) it should do what it is intended to do (allow these classes to land a melee attack in a desperate situation) and applies to all attacks from these classes until 11th level (1st iterative attack for these classes).  The *purpose* of the spell is preserved.  

But then it would not be easy to combine with a series of iterative attacks (see Elder Basilisk's example for a Fighter/mage) or Polymorphing into a form with many attacks (as above).  It would also make me less worried about migration to other spell lists (instead, i would encourage adding this version of wrathstrike to the Paladin and Ranger -- the latter getting a ranged version).  

How to do this is less obvious.  

1] If it says a swift action and the spell text stays the same then it can be used to help do amazing things with charges.  But that is probably not gamebreaking.  

2] If it costs a move action to cast then a 6th level version can be Quickened; this is okay although rods of quicken could be an issue.  But 6th level spells are strong and I am not as worried about the fighter/mage doing something amazing with a combination of spending many feats and burning pinnacle spell slots.  It might make the Bladesinger class fairly appealing, however, but (again) that is hardly upsetting to me (if a plyer wants to cripple himself with levels of Bladesinger for flavor, it is cool that he gets a decent uptick as a result).


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 11, 2007)

Votan said:
			
		

> This is a good example, actually.  I had forgotten about Polymorph but the syngergy with Polymorph and Wraithstrike is high.
> 
> I think I am convinced that the spell should affect a single attack.  It could stay a swift action.  At the level it is obtained (3rd for wizards, 4th for Sorcerers) it should do what it is intended to do (allow these classes to land a melee attack in a desperate situation) and applies to all attacks from these classes until 11th level (1st iterative attack for these classes).  The *purpose* of the spell is preserved.
> 
> ...




What am I?  Chopped liver.  Post #70 was a similar and I started this thread.....


----------



## ainbimagh (Jan 11, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> What am I?  Chopped liver.  Post #70 was a similar and I started this thread.....




SILENCE LIVER BOY!


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Lets get this striaght haste, arcane strike, persistant spell, combined with wraithstrike is great? Thats a lot to get good at melee for a brief while. The same multiclassed guy would have ? hit points at 14th level 7d10 + 7d4 = a dead melee combatant at this level you had better pray you win initiative.

Blightersbane


----------



## ainbimagh (Jan 11, 2007)

The problem with wraithstrike is not that it is overpowered, or the wrong level.  The problem with wraithstrike is that its more easily broken by young inexperienced players, who dont quite understand the consequence or reprecusions (sp?) of "breaking" the game.  So it is looked down upon with a little disdain.  The char-op board shows MANY other combos which are infiniately more powerful to break, they just take more work.  I have no problem with wraithstrike as a spell, but just as everything use of anything has consequences, and those consequences being that my NPCs/Monsters will respond.

...remember!

"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 11, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> Lets get this striaght haste, arcane strike, persistant spell, combined with wraithstrike is great? Thats a lot to get good at melee for a brief while.



 What about Persistent Spell is brief?


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> What about Persistent Spell is brief?




it takes a 15th level Wizard to cast this, what level fighter would he be? In order for Wraithstrike to be truly potent you need to be a melee threat such as a high level fighter. 

No doubt it is a lethal combo but at what cost?

Blightersbane


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 11, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> No doubt it is a lethal combo but at what cost?



 I agree the cost is high, but a 24-hour-long wraithstrike is anything but brief.  But, hey, make a scroll and give it to the UMD two-handed weapon fighter.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> I agree the cost is high, but a 24-hour-long wraithstrike is anything but brief.  But, hey, make a scroll and give it to the UMD two-handed weapon fighter.





very expensive but yah he would be a absolute killing machine for a day! And that is the real fear isnt it, having a high level fighter with this at his disposal YIKES! But in the hands of a 15th level mage with a level or in fighter no biggy!

Bb


----------



## Slaved (Jan 11, 2007)

I thought that someone on this board had shown why wraithstrike could not be made persistant in a way that will actually give you any benefits?

As long as we are banning problematic spells polymorph and shapechange should go on the same list of banned as wraithstrike.


----------



## Blightersbane (Jan 11, 2007)

Slaved said:
			
		

> I thought that someone on this board had shown why wraithstrike could not be made persistant in a way that will actually give you any benefits?
> 
> As long as we are banning problematic spells polymorph and shapechange should go on the same list of banned as wraithstrike.




aaahhh add fly & imp invisibility to the list says my 2 handed greatsword weilding Fighter incidentally murdered by Rogue using said combo of spells not to long ago! 

Bb


----------



## Slaved (Jan 11, 2007)

Definately on the improved invisibility! Who thought that was a balanced idea anyway?

Fly seems to me to be one of those short duration buff spells that you only put up if a need presents itself since there are a lot of other buffs to put up before or in the middle of combat which will help more against any nonflying foes or foes that cannot be taken care of in some other way.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 11, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> it takes a 15th level Wizard to cast this, what level fighter would he be? In order for Wraithstrike to be truly potent you need to be a melee threat such as a high level fighter.
> 
> No doubt it is a lethal combo but at what cost?
> 
> Blightersbane




I agree.  Most of my position on this issue is that the spell, as used in common use by your average character who can have access to Wraithstrike but who also has to have a decent armor class, hit points, and base attack bonus to be able to handle melee combat, the spell isn't an issue.  There are combinations here and there that make it more powerful, but you can say the same for probably 30% of the spells and abilities in this game.

If folks want to say a persistant spell of any kind is overpowered, or a touch attack from a character with improved invisibility and fly is powerful, or a combination with arcane strike and some other tactics, I agree.  But that isn't a good reason to entirely dismiss this spell.

I just don't like an overreaction to a spell because it can be powergamed to be more powerful than expected.  I honestly think in the normal use, in 95% of the games out there, this spell is no problem.  DMs shouldn't ban the spell because they read a thread like this and think the spell is destined for a horror story.  Unless a player (or NPC) is totally focused on not only being a Gish, but on being a Gish who can take full advantage of a spell like this, then I don't think DMs or players should be too worried about this spell.  Give it a chance in your game, and I think most people will find it works out just fine.  If you are playing with a bunch of powergamers who tend to tailor their entire character around a single concept, and you think wraithstrike is the concept, then I can see the reason for concern.  But for your average caster, and even your average Gish, I think it's fine.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 11, 2007)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> I agree the cost is high, but a 24-hour-long wraithstrike is anything but brief.  But, hey, make a scroll and give it to the UMD two-handed weapon fighter.




An extremely expensive scroll, and a very high UMD roll required.  

It more and more seems that most objections to this spell involved very high level characters tailor made to be able to use this second level spell.  It seems to me that such a situation would not be common, and not be sufficient to warrant a major objection to the spell overall.


----------



## two (Jan 12, 2007)

*powergamers?*



			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> I agree.  Most of my position on this issue is that the spell, as used in common use by your average character who can have access to Wraithstrike but who also has to have a decent armor class, hit points, and base attack bonus to be able to handle melee combat, the spell isn't an issue.  There are combinations here and there that make it more powerful, but you can say the same for probably 30% of the spells and abilities in this game.
> 
> If folks want to say a persistant spell of any kind is overpowered, or a touch attack from a character with improved invisibility and fly is powerful, or a combination with arcane strike and some other tactics, I agree.  But that isn't a good reason to entirely dismiss this spell.
> 
> I just don't like an overreaction to a spell because it can be powergamed to be more powerful than expected.  I honestly think in the normal use, in 95% of the games out there, this spell is no problem.  DMs shouldn't ban the spell because they read a thread like this and think the spell is destined for a horror story.  Unless a player (or NPC) is totally focused on not only being a Gish, but on being a Gish who can take full advantage of a spell like this, then I don't think DMs or players should be too worried about this spell.  Give it a chance in your game, and I think most people will find it works out just fine.  If you are playing with a bunch of powergamers who tend to tailor their entire character around a single concept, and you think wraithstrike is the concept, then I can see the reason for concern.  But for your average caster, and even your average Gish, I think it's fine.




You simply are stating things here. Many people have said it is not working out "just fine" in fact it was used once or twice and immediately thereafter banned. 

You also claim it needs to be optimized somehow.  That's simply not true.  You just need a PC with power attack and 3/4 BAB.  More is better, but not required.  

The horrible thing about Wraithstrike is that you simply don't need to optimize it to make it amazingly powerful.

Example:

Any melee-capable monster capable of casting 2nd level spells (dragon, etc.) + wraithstrike = Many dead PC's, almost guaranteed.  Just add spell, that's it. Nothing more.

A PC with power attack and this spell with 3/4 BAB is instantly ferocious, often able to kill equal level CR's in one round or two.  (thus defense is, well, not as critical)

A wizard with polymorph (pick any melee form) and this spell is brutal (see above example).

These are completely unoptimized builds.  They simply stirred in Wraithstrike and got really gnarly.

A build that actually pays attention to this spell, even half-heartedly, and thus maximizes (for example) number of attacks, gets really gross.  Build a two-weapon using gish with oversized weapons and power atack (lots of negatives "to hit" which don't matter pretty much), and cast Wraithstrike as often as possible.  Really basic build, really nasty resuts.

I don't see how wraithstrike is NOT creating a huge jump in power even when PC's just use it casually.  It's just a 2nd level spell.  That's a pretty low resource for such an effect.

Even something as dumb as alter self (trog form) grants +6 nat. AC allowing a gish or wizzie to handle 1-2 rounds of combat.  Trog has multiattack claw/claw/bite, then stir in weapon attacks, etc.  All hit, etc.  This is all really basic low level stuff.  Once you hit level 8+, a half-optimized wraithstrike user will be intimidating.  A competently optimized wraithstriker will be boring; way too powerful.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 12, 2007)

ainbimagh said:
			
		

> SILENCE LIVER BOY!




  I was almost in tears with this silly comment.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 12, 2007)

Slaved said:
			
		

> I thought that someone on this board had shown why wraithstrike could not be made persistant in a way that will actually give you any benefits?
> 
> As long as we are banning problematic spells polymorph and shapechange should go on the same list of banned as wraithstrike.




Shapechange is a 9th level spel and cannot partake of the benefits of persistant spell since it cannot be a 15th level spell.  Wraithstrike can be per the rules since it would then be an 8th level spell.


----------



## Nifft (Jan 12, 2007)

Infiniti2000 said:
			
		

> What about Persistent Spell is brief?




Hopefully the span of time that it's allowed in any given campaign. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## mikebr99 (Jan 12, 2007)

FYI...
Wraithstrike can be made persistant by a 6th level Cleric of Mystra (Spell Domain):

Male Human(Select an Ethnicity) Clr6; CR 6;
Medium Humanoid (Human);
HD 6d8+6; hp 39;
Init +0; Spd 30 ft/x4;
AC 10 touch 10, flat-footed 10;
Base Atk/Grapple +4/+5;
;
SA&SQ Aura(Ex), Spontaneous Casting, Restricted Spells, Turn Undead(Su);
AL NG; SV Fort +6, Ref +2, Will +8;
Str 12(+1), Dex 10(+0), Con 12(+1), Int 12(+1), Wis 17(+3), Cha 14(+2);
Skills: .
Feats: Extra Turning, Extend Spell, Divine Metamagic (Persistent), Persistent Spell.



Mike


----------



## Deset Gled (Jan 12, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> It more and more seems that most objections to this spell involved very high level characters tailor made to be able to use this second level spell.  It seems to me that such a situation would not be common, and not be sufficient to warrant a major objection to the spell overall.




My objection to this spell is the opposite.  Being such a low level spell, it is available to a warrior class that takes just a couple level dip into a casting class and is available very early on.


----------



## Slaved (Jan 12, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> Shapechange is a 9th level spel and cannot partake of the benefits of persistant spell




Not true but also not the point. It is broken casting it normally.


----------



## Mort (Jan 12, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> An extremely expensive scroll, and a very high UMD roll required.
> 
> It more and more seems that most objections to this spell involved very high level characters tailor made to be able to use this second level spell.  It seems to me that such a situation would not be common, and not be sufficient to warrant a major objection to the spell overall.




All it requires is a standard everyday fighter/mage build past about 10th level (It gets really big at 15+ but that's not "extremely high" it's just high). Yes if you don't see fighter/mages the spell isn't that worth it, but that's common enough. You still haven't answered my previous question though, have you had any experience with this in a campaign? 
I ask because before I had any experience with it, I thought the spell was perfectly fine, didn't see any problem. Now that I've used it in a campaign I can see how problematic it is now and how much more problematic it will be later.

There are plenty of "huge" combos out there, many that generate more damage than wraithstrike combined with arcane strike and power attack. Most of them however are either a) really complicated or b) so excessively cheesey as to be immediately thrown out. Wraithstrike is simple and it's not cheesey it's just overly effective for a 2nd level spell.


----------



## Elemental (Jan 12, 2007)

Thurbane said:
			
		

> Could you balance out the spell by saying that the weapon is basicallly immaterial, you don't get any Strength or Power Attack bonuses to damage?




That's what I did, and it's worked out pretty well so far. Oddly enough, I put that rule in place based on one of my characters adding +20 or so damage (at level 15) with Wraithstrike + Power Attack, and still hitting on a 2+.


----------



## Elemental (Jan 12, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> Shapechange is a 9th level spel and cannot partake of the benefits of persistant spell since it cannot be a 15th level spell.  Wraithstrike can be per the rules since it would then be an 8th level spell.




The problem with Persistant Spell (and the reason I no longer allow it) is that I've seen it used maybe _twice_ in a situation where the character actually paid for the higher spell level. IME, it's the feat of choice for an "add metamagic to a spell for no cost" class features or feats, of which Divine Metamagic is only the most obvious.


----------



## Heckler (Jan 12, 2007)

Rather than banning or changing _Wraithstrike_ , has anyone bothered trying to find other solutions?  With a quick look I've come up with _Wings of Cover_ (for single attacks) and _Scintillating Scales_ as "counters" to _Wraithstrike."_   These seem to be spells that dragons, at least, would learn, especially if there are gishes running around the countyside killing dragons with _Wraithstrike."_ 

And, these are both second level spells.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 12, 2007)

Slaved said:
			
		

> Not true but also not the point. It is broken casting it normally.




Short of a greater metamagic Rod, How?  As Someone pointed out, Divine Metamagic.  But how would a divine metamagic work on an arcane spell.  Is the gods domains magic?


----------



## Elemental (Jan 13, 2007)

Heckler said:
			
		

> Rather than banning or changing _Wraithstrike_ , has anyone bothered trying to find other solutions?  With a quick look I've come up with _Wings of Cover_ (for single attacks) and _Scintillating Scales_ as "counters" to _Wraithstrike."_   These seem to be spells that dragons, at least, would learn, especially if there are gishes running around the countyside killing dragons with _Wraithstrike."_
> 
> And, these are both second level spells.




This reminds me of the arguments that 3.0 Harm was perfectly balanced because everyone could buy a Ring of Counterspells. Will this dragon be taking similar highly specific precautions against other level 2 spells, such as Glitterdust, Spiritual Weapon, Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow?

(edit--and a dragon casting an energy resistance spell to cover a vulnerability doesn't count, since that isn't in response to one specific spell)

And it's not just the dragon, don't forget. Everyone who isn't crazy fast will need to invest in spells specifically not to get mangled by this level 2 spell. At every level.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 13, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> You simply are stating things here. Many people have said it is not working out "just fine" in fact it was used once or twice and immediately thereafter banned.





And I am saying that once or twice is hardly a fair sample to ban a spell, particularly since it sure sounded like they were both high level games with optimized characters.



> You also claim it needs to be optimized somehow.  That's simply not true.  You just need a PC with power attack and 3/4 BAB.  More is better, but not required.




Tell you what, work it out.  Everyone has mentioned arcane strike as being important for the combo to work, so work those requirements in as well.  From what I can tell, it's simply not a useful spell in 99% of the cases until around 10th level, and it doesn't really make a big impact until later, and only with Gish's, and only Gish's who dedicate their feats to make it happen.  It's not just power attack.  If all you have is power attack to back this up, you're dead.  You need to be a melee combatant who also has many spellcasting levels to get the 2nd level spell slots, and you need to be facing opponants where it even matters.  When you work that out, it seems to be to be a fairly tight window of times when it is useful over the career of an adventurer from level 1 to 20.



> The horrible thing about Wraithstrike is that you simply don't need to optimize it to make it amazingly powerful.




You're wrong, and I think I'm not the only one that has detailed that.  Most people were arguing stackig 4-5 things on top of each other, at high levels, to get the desired result out of this spell.  A 7th level anything will not make great use of this spell.  Nor at any level below that for the most part.  



> Example:
> 
> Any melee-capable monster capable of casting 2nd level spells (dragon, etc.) + wraithstrike = Many dead PC's, almost guaranteed.  Just add spell, that's it. Nothing more.




Oh gee, a FRIGGEN DRAGON is your common example? Common man, there is a reason it's called Dungeons and Dragons.  They made the dragons quite powerful.  They are melee combatants and spellcasters with powerful stats across the board.  Of COURSE it helps them.  But they are not a fair example.



> A PC with power attack and this spell with 3/4 BAB is instantly ferocious, often able to kill equal level CR's in one round or two.  (thus defense is, well, not as critical)




Work it out.  I think you are quite wrong in this claim, but let's see you actually work out the numbers on such a PC.  See if you can make it a continually effective tactic at levels below 8.



> A wizard with polymorph (pick any melee form) and this spell is brutal (see above example).




Again, having to turn to one of the few spells WOTC admitted as so broken they had to do a retroactive fix on it.  Come on...if it is so easy, you don't need to turn to dragons and busted spell combos of discredited spells to work it out.



> These are completely unoptimized builds.  They simply stirred in Wraithstrike and got really gnarly.




A dragon and polymorphing under the old rules to be a melee fighter as a wizard is not optimized?  How about completely optimized.  Those two examples don't apply in 99%+ of the games out there.



> A build that actually pays attention to this spell, even half-heartedly, and thus maximizes (for example) number of attacks, gets really gross.  Build a two-weapon using gish with oversized weapons and power atack (lots of negatives "to hit" which don't matter pretty much), and cast Wraithstrike as often as possible.  Really basic build, really nasty resuts.




So build it.  Show us the example at a reasonable level. 



> I don't see how wraithstrike is NOT creating a huge jump in power even when PC's just use it casually.  It's just a 2nd level spell.  That's a pretty low resource for such an effect.




Because to use that second level spell you need to be both high level and have other abilities to make you good at melee attacks, like multiple attacks, high hit points, a high AC of your own, and enough spell slots to make it useful.  It's not "just" a second level spell, it's a second level spell that apparently almost only high level characters can actually make good use out of.



> Even something as dumb as alter self (trog form) grants +6 nat. AC allowing a gish or wizzie to handle 1-2 rounds of combat.




Alter self into the highest AC creature in the game is dumb?  In debates in these forums about that spell, and awful lot of folks thought that tactic alone was very broken.

I am seeing a pattern here...you keep mentioning other combos that are themselves already overpowered, and combining them with this spell and proclaiming it broken.  Couldn't it be the other stuff?



> Trog has multiattack claw/claw/bite, then stir in weapon attacks, etc.  All hit, etc.  This is all really basic low level stuff.  Once you hit level 8+, a half-optimized wraithstrike user will be intimidating.  A competently optimized wraithstriker will be boring; way too powerful.




It's not really basic low level stuff.  There are entire multi-page long threads talking about how not common that is.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 13, 2007)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> My objection to this spell is the opposite.  Being such a low level spell, it is available to a warrior class that takes just a couple level dip into a casting class and is available very early on.





Couple level dips?  Just to get a couple of uses a day you need to take 3 levels, and to make it actually a useful tactic for your character it should be many more.  Most builds here seem to count up a lot of spellcasting levels.  So show us the broken combo at a relatively low level.


----------



## Votan (Jan 13, 2007)

Elemental said:
			
		

> This reminds me of the arguments that 3.0 Harm was perfectly balanced because everyone could buy a Ring of Counterspells. Will this dragon be taking similar highly specific precautions against other level 2 spells, such as Glitterdust, Spiritual Weapon, Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow?
> 
> (edit--and a dragon casting an energy resistance spell to cover a vulnerability doesn't count, since that isn't in response to one specific spell)
> 
> And it's not just the dragon, don't forget. Everyone who isn't crazy fast will need to invest in spells specifically not to get mangled by this level 2 spell. At every level.




Yeah; the spell Miasma (pre-errata) in the Complete Divine was exactly the same way when it had no saving throw.  It was so brutal that intelligent opponents would actually have to alter their default preparation just in case "somebody cast Miasma on me" to avoid this being an instant kill action.  

Yes, 20th level wizards were worried about this spell and needed to take counter-measures.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 13, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> All it requires is a standard everyday fighter/mage build




Nothing standard about a Gish.  It's a very specific focus, and not it's own character class even.



> past about 10th level (It gets really big at 15+ but that's not "extremely high" it's just high).




Right, a second level spell that is effective only at 10th level and above and only for Gish's who commonly fight things with a high AC that they otherwise would not be hitting as often.  That doesn't sound common.



> Yes if you don't see fighter/mages the spell isn't that worth it, but that's common enough.




I really do not think it is.  It's popular on board to discuss, because it's an interesting speciality.  But generally speaking, it's fairly rare.



> You still haven't answered my previous question though, have you had any experience with this in a campaign?




We are talking about around 10 responses to my 1 response.  Sorry if I miss something you say...it's hard to keep up.

To answer your qestion, yes we have, and we didn't find it very compelling.  However, we don't tend to play high level games.  I am open to the possibility it starts to break at high levels, if you build a character around the concept.



> I ask because before I had any experience with it, I thought the spell was perfectly fine, didn't see any problem. Now that I've used it in a campaign I can see how problematic it is now and how much more problematic it will be later.




Well, our experiences so far are different, but again our games didn't go past 12th level (yet).  Yeah I know...6 straight years of 3.X, and still nothing above level 12.



> There are plenty of "huge" combos out there, many that generate more damage than wraithstrike combined with arcane strike and power attack. Most of them however are either a) really complicated or b) so excessively cheesey as to be immediately thrown out. Wraithstrike is simple and it's not cheesey it's just overly effective for a 2nd level spell.




It really doesn't seem very simple to me.  It seems fairly complex.  You need to multiclass as a Gish, and you probably use a prestige class from a relatively new book like Complete Mage, and you take a relatively unusual feat like arcane strike, and you have a high BAB and HPs and AC while also having enough spell slots to make use of this and be able to cast while in armor or have other protection.  That doesn't seem simple to me.  It seems a heck of a lot more complex than a raging barbarian with a two-handed greataxe and a huge strength and power attack.  THAT is simple and powerful.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 13, 2007)

Elemental said:
			
		

> And it's not just the dragon, don't forget. Everyone who isn't crazy fast will need to invest in spells specifically not to get mangled by this level 2 spell. At every level.




I asked earlier, and I have yet to hear anyone claim their game broke after long term use of this spell (though several people stopped it quickly without letting it go on for a long test).


----------



## Votan (Jan 13, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> It really doesn't seem very simple to me.  It seems fairly complex.  You need to multiclass as a Gish, and you probably use a prestige class from a relatively new book like Complete Mage, and you take a relatively unusual feat like arcane strike, and you have a high BAB and HPs and AC while also having enough spell slots to make use of this and be able to cast while in armor or have other protection.  That doesn't seem simple to me.  It seems a heck of a lot more complex than a raging barbarian with a two-handed greataxe and a huge strength and power attack.  THAT is simple and powerful.




Well, I would quibble about Arcane Strike being an usual feat.  It's been on my radar from within a week of the release of the Complete Warrior as being an interesting spell.  

In general, the problem with the spell is that it can be pushed into being too tough with focus.  Many potentially problem spells work that way.  For example, Divine Power is pretty reasonable if and only of it can't be easily persisted.  Blasphemy is a fine spell unless your cleric figures out how to add 10 caster levels and watches Titans and Dragons go down.  

Polymorph can be a fine spell until people start scouring 10 monster manuals for the most overpowered form at every hit die level.  

Wratihstrike works perfectly fine in the hands of a single classed wizard or sorcerer.  I am not even worried about it in the hands of an assassin.  But that example of a 6th level cleric using divine metamagic to persist it at 6th level was chilling.  If he then invests the feats and gold to be able to persist Divine Power as well then the warriors are going to have a hard time keeping up.


----------



## Heckler (Jan 13, 2007)

Elemental said:
			
		

> This reminds me of the arguments that 3.0 Harm was perfectly balanced because everyone could buy a Ring of Counterspells. Will this dragon be taking similar highly specific precautions against other level 2 spells, such as Glitterdust, Spiritual Weapon, Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow?
> 
> (edit--and a dragon casting an energy resistance spell to cover a vulnerability doesn't count, since that isn't in response to one specific spell)





When I mentioned that dragons in particualr might learn these spells, that was because these spells are useful in many situations beyond _Wraithstrike._ _Scintillating Scales_ also defends against _Scorching Ray, Acid Arrow,_ or any other spell or attack requiring a touch attack.

_Wings of Cover_ defends against all the spells you listed execpt _Glitterdust._ 

_Invisibility, Blur_  and _Mirror Image_ can all work to counter _Wraithstrike_ and these are well known common spells that people use all the time(again, all second level).  There's no need to specialize to counter _Wraithstrike._ I'm thinking a lot of people got caught off guard when it was introduced into their game, and they opted to "fix" it out of game rather than in game.  Its like introducing gunpowder into a game.  It would dominate for awhile until people learned to compensate for it.





			
				Elemental said:
			
		

> And it's not just the dragon, don't forget. Everyone who isn't crazy fast will need to invest in spells specifically not to get mangled by this level 2 spell. At every level.




Yep, the same way all monsters pick up fire immunity to deal with the ever popular _Fireball._


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 13, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I asked earlier, and I have yet to hear anyone claim their game broke after long term use of this spell (though several people stopped it quickly without letting it go on for a long test).




Just because it has not broke a game somewhere doesn't mean that it won't possibly in the future.

Have nuclear weapons destroyed our world in order to see them as a problem that could destroy us all.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 13, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Nothing standard about a Gish.  It's a very specific focus, and not it's own character class even.




We could also invent a fireball that does 1d6 damage per 2 levels level but added 4d12 damage per level of evocation specialist wizard. Evocation specialization is a very specific focus and not even it's own character class and the spell would only really be useful for those evocation specialist wizards. That wouldn't make it a good addition to the game though.

The argument that a spell is only broken in the hands of those who would actually want to use it is not very convincing. Spells should be analyzed for their power, balance, and usefulness in the cases where they are going to be used not in the cases where they won't. To use another example, my Living Arcanis character has a 9th level cleric cohort. With her 8 strength, 10 dex, and compete lack of any melee focused combat feats, Divine Power is pretty anemic for her. (Wohoo, she gets to attack at +12/+7 for 1d8+2 instead of +6/+1 for 1d8--it's a big improvement, sure, but +12/+7 for 1d8+2 isn't going to be helpful in any combats that call for casting spells. She could make the spell persistent and it STILL wouldn't be broken). That does not, however, prove that Divine Power is a weak spell. In the hands of my Shadowbane Stalker character or my melee focused cleric, it is a great spell.

Likewise, wraithstrike may not be broken for a single-classed arcane caster with low hit points and a +1/2 BAB. In fact, it's probably useless for most of them just like Divine Power is useless to my Living Arcanis cohort. The case where wraithstrike should be examined for balance is the people who actually will use it: fighter/mage characters who plan on fighting in melee and have access to builder books (like the one wraithstrike comes out of). Thus, the fighter/wizard/eldritch knight with Arcane Strike is the paradigmatic case for wraithstrike, not the exception.



> Right, a second level spell that is effective only at 10th level and above and only for Gish's who commonly fight things with a high AC that they otherwise would not be hitting as often.  That doesn't sound common.




It's effective a good ways below 10th level. About 4th level (when the standard fighter/wizard would cast the spell) is when it would become useful. Granted, it's not quite as broken at those levels, and its useful in a different way (it's more of a big bonus to attack than an autohit), but it's still pretty darn good at those levels.

And, as for commonly fighting things with high ACs that they would otherwise not be hitting as often? What other kind of fighter mages are there? I can guarantee you that a fighter/mage power Attacking for his full base attack bonus will otherwise not hit as often as he does when he's using wraithstrike unless he's fighting a raging naked barbarian with a dex penalty at low levels or one of less defensive dire animals. There was only one battle where I remember my fighter/wizard starting off using wraithstrike and then deciding that it wasn't necessary. One fight in four levels or so of play is not much.




> It really doesn't seem very simple to me.  It seems fairly complex.  You need to multiclass as a Gish, and you probably use a prestige class from a relatively new book like Complete Mage, and you take a relatively unusual feat like arcane strike, and you have a high BAB and HPs and AC while also having enough spell slots to make use of this and be able to cast while in armor or have other protection.  That doesn't seem simple to me.  It seems a heck of a lot more complex than a raging barbarian with a two-handed greataxe and a huge strength and power attack.  THAT is simple and powerful.




Sure, creating a wraithstrike using fighter/mage is more complex than a raging, power attacking, barbarian. But it's also orders of magnitudes more effective than a simple raging power attacking barbarian. I know my character (who was using this newfangled prestige class called Eldritch Knight from that rare and relatively new book, the DMG) dropped a Cornugon in one round with attacks left over (and without a weapon that could penetrate its DR at that time) when he was 14th or 15th level. A barbarian who can do that reliably (ie, without assuming that he rolls really well and scores crits) is not going to be simple if he exists at all. Similarly, I could create a 17th level power attacking barbarian NPC and he would be powerful, but he wouldn't be reliably dropping a similar level fighter from full hit points to nearly dead in a single round without critting and killing that fighter with a slightly hot set of damage dice or a crit. (On the other hand, the fighter/wizard/eldritch Knight with just Arcane Strike, wraithstrike, and NPC gold did that).

As for Arcane Strike, I think it comes standard for any fighter/mage that has a copy of complete warrior. It's a bit like rapid shot for archers or Power Attack for melee fighters who don't use light weapons--good enough and important enough to the concept that, of course you're going to take it.


----------



## Elemental (Jan 13, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I asked earlier, and I have yet to hear anyone claim their game broke after long term use of this spell (though several people stopped it quickly without letting it go on for a long test).




It seems like you're moving the goalposts a bit here. It was asked if Wraithstrike was broken in actual play--examples were provided, then you bought in the new criteria of a "long test".

Against enemies with a touch AC of 18 (above average), my eldritch knight could power attack for an extra 20 damage and still hit on a 2+. How many encounters would have been needed to prove that was broken?

Yes, there are defences against being hit, which affect all melee-fighting characters--but when the Wraithstriker does hit, they'll be doing vastly more damage. And a fighter-caster is more likely to have ways past those defenses than a straight battler, I might add.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

Elemental said:
			
		

> This reminds me of the arguments that 3.0 Harm was perfectly balanced because everyone could buy a Ring of Counterspells. Will this dragon be taking similar highly specific precautions against other level 2 spells, such as Glitterdust, Spiritual Weapon, Scorching Ray or Acid Arrow?




Only if that is something they are worried about.  There isn't a way to protect yourself 100% against EVERY type of attack.  If you want to focus on boosting your touch AC because you fear Wraithstrike, then why not?  I personally hate being Charmed or Dominated of Feared, so I try to take precautions to prevent those conditions in every character I play (though sometimes I am simply unable to).


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

Votan said:
			
		

> Wratihstrike works perfectly fine in the hands of a single classed wizard or sorcerer.  I am not even worried about it in the hands of an assassin.  But that example of a 6th level cleric using divine metamagic to persist it at 6th level was chilling.  If he then invests the feats and gold to be able to persist Divine Power as well then the warriors are going to have a hard time keeping up.




IIRC, there is errata on Divine Metamagic that only allows you to apply the feat to Divine spells.  I might be wrong, and this could be a house rule I am thinking of.  Anyway...

A 6th level Mage (same level as your 6th level divine metamagicking cleric) can easily dispel it.  Heck, even if he doesn't know the spell is active, tossing out a Targetted Dispel to debuff enemies is not a new concept (our group does it all the time).


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Moving away is a bit of a cop out option--that suggests that the only way to stop the Wraithstrike PC is to constantly flee, every round if necessary, to prevent a full attack.  And at high levels, even this chicken strategy can be avoided with abilities that add Pounce, etc.




I'm sorry, but I just have to chime in and say I totally disagree with this statement.  Not only is "staying out of melee combat with a melee-optimized fighter" a SMART thing to do, it is a COMMON thing to do.  You would not be doing your character justice if they did not take advantage of alternate ways to avoid being hit in melee, whether this be flight, concealment, burrowing, incorporealness/etherealness, blink, invisibility, etc.  This is a valid defense that affects all melee attackers, not just wraithstrikers.  To quote Mr. Myagi from The Karate Kid II, "Best defense, no be there".


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> This reminds me - a lot - of the old 3.0 haste discussions that raged.
> 
> One excellent way to get to the root of it is this... (thinking about haste now):
> 
> ...




Are we comparing 3.0 Haste to Wraithstrike now?  There is a problem with comparing the two.  A big difference between them IMHO, which I will attempt to demonstrate...

If a player came to me as you proposed, I would ask one of two questions:

1) Does your 3.0 Haste have a duration of 1 round?  If it's longer than that, then my answer is "No, I see it as broken". ---  Not to mention (and correct me if I am remembering wrong), 3.0 Haste not just affected you, but could affect your party members too. --- Or is this 3.5 Haste?  Eh...
2) Does your Wraithstrike spell have a duration of more than 1 round?  If the answer is "Yes" I would say "No, it seems broken to me".  If the answer is "No, just works for 1 round" then I would say, "Sure, why not".


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

BeholderBurger said:
			
		

> I have a severe problem with wraithstrike. I am running Red hand of Doom and basically a 9th level Sorcerer took out a CR10 red dragon without breaking a sweat due to it. He polymorphed into a hag, cast fly met it in hand to hand and wraithstriked twice. With such a low Touch AC (even with Shield and mage armour) the dragon was easy to hit with all attacks and with rend devestated the dragon. This was with virtually no intervention from the party or their cohorts.




So was your problem really with Wraithstrike, or was it really with Polymorph?  Or was it more of a combination of Wraithstrike, Polymorph and Fly?  Or maybe Sorcerers as a whole are too powerful, and they should be banned?  

Seriously...  from your description, I see Polymorph as the real culprit here.  Fly just let you get to where you needed to be, and Wraithstrike just let you hit a little easier.  Polymorph is where your power/damage came from.  JMHO.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

Blightersbane said:
			
		

> very expensive but yah he would be a absolute killing machine for a day!
> 
> Bb




Well, for about a day OR until he becomes dispelled, whichever comes first (personally I am betting on the Dispel Magic).


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

Slaved said:
			
		

> Definately on the improved invisibility! Who thought that was a balanced idea anyway?




Yeah, I mean it's not like you can negate it by Dispel Magic, See Invisibily, Invisibility Purge, Glitterdust or True Seeing.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

mikebr99 said:
			
		

> FYI...
> Wraithstrike can be made persistant by a 6th level Cleric of Mystra (Spell Domain):
> 
> Male Human(Select an Ethnicity) Clr6; CR 6;
> ...




In other words, what Mistwell said:



			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> It more and more seems that most objections to this spell involved very high level characters tailor made to be able to use this second level spell.  It seems to me that such a situation would not be common, and not be sufficient to warrant a major objection to the spell overall.


----------



## two (Jan 13, 2007)

*ok guys*

OK "WS is fine" people, what is it?

It's not WS, it is really polymorph that is the problem.

It's not WS, it is Eldritch K builds that are the problem.

It's not WS, it is Arcane Strike that is the problem. 

It's not WS, it is Alter Self/Power Attack/Insert common Feat or class here...

Every example:  it's not WS, it is X combined with WS.

Guess what all these have in common?

Yesterday, nobody cared if the sorcerer turned into a troll; yeah, he is now melee capable, but... on par with a same-level fighter, maybe.  Today, we care.  Why? hmmmm.....

{throw out persistent WS; that is silly.}


----------



## two (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Are we comparing 3.0 Haste to Wraithstrike now?  There is a problem with comparing the two.  A big difference between them IMHO, which I will attempt to demonstrate...
> 
> If a player came to me as you proposed, I would ask one of two questions:
> 
> ...




This makes no sense to me.  Finger of Death has a duration of 1 round (you can't cast it 10 times over 10 rounds for free); presto it's ok for 2nd level?

The question is not how long, but what is done during the spells duration.  For WS, that is a full attack at max power attack plus possibly other fun things... is 1 round enough?  I say yes due to the effect.  Really duration is a red herring.  A really powerful effect that only requires 1 round is not limited by only lasting... 1 round.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Are we comparing 3.0 Haste to Wraithstrike now?  There is a problem with comparing the two.  A big difference between them IMHO, which I will attempt to demonstrate...
> 
> If a player came to me as you proposed, I would ask one of two questions:
> 
> ...




Where as I agree with Mr. Myagi, if you are not there, then you cannot defeat your foe.  Mr. Myagi is almost a LG pacifist.

Let's get back to the question at hand that I started.  Is wraithstrike the wrong level.

Compared to true strike, the very next attack at +20 to hit.  Standard action.

Wraithstrike, good for all attacks that round and a swift action.

At low level or one single attack, this spell is not a problem.  If wraithstrike was for the next attack and 3rd level, this may be more in line with camparable power of the spells.

Now as written, if it were for 2 attacks, then it should be a 5th level spell, 3 attacks a 7th level spell and for a full set of attacks a 9th level spell.  To the degree that damage can be done, the use of this spell is well worth a 9th level spell.  

In my post 70, I showed where you could do about 400 points of damage tricked out in a single round.  9th level save or die spells are generally not quite as good.  Under my suggestion, wraithstrike should be a 9th level spell and you would sacrifice another 9th level spell for arcane strike.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> This makes no sense to me.  Finger of Death has a duration of 1 round (you can't cast it 10 times over 10 rounds for free); presto it's ok for 2nd level?




Nope, just as 3.0 Haste isn't good for level 2.  Level 3, sure...



			
				two said:
			
		

> The question is not how long, but what is done during the spells duration.  For WS, that is a full attack at max power attack plus possibly other fun things... is 1 round enough?  I say yes due to the effect.  Really duration is a red herring.  A really powerful effect that only requires 1 round is not limited by only lasting... 1 round.




There are a lot of powerful feat/spell/class combos.  Do you want to list them all?  Do you want to "ban" them all?


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> Where as I agree with Mr. Myagi, if you are not there, then you cannot defeat your foe.  Mr. Myagi is almost a LG pacifist.




Sure you can, they are called ranged attacks.  Guess what?  Wraithstrike doesn't help w/ ranged attacks.  You win, they lose.



			
				wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> Let's get back to the question at hand that I started.  Is wraithstrike the wrong level.
> 
> Compared to true strike, the very next attack at +20 to hit.  Standard action.
> 
> ...




You are not looking at what you are giving up by maximizing on WS though.  Make an actual build, and you will see that while you may be doing a lot of damage w/ WS, you are sacrificing in other areas.  Either you yourself will also be hit just as easily because of low AC, or you won't have a ton of HPs like a person that concentrates on that, or a any plethora of other things (some combat related, some not).


----------



## Nifft (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Nope, just as 3.0 Haste isn't good for level 2.  Level 3, sure...




In my experience, there is NO level for 3.0e _haste_, because whatever level it would be available, it's always the best first spell to cast in any combat.

Thus, it's too strong for any level.




			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> There are a lot of powerful feat/spell/class combos.  Do you want to list them all?  Do you want to "ban" them all?




There should always be choices. _Wraithstrike_ is better than Quickened _true strike_ in all situations except concealment + sneak attack. _Wraithstrike_ is not as strong as 3.0e _haste_, for sure. But it's really really really strong for its level.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> There should always be choices. _Wraithstrike_ is better than Quickened _true strike_ in all situations except concealment + sneak attack. _Wraithstrike_ is not as strong as 3.0e _haste_, for sure. But it's really really really strong for its level.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I don't see it as strong as other people make it out to be.  Let me rephrase that slightly...  It is strong, but you need to make very specific builds to take advantage of it, and you often compensate in other areas when doing so.  Just like any combo.  There was a time (and it possibly still holds true) that Tripping-builds were considered more powerful than other melee builds (grappling, pure damage, disarming/sundering).


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 13, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> OK "WS is fine" people, what is it?
> 
> It's not WS, it is really polymorph that is the problem.
> 
> ...



Yes, wraithstrike is the problem because it is a quickened/swift/immediate action, it applies to all attacks unlike comparable spells.  This makes the spell problematic.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Sure you can, they are called ranged attacks.  Guess what?  Wraithstrike doesn't help w/ ranged attacks.  You win, they lose.
> 
> 
> 
> You are not looking at what you are giving up by maximizing on WS though.  Make an actual build, and you will see that while you may be doing a lot of damage w/ WS, you are sacrificing in other areas.  Either you yourself will also be hit just as easily because of low AC, or you won't have a ton of HPs like a person that concentrates on that, or a any plethora of other things (some combat related, some not).




I have for a high level game.  The character has 127 HP, AC 38, Attack 27/22/17/12

With a 2 rds of prep can stay longer than a fighter.

Fighter Stats HP 223, AC 42 attack 36/31/26/21.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 13, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> I have for a high level game.  The character has 127 HP, AC 38, Attack 27/22/17/12
> 
> With a 2 rds of prep can stay longer than a fighter.
> 
> Fighter Stats HP 223, AC 42 attack 36/31/26/21.




May I ask what levels?

It just seems to me that by the time you can get real use out of WS you have to be kinda high level anyway (level 12+) and at that point, aren't characters supposed to be good at what they do?

If you were doing 200 points of damage (or whatever the figure was) at a much earlier level, I can see it as being a problem.  And even then, it is probably a combination of things that is causing the problem.


----------



## Nifft (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I don't see it as strong as other people make it out to be.  Let me rephrase that slightly...  It is strong, but you need to make very specific builds to take advantage of it, and you often compensate in other areas when doing so.  Just like any combo.  There was a time (and it possibly still holds true) that Tripping-builds were considered more powerful than other melee builds (grappling, pure damage, disarming/sundering).




Tripping builds are IMHO stronger than many other melee builds. But that's okay, because they require so many feats to be really excellent that you've "paid" in flexibility. Also, trippers suffer from MAD (multiple ability dependency) if they want to go the Combat Reflexes, keep-'em-down route, which is one of the stronger trip tricks.

There are also effective counters to tripping. A 1st level Psionic power _catfall_ (an otherwise weaker version of _feather fall_) negates one trip per round at the cost of your Immediate action, being a Dwarf helps a lot, swimming can help, many larger critters are immune (based on your size), oozes are immune to it, etc. It's strong, but not universally applicable.


_Wraithstrike_ is not super-broken (like IMHO 3.0e _haste_ was), that's for sure. IMHO it would be perfectly balanced by one of two things:

1/ Standard action to cast, gives you touch attacks all next round (like _true strike_). You can Quicken it as a 6th level spell.

2/ Swift action to cast, affects ONE attack.

Neither of these would really hurt Wizards, but might make the average Gish think carefully before filling her spell slots with nothing but _wraithstrike_s.

- - -

We certainly can agree to disagree. Each of us has his own game, after all.  But you seem smart and rational, and I'm not so fixated on being right that I will ignore good arguments, so I'd appreciate criticism of the following reasoning:


IMHO Psionics is pretty well balanced. There's a Psionic feat chain (requires BAB +5 and three feats total) which allows you to make a melee attack as a touch attack once per round. The BAB prereq means it's aimed at PsiGish characters. You must make a DC 20 Concentration check to recharge this ability.

Three feats and pre-reqs requiring at least 6th level character, for the effect of a 2nd level spell? Seems okay.

Now, I also like Tome of Battle. There's a 2nd level maneuver in there which allows you to make a single attack as a Touch attack. If you're a Warblade, you can do this every other round, attacking normally on the in-between rounds.

So, seen in that light, a single touch attack for the price of a 2nd level spell is a bit too weak.

The main abuse I've seen with _wraithstrike_, though, is when someone uses a large number of attacks in a single round. Typically, with a form that has Multiattack to reduce its secondary natural attack penalties.

So... how about this:

*Wraithstrike*
Necromancy
Level: Assassin 3, Sorc/Wiz 2
Components: V
Casting time: 1 swift action
Range: Personal
Target: One weapon or natural attack
Duration: 1 round

_You let out a sickly moan, blah blah blah..._

For the duration, your chosen weapon or natural attack resolves attack rolls as touch attacks, not normal attacks.

- - -

It's still an excellent choice for a Monk-Gish, good for a two-handed Power Attack Gish, and terrible for a Totemist 3 / Binder 5 / Aberrant Feat using natural attack monkey.

Thoughts?

Cheers, -- N


----------



## two (Jan 13, 2007)

*This is absurd*



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Nope, just as 3.0 Haste isn't good for level 2.  Level 3, sure...
> 
> [...]
> 
> There are a lot of powerful feat/spell/class combos.  Do you want to list them all?  Do you want to "ban" them all?




Two really strange comments here.

Point 1: Haste 3.0 WAS broken.  How do we know?  They nerfed it like crazy in 3.5.  The designers admit it was broken - everyone on the design staff eventually agreed on this point.  What more evidence do you need?  Haste was always cast, its benefits were too high, the limitations nonexistent.  Yes, some people think it was fine... (and still do), but some people also think Martians work at MacDonald's.    Haste 3.0 is unequivocal evidence that sometimes WOTC gets things very wrong...this is understandable.  D&D is a huge game.  They were wrong, they fixed it.  What I find strange is that you still can't even see why 3.0 haste might have been a problem (even at 3rd level!).  This, for me, makes your comments about another possibly overpowered spell (Wraithstrike)... rather less convincing.  Or, remove the "rather."

Point 2: Do I want to list all the powerful combos and ban them?  As a rhetorical flourish... well, we have seen that sort of question before. Obviously not.  I just ban Wraithstrike and that (coincidentally?) takes care of a large percentage of the most easy-to-achieve balance problems.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> May I ask what levels?
> 
> It just seems to me that by the time you can get real use out of WS you have to be kinda high level anyway (level 12+) and at that point, aren't characters supposed to be good at what they do?
> 
> If you were doing 200 points of damage (or whatever the figure was) at a much earlier level, I can see it as being a problem.  And even then, it is probably a combination of things that is causing the problem.




20th level.  This is where it is truely broken.  
Let's look at differences of level and damage

10th level
BA +7/+2,  Str+Magic+Misc=+6+1d6, +PA +7/+14 and Arcane Strike +4/hit +4d4 damage
+10/+5 to hit, damage 33 ave + weapon damage, about 40 points for each strike that is likely to hit based 12 to 15 touch AC.

15th level
BA +12/+7/+2, Str+Magic+Misc=+9+3d6, +PA +12/+24 and arcane Strike +6/+6d4
+15/+10/+5 to hit, damage ave about 65 points a hit.

Even at 10th level this starts to become problematic.  Only at less than 8th level does this not become problematic.

The problem is the spell.  Eliminate or vastly change the spell and everything else that the Gish's are are not out of balance to any great degree.  This when used in combination is the problem.


----------



## Votan (Jan 13, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> IIRC, there is errata on Divine Metamagic that only allows you to apply the feat to Divine spells.  I might be wrong, and this could be a house rule I am thinking of.  Anyway...
> 
> A 6th level Mage (same level as your 6th level divine metamagicking cleric) can easily dispel it.  Heck, even if he doesn't know the spell is active, tossing out a Targetted Dispel to debuff enemies is not a new concept (our group does it all the time).




If the cleric is getting the spell via "Anyspell" in the Spell Domain then it appears to qualify as a divine spell (just like any other domain spell).  It's true that a oppenent with dispel magic can use an action to debuff.  But many of the opponents in the average module do not have this option.  I have been playing Dungeon Crawl Classics and they are not filled with counters to this.


----------



## Votan (Jan 14, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> Do I want to list all the powerful combos and ban them?  As a rhetorical flourish... well, we have seen that sort of question before. Obviously not.  I just ban Wraithstrike and that (coincidentally?) takes care of a large percentage of the most easy-to-achieve balance problems.




In some ways Wraithstrike is an enabling spell rather than being broken in and of itself.  It is like things that allow massive boosts to caster level or allow you to break the metamagic meta-cap.  They are fine in most cases but can be the core of almost unlimited abuse.

For example, Divine Metamagic is almost impossible to abuse if the cleric has to be capable of casting a spell of the level of the metamagiced spell.  It is only very good with quicken and only gets insane with things like persistent or twin.  It is downright mediocre with silent or still.  

But it is often banned or rewritten to avoid these "corner cases" because it just combines too well with too many things; players cna create overpowered combinations by mistake just because of the number of potential game interactions.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 14, 2007)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> It's effective a good ways below 10th level. About 4th level (when the standard fighter/wizard would cast the spell) is when it would become useful. Granted, it's not quite as broken at those levels, and its useful in a different way (it's more of a big bonus to attack than an autohit), but it's still pretty darn good at those levels.




It's a second level spell.  So you need to be a third level wizard.  Which means you have only one level of fighter, low hit points, low base attack bonus, no ability to cast in armor, and a MAD problem.  I really don't see that as being useful.  At that level, there are far better spells than Wraitstrike to be memorizing with those few precious second level spell slots.

Naw, like most people have mentioned in this thread, really 9th level is the earliest this even because a decent option, and really it's 10th level that it starts to get rolling.  Which is around the same level that MOST focused tactics start to get rolling, if not a tad bit late.



> I know my character (who was using this newfangled prestige class called Eldritch Knight from that rare and relatively new book, the DMG)




There is really no need to for the snarkiness.  I was specifically responding to people who had mentioned a prestige class from Complete Mage (because it does not have the loss of a spellcasting level, like Eldritch Knight does).  Abjurant Champion I think it was called?  Anyway, you knew quite well that I was not calling the Eldritch Knight an obscure prestige class from an obscure new book.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 14, 2007)

Elemental said:
			
		

> It seems like you're moving the goalposts a bit here. It was asked if Wraithstrike was broken in actual play--examples were provided, then you bought in the new criteria of a "long test".
> 
> Against enemies with a touch AC of 18 (above average), my eldritch knight could power attack for an extra 20 damage and still hit on a 2+. How many encounters would have been needed to prove that was broken?
> 
> Yes, there are defences against being hit, which affect all melee-fighting characters--but when the Wraithstriker does hit, they'll be doing vastly more damage. And a fighter-caster is more likely to have ways past those defenses than a straight battler, I might add.




I think any tactic should be tested for at least a dozen encounters, over a few levels and against different types of opponents, before it's declared "broken and banned".  Spells (and most abilities for that matter) are usually more useful in some situations than in others, and I think it's fair to give them a broad test rather than a narrow one.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 14, 2007)

two said:
			
		

> OK "WS is fine" people, what is it?
> 
> It's not WS, it is really polymorph that is the problem.
> 
> ...




I think that is a mischaracterization of what's been said here.  Virtually all of the builds presented had multiple choices from those you listed, sometimes all of them at the same time plus some.  In addition, many of those claims were never made to begin with.  For example, who said Eldritch K builds in and of themselves are the problem?


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 14, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I think that is a mischaracterization of what's been said here.  Virtually all of the builds presented had multiple choices from those you listed, sometimes all of them at the same time plus some.



I think two's list is a good start on agreeing on some facts about _wraithstrike_. 

What will it take for you to accept a build as evidence that _wraithstrike_ is overpowered? 

Can it use standard PHB spells like _alter self _or _polymorph_? Can it use rules from the _Complete_ books? Spells from the Spell Compendium? Rules from other WotC books? (Which?) Can it be higher than 8th level? 

If your answer to any of the above questions is "no", can we then make some general rules based on that? 

I.e. "_Wraithstrike_ is overpowered if the DM allows the players to use spells from the _Player's Handbook_" or "_Wraithstrike_ is overpowered if you have higher than 8th level characters".


----------



## two (Jan 14, 2007)

*no time but*

I don't have time to create them right now (at all!), but here are some simple ideas for nasty WraithStrike (WS) builds.  All are obvious and simple.

"I hit you, you miss me":  Combine oversized greatsword w/reach w/maximum combat expertise for a lot of auto-hit damage and your BAB in bonus to AC.

"Charge it!":  maximize a basic charger, either mounted or not.  Should use various feats to increase Power Attack ratio when charging, or lance when mounted.  WS almost auto-insures a hit even with power attack heavily used; stir in cleave for fun.

"Death by a thousand cuts":  1 level of monk/2 weapons/flurry/WS.  Idea is you maximize your number of attacks, but don't use power attack that much if at all; simply use WS to let ALL the attacks hit.  Not overwhelming, but probably fun.  Stir in Dervish later for overwhelming.

"PolySlam":  Polymorph into a melee-capable form and just attack with WS.

The charging one I see immediately as being the most easy to abuse as well as the most powerful (beyond the typical gish full attack full power attack builds).  Ride-by, etc.


----------



## Votan (Jan 14, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> It's a second level spell.  So you need to be a third level wizard.  Which means you have only one level of fighter, low hit points, low base attack bonus, no ability to cast in armor, and a MAD problem.  I really don't see that as being useful.  At that level, there are far better spells than Wraitstrike to be memorizing with those few precious second level spell slots.





My final theory on Wraithstrike is that it is bad not because it is specifically broken but it is one of those things that can be mixed with other material way too easily.  For example, the character above could be a Human Paragon 1/Wizard 1/Human Paragon 2-3.  That would appear to do the trick quite nicely (and all for a single level lost as a caster).  Curiously, this build can enter Abjurant Champion once they get a BAB of +5.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 14, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> I think two's list is a good start on agreeing on some facts about _wraithstrike_.
> 
> What will it take for you to accept a build as evidence that _wraithstrike_ is overpowered?
> 
> ...




I think using Alter Self or Polymorph is fine.  However, I do not think using them in a manner which is barred by the current rules, or which goes against the vast majority of DMs opinions as represented in the many heated debates on this board, is not a good way to analyze this spell.

For example, the current rules make your magic items meld into your body for these spells.  That should be how it is evaluated.

In addition, threads on alter self are very heated in respect to what you can change into, and whether players should be allowed to flip through all the monster source books and make a list from that to change into, or whether their character has to have encountered the creature before or whether the creature has to be a common one.  I think it's fair to default the way most DMs seem to allow it, which means no obscure twinked out monster that just happens to have the highest natural armor in the book (like Tren, from Savage Species and a web update, which have a +8) or Asabi for burrowing and high base speed (Movement: 50’ Ground; 20’ Burrow, from Monsters of Faerun).  Just your run of the mill normal MMI creatures that characters typically encounter by the level they are casting at.

I think core + complete books is fine.  I think spell compendium and campaign books and some of the more obscure specialty books isn't.  Particularly with spell compendium, that stuff is taken on a case by case basis by most DMs, and shouldn't be part of a discussion of what is typical and common.  

The gist of my point is we should aim for your typical character and game, and not your specialty character or game.  If the point you guys are trying to make is that wraithstrike is EASY to abuse (and that does seem to be the point), then you should be using sources, and interpretations of rules, that are typical and common.


----------



## Mort (Jan 14, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I think using Alter Self or Polymorph is fine.  However, I do not think using them in a manner which is barred by the current rules, or which goes against the vast majority of DMs opinions as represented in the many heated debates on this board, is not a good way to analyze this spell.
> 
> For example, the current rules make your magic items meld into your body for these spells.  That should be how it is evaluated.
> 
> ...




Simple enough:

Wraithstrike is easy to abuse with the core EK and the complete books (which if you're using wraithstrike you have). All you need is an eldrich knight of decent level and power attack. For gravy you need the spells blink and or improved invisibility (available easily to an EK of 9th level which is when the build gets decent). For big extra gravy and to truly abuse the combo you need arcane strike (complete warrior) and available to the EK by 9th level.


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 14, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> For example, the current rules make your magic items meld into your body for these spells.



No they don't. Those rules only apply to the new polymorph subschool spells. _Polymorph_ has not changed. 


			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> (like Tren, from Savage Species and a web update, which have a +8)



Tren are from Serpent Kingdoms. Crucians (MinH and Sandstorm) also have +8 armor. But troglodytes work just fine with their +6. 


			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> I think core + complete books is fine.  I think spell compendium and campaign books and some of the more obscure specialty books isn't.
> Particularly with spell compendium, that stuff is taken on a case by case basis by most DMs, and shouldn't be part of a discussion of what is typical and common.



 Spell Compendium is the latest official source for _wraithstrike_. It has errata for many of the spells in the Complete books. It's the book I refer to whenever I mention the spell. And yet it doesn't "count" in a discussion about _wraithstrike_. That does not make sense. 

And it seem rather convenient to dismiss the majority of supplements when discussing a spell from a supplement book. Especially since a major objection to it in this thread is the way it interacts with other spells, feats and abilities. 


			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> The gist of my point is we should aim for your typical character and game, and not your specialty character or game.  If the point you guys are trying to make is that wraithstrike is EASY to abuse (and that does seem to be the point), then you should be using sources, and interpretations of rules, that are typical and common.



Ok, so now we've established an agreed upon "fact". (?)

"_Wraithstrike_ is overpowered if you allow the Spell Compendium, supplements from a published campaign setting, or any other supplements other than the _Complete_ books."

Good. It's a start.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 14, 2007)

Below is something that I have submitted to customer service for a clarification.  I'm now getting the impression that some of the horrible abuses may not have been intented.



Upon reading the text of the spell in the Complete Adventurer, I am getting the feeling the text would imply that strength based damage or power attack damage would not be applicable. I doesn't explicitely say either way but 'your melee weapons or natural weapons become ghostly and nearly transparent for a brief time.' It would be hard in my opinion utilize strength based damage.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 14, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Simple enough:
> 
> Wraithstrike is easy to abuse with the core EK and the complete books (which if you're using wraithstrike you have). All you need is an eldrich knight of decent level and power attack. For gravy you need the spells blink and or improved invisibility (available easily to an EK of 9th level which is when the build gets decent). For big extra gravy and to truly abuse the combo you need arcane strike (complete warrior) and available to the EK by 9th level.




So give me a quick specific build.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 14, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> No they don't. Those rules only apply to the new polymorph subschool spells. _Polymorph_ has not changed.
> Tren are from Serpent Kingdoms. Crucians (MinH and Sandstorm) also have +8 armor. But troglodytes work just fine with their +6.




If you are of a level to have commonly fought a torglodyte, then fine.



> Spell Compendium is the latest official source for _wraithstrike_. It has errata for many of the spells in the Complete books. It's the book I refer to whenever I mention the spell. And yet it doesn't "count" in a discussion about _wraithstrike_. That does not make sense.




I gave my reasons why.  You asked me what sources I think are fair.  Now you are arguing about it?  Why ask if you had no interest in the answer?



> And it seem rather convenient to dismiss the majority of supplements when discussing a spell from a supplement book.




No it doesn't  I am aiming for the typical game.  From my experience, most games have core and the complete books, and not a whole lot else.  So that is what I aimed for.  You want to argue something is typical, make the argument.  But "anything I can think of" isn't typical, and I think my default was fair.  What is so unfair about it?



> Especially since a major objection to it in this thread is the way it interacts with other spells, feats and abilities.
> Ok, so now we've established an agreed upon "fact". (?)
> 
> "_Wraithstrike_ is overpowered if you allow the Spell Compendium, supplements from a published campaign setting, or any other supplements other than the _Complete_ books."
> ...




I didn't say it's overpowered.  I said lets discuss it's power level for a typical game.  ANYTHING can be overpowered when twinked to perfection.  But lets focus on whether the typical DM should ban this spell in a common game.  

If you want me to admit that there are scenarios where wraithstrike is overpowered, I long ago granted that fact.  But there are scenarios where magic missle is overpowered, and I don't hear you clamoring for that spell to be banned.  So lets just focus on the most useful thing - typical games.


----------



## Votan (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> If you are of a level to have commonly fought a torglodyte, then fine.




You need to be 1st level??  It is, after all, a CR 1 creature and, by the time you can cast the spell it seems unlikely that CR is the limiting factor in meeting these creatures.  After all, you have to be at least level 3 to cast the spell as a wizard (it is a level 2 spell); you have to be level 4 if you are either a sorcerer or a bard.


----------



## Votan (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> So give me a quick specific build.




Human Fighter 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 3

Casts 4th level spells (therefore improved Invisibility).  Gets Wraithstrike at level 4 and is able to be effective in melee at that level using the spell.  Reach is essential to not being hit as often as you hit others.  It might be worth moving expertise up the list (even above power attack) if you have trouble with people hitting you too often.

Feats 
1(H): Exotic Weapon Proficency (Spiked Chain) [PHB]
1(F): Power Attack [PHB]
1: Cleave [PHB]
3: Practiced Caster [CA or CD]
6: Combat Expertise [PHB]
7(EK): Improved Trip [PHB]
9: Arcane Strike [CW]


Finish is material dependent.  If you have access to Complete Mage the obvious one is:

Human Fighter 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 1-3/Abjurant Champion 1-5/Eldritch Knight 4-8

Replace Practiced Caster with Combat Casting and move the Practiced Caster later in the build.  

Final Character has 18th level wizard casting and BAB +17.


----------



## Nifft (Jan 15, 2007)

Here's another:

Rogue 3 / Wizard 5 / Arcane Trickster 2

Wizard _polymorph_s into a lion.

If he can flank a foe and can charge, attack with claw/claw/bite + rake/rake, for five attacks. Each attack deals +3d6 Sneak Attack damage.

(I picked lion for its pounce ability. A girallon is better for stand-up flank-n-spank: 4x claw + bite. Both are under 7 hd.)

In this case, it's not Power Attack that I'd max out, it's Combat Expertise. He'll have a BAB of exactly +5, so that works out nicely, and boosts his AC while not particularly impacting his ability to strike his foe. (I'd also take Extend Spell and fill some 3rd level slots with Extended _wraithstrike_s.)

Cheers, -- N


----------



## brehobit (Jan 15, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> Here's another:
> 
> Rogue 3 / Wizard 5 / Arcane Trickster 2
> 
> ...



Dumb question, 
How exactly is the lion casting a spell?  I don't have wraithstrike in front of me, but it must have either verbal, somatic, and/or material components, none of which can be managed as a lion AFAIK.

Mark


----------



## Votan (Jan 15, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> Dumb question,
> How exactly is the lion casting a spell?  I don't have wraithstrike in front of me, but it must have either verbal, somatic, and/or material components, none of which can be managed as a lion AFAIK.
> 
> Mark




Well, silent or stilled Wraithstrike is a third level spell.  Silent and stilled is fourth level (according to both sources it is a V, S spell).  

Reason #101 why polymorph is confusing is questions like this which do not, as far as I can tell, have clear answers.  If you polymorph into an elf, obviously you can cast such a spell.  But where does the line appear for each type of transform?


----------



## Mort (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> So give me a quick specific build.





The whole point is that you don’t need a “specific build.” The spell interacts well with anything that gives a remotely good BAB and power attack.

Something like ftr 1/wiz 6/EK X is perfectly fine (add whatever the DM allows such as a level of spell sword).  Or just use spellsword, or a battle sorcerer or any number of viable fighter/mage builds. 

I suppose you can argue that the spell is only to good for fighter/mages -- but that's like saying combat brute is only useful for a fighter that focuses on charging.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Jan 15, 2007)

But, Spirited Charge is only useful for a mounted fighter. It must be too weak.



			
				Mort said:
			
		

> I suppose you can argue that the spell is only to good for fighter/mages -- but that's like saying combat brute is only useful for a fighter that focuses on charging.


----------



## Votan (Jan 15, 2007)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> But, Spirited Charge is only useful for a mounted fighter. It must be too weak.




It is pretty weak, isn't it?    

The damage is nice but it is so hard to apply and so easy to evade that it seems to be a waste of a feat most of the time even for the Paladins who are the closest to being able to exploit it.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> So give me a quick specific build.




We've given the essentials of a build, there are many extras that aren't stated that may or may not have further affects.  Do you want to see the entire character in stat block?  Look at my post #70 and it has all the essentials that you need.


----------



## Nifft (Jan 15, 2007)

brehobit said:
			
		

> How exactly is the lion casting a spell?  I don't have wraithstrike in front of me, but it must have either verbal, somatic, and/or material components, none of which can be managed as a lion AFAIK.




I probably need to go back and look at how Swift action spells work. Sorry, no doubt my mistake. Thanks for catching it! 

So instead of Lion or Girallon, choose Thri-Kreen (four claws, one poison bite).

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 15, 2007)

Votan said:
			
		

> Human Fighter 1/Wizard 6/Eldritch Knight 3
> 
> Casts 4th level spells (therefore improved Invisibility).  Gets Wraithstrike at level 4 and is able to be effective in melee at that level using the spell.  Reach is essential to not being hit as often as you hit others.  It might be worth moving expertise up the list (even above power attack) if you have trouble with people hitting you too often.
> 
> ...




Sorry, when I said specific, I meant give me a specific actual build.  You know, standard array stats, average hit points, standard equipment for that level, saves, average attack bonus and damage per round in melee, etc...

But already I can tell from what you posted that the character in question is weak relative to the rest of the party.  Looks to be around the equivalent of a bard.  I know that character gets more powerful at higher levels, but I thought we were discussing how wraithstrike would be overpowered.  Sure doesn't look more powerful than what you could do as a straight blaster wizard or straight chain-tripper fighter at that level (10th).


----------



## IanB (Jan 15, 2007)

Trying to Evaluate wraithstrike without involving other spells that come from *the same source as wraithstrike* is setting a pretty ridiculous requirement, I think.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 15, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> The whole point is that you don’t need a “specific build.” The spell interacts well with anything that gives a remotely good BAB and power attack.
> 
> Something like ftr 1/wiz 6/EK X is perfectly fine (add whatever the DM allows such as a level of spell sword).  Or just use spellsword, or a battle sorcerer or any number of viable fighter/mage builds.
> 
> I suppose you can argue that the spell is only to good for fighter/mages -- but that's like saying combat brute is only useful for a fighter that focuses on charging.




My point is that when you actually get into real numbers, you find it isn't nearly as good as it seems at first blush.  If you are arguing that the spell is overpowered with "almost anything", then it should be REALLY easy to demonstrate it, shouldn't it?

Just show me how it actually functions in an overpowered manner with an actual build at, say, 8th level using the standard array of stats and equippment.


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 15, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> We've given the essentials of a build, there are many extras that aren't stated that may or may not have further affects.  Do you want to see the entire character in stat block?  Look at my post #70 and it has all the essentials that you need.




I want to see how the average attack and damage bonus against your average opponent at that level works out, relative to your defensive abilities such as average AC and hit points and saves.

You know...the stuff that shows it's overpowered.  This is like pulling teeth.  In threads with stuff like divine metamagic and persistent spell, people let the specific builds fly.  Here, the builds seem suspiciously general and comments seem to be saying "it's self evident".  No, it isn't self evident.  You have several people disputing that it actually works out to an overpowered character when you build something to make this an effective tactic without using some other known broken build.  So, show us the build.  Break down the actual numbers.

I mean, you guys SAID you saw it used several times in games where it was broken, right?  So just post that build.  What is so hard about that?


----------



## Mistwell (Jan 15, 2007)

IanB said:
			
		

> Trying to Evaluate wraithstrike without involving other spells that come from *the same source as wraithstrike* is setting a pretty ridiculous requirement, I think.




Wraithstrike comes from Complete Arcane.  I said any of the complete books is fine, since most games seem to use those books + core.  What is the problem? People have been complaining that wraithstrike has been broken since the day it was first published.  Are you now saying it only became a problem with the introduction of the Spell Compendium, and that if people do not play with that book, then it's no longer a problem spell?


----------



## IanB (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Wraithstrike comes from Complete Arcane.  I said any of the complete books is fine, since most games seem to use those books + core.  What is the problem? People have been complaining that wraithstrike has been broken since the day it was first published.  Are you now saying it only became a problem with the introduction of the Spell Compendium, and that if people do not play with that book, then it's no longer a problem spell?




What I am saying is you can't really evaluate spells in D&D in a vacuum or by setting what is a frankly arbitrary limit like that. Most of the groups I'm personally familiar with are more likely to allow the SC than the Complete series, since the content in the Spell Compendium has been revised for better balance (in theory.) Your experience is apparently different, and that just underlines why when we're discussing these things as a group it doesn't help to try and narrow things down like that.

Given that WotC themselves are supporting non-core material in all their books now, I think we have to take the same approach when we're evaluating their material; their intent appears to be that it will *all* work together, after all.


----------



## Votan (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> Sorry, when I said specific, I meant give me a specific actual build.  You know, standard array stats, average hit points, standard equipment for that level, saves, average attack bonus and damage per round in melee, etc...
> 
> But already I can tell from what you posted that the character in question is weak relative to the rest of the party.  Looks to be around the equivalent of a bard.  I know that character gets more powerful at higher levels, but I thought we were discussing how wraithstrike would be overpowered.  Sure doesn't look more powerful than what you could do as a straight blaster wizard or straight chain-tripper fighter at that level (10th).




Sorry.  I'll actually need a bit of time to knit one together but I think your general comments are correct; at 10th level this build is just starting to come together.  It is hard to be sure of balance at 18th level as that Fighter/Mage could also be a pure class cleric with the Death Domain plus Domain spontaneity and spamming death spells.  

One thing to be careful about (and balance on this point is slippery) is when does a feat stop making a build viable and start making it overpowered.  To keep up with a power attack monster barbarian with good spellcaster support, the 10th level Fighter/Mage almost has to be using Wraithstrike and Arcane Strike.  

The more that I think about it, the nastiest combination I can thionk up for 10th level is actually the Battlesorcerer but here the spell is making up for the brutal weakness of the class (which is a pity as I like Battlesorcerers alot).  

My biggest concern was mostly migration of the spell to a cleric (who then persists it with divine matamagic) or what would happen if it snuck into the list of a Ranger/Paladin/Duskblade.


----------



## Mort (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> My point is that when you actually get into real numbers, you find it isn't nearly as good as it seems at first blush.  If you are arguing that the spell is overpowered with "almost anything", then it should be REALLY easy to demonstrate it, shouldn't it?
> 
> Just show me how it actually functions in an overpowered manner with an actual build at, say, 8th level using the standard array of stats and equippment.




As I've said a few times 8th level is not a big problem, the spell is good but not excessive at that level - it just gets better later.

The build I originally posted was a 10th level build. To make it "core compliant" simply add one level of wizard and use eldritch knight instead of knight phantom (since we're allowing complete books use 1 level of spellsword) - so ftr 1/wiz 6/spellsword 1/EK 2. Now as I've stated repeatedly by 10th level the build only starts to get big - really it gets big by 14th level (3 attacks) - but let's look at a 10th level example:

fighter/mage (18 STR with +2 greatsword: hasted and with blink up (these are spells any fighter mage will want up if he can during the fight regardless of wraithstrike):

fighter mage uses wraithstrike and arcane strikes a 4th level spell:
His to hit +19/+19/+14 full power attack to hit +12/+12/+7
Each attack does 2d6 +6 +2 +14 +4d4 (at 10th level this is higher with each level)

Going against AC 10: (the vast majority of monsters and opponents at this level since no dex applies to AC in addition to it being a touch attack)
Assuming full attack:  avg damage is 37 
1st 2 attacks 95% to hit so damage (not counting criticals which can be a significant factor): 74
3rd attack: 33
total damage: 107 
Now that’s a 10th level example where it’s very good but not outrageous.

lets upgrade to a 14th level example  (20 STR with +4 greatsword, hasted and blink up):
to hit +25/+25/+20/+15 full power attack to hit +14/+14/+9/+4

against AC 10:
1st 2 attacks: 47.5 avg each – 95 total
3rd attack  47.5 average
4th attack :35 average
total: 177

against AC 15 (very few opponents will have this high a touch AC with no Dex mod)
1st 2 attacks: 47.5 each – 95 total
3rd attack : 35
4th attack:  22
total: 152 (against one of the higher likely touch AC’s barring special circumstances)

can’t 100% guarantee the math but it’s close. (edited for revised figures)


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I gave my reasons why.  You asked me what sources I think are fair.  Now you are arguing about it?  Why ask if you had no interest in the answer?



Let me get this straight. I reply commenting on your answer and explain why I think it's unreasonable. To you this is "showing no interest in the answer"?   


			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> No it doesn't  I am aiming for the typical game.  From my experience, most games have core and the complete books, and not a whole lot else.  So that is what I aimed for.  You want to argue something is typical, make the argument.  But "anything I can think of" isn't typical, and I think my default was fair.  What is so unfair about it?



Spell Compendium is the latest official source for wraithstrike. (BTW, it first appeared in Complete Adventurer, not Arcane.) The Spell Compendium has errata for many of the spells in the Complete books. (If you're using the Spel Compendium you're not playing with the "official" WotC versions of the spells from the Complete books.) It's the book I refer to whenever I mention the spell. 

And what is this "experience" based on? The Complete books have no special status in my gaming group and in my experience with "help me build a character" threads on this board, there are a lot of groups out there that allow a wide range of supplements. 


			
				Mistwell said:
			
		

> I didn't say it's overpowered. I said lets discuss it's power level for a typical game. ANYTHING can be overpowered when twinked to perfection. But lets focus on whether the typical DM should ban this spell in a common game.
> 
> If you want me to admit that there are scenarios where wraithstrike is overpowered, I long ago granted that fact.  But there are scenarios where magic missle is overpowered, and I don't hear you clamoring for that spell to be banned.  So lets just focus on the most useful thing - typical games.



The statement you replied to didn't "say it was overpowered" either. It said: "Wraithstrike is overpowered if you allow the Spell Compendium, supplements from a published campaign setting, or any other supplements other than the Complete books." You refuse to agree to that, and at the same time you _insist_ on disregarding all of the above supplements when discussing balance. I can't think of any good reason why. 

But fine. You're now demanding a detailed character with carefully calculated average damage outputs. You've made it clear that you stand ready to dismiss any character as ineffective without, or even _with_, wraithstrike. I can play that game. I'll compare and post the damage output with and without wraithstrike for a few builds. That should give us some numbers, and then we can try to decide if it's an appropriate damage addition from a swift action 2nd level spell. Since you apparently don't think melee mages were playable before wraithstrike, I'll also include some more details, like combat AC, hit points and saves. 

(Average damage calculations can be a lot of work. I lost my own average damage spreadsheet, so I'm hoping to find a new one. There may be a delay.)


----------



## Deset Gled (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> You know...the stuff that shows it's overpowered.




How about comparing it to anther spell of equal level?  Just because a particular build might not be completely over the top doesn't mean a spell is balanced.

Bull's Strength is 2nd level, and grants +2 to attack and damage for 1 min/level, and takes a standard action to cast.  By comparison, Wraithstrike is 2nd level, nets a bonus to attack that is completely open ended, but would average around 8 IME (less at low levels, more at high), lasts for 1 round, and takes a swift action to cast.

I don't know about you, but just about every caster I've ever seen in action would much rather have the ability to cast as a swift action than a standard one.  The facts that the to-hit bonus is better (and can be converted to damage with PA), scales as you fight tougher opponents, and doesn't have issues with stacking is all just icing on the cake.  The only downside is the short duration, and that's not enough of a limitation when the spell can be cast as a swift action.


----------



## Nifft (Jan 15, 2007)

Mistwell said:
			
		

> I mean, you guys SAID you saw it used several times in games where it was broken, right?  So just post that build.  What is so hard about that?




1/ I've never seen it used in a game.

2/ The broken builds involve sources outside of Core + Complete.

3/ I've tried to give you the flavor of a broken build (the Thri-Kreen Combat Expertise Arcane Trickster flank-o-matic), but for true brokenness, you'd have to add some Aberrant feats from Lords of Madness and some grafts from Fiend Folio.

4/ The more outside sources, the more broken _wraithstrike_ appears.

5/ A concrete suggestion: allow _wraithstrike_ to apply to any one weapon you wield (or natural attack you possess) for one round. That keeps it useful for the greatsword power-attack Eldritch Knight, but kills every abuse I can think of.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Mort (Jan 15, 2007)

Nifft said:
			
		

> 1/ I've never seen it used in a game.
> 
> 2/ The broken builds involve sources outside of Core + Complete.
> 
> ...




One thing that should be taken into account, I think, is that the bar for a core build (or one using only core and complete books) and the bar for a non core build (or one using 3rd party stuff, campaign specific stuff etc.)must be different. It's pretty much a given that the non-core build will be more powerful than a core build. So if you limit the sources you must recognise that what is excessive (or broken if you prefer) has a different definition.

I think the 152-177 HP in one round (from my above example) is excessive for a core or core+complete build. Once you start allowing other stuff, it may not be.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 16, 2007)

Response (Brandon) 01/15/2007 04:58 PM 
Hello James,

Unfortunately the rules are silent on this particular issue. It will fall to the DM to adjudicate whether or not strength is applicable! 

Good Luck and Game On!  

The above is the response to my question.

 Customer (James Webster) 01/14/2007 01:04 PM 
Upon reading the text of the spell in the Complete Adventurer, I am getting the feeling the text would imply that strength based damage or power attack damage would not be applicable. I doesn't explicitely say either way but 'your melee weapons or natural weapons become ghostly and nearly transparent for a brief time.' It would be hard in my opinion utilize strength based damage.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 17, 2007)

Here's the Specific build.  I didn't add in if you had a bard but at this level which could add another 4pts of damage per strike.  Also, the character only has 5 things that are outside Core and has less than the 760k in wealth that a character of this level would have.

20th lvl, 20th level caster (17th level spellcaster)
Male Human XYZ
XP  190000+, 2nd level Fighter, 7th level Wizard, 1st level Spellsword, 10th level Eldritch Knight
Align CG Race Human
Init +6 Senses Spot +2 Listen +2
Languages Common, Draconic, Orcish, Elvish
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AC 32 Touch 12 Flat-footed 30
HP 138
Fort +21 Ref +12 Will +14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed 	30 ft.
Melee	2 Handed Sword (+30/+25/+20/+15 to hit, 2d6+13+1d6, Crit 19-20 x2)
Rngd 	Longbow (+10 to hit, Range 110/220/330/440/550, 1d8+2, Crit 20 x3)
BA	+16/+11/+6/+1 Grppl +23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DC 	1st 	2nd 	3rd 	4th 	5th 	6th 	7th 	8th 	9th 
	19	20	21	22	23	24	25	26	27
Bonus Spells 2x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th 
0th level spells
All Cantrips
1ST level spells
Shocking Grasp, Shield, Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, Magic Missile, Enlarge Person, Color Spray
2nd Level Spells
Wraithstrike, Bull’s Strength, Scorching Ray, Mirror Image
3rd Level Spells
Haste, Water Breathing, Displacement, Vampiric Touch
4th Level Spells
Stoneskin, Dimension Door, Fire Shield, Confusion, Improved Invisibility
5th Level Spells
Feeblemind, Teleport, Baleful Polymorph, Overland Flight
6th Level Spells
Heroism, Disintegrate, Repulsion, Flesh to Stone
7th Level Spells
Banishment, Spell Turning, Finger of Death, Delayed Blast Fireball
8th Level Spells
Polar Ray, Temporal Stasis, Moment of Prescience, Maze
9th Level Spells
Time Stop, Shapechange
Spells Memorized, All spells cast at 20th level
0th – (4) Read Magic, Detect Magic x2, Ray of Frost
1st – (6) Shield, Enlarge Person, Magic Missile x2, Shocking Grasp x2
2nd – (6) Mirror Image, Wraithstrike x3, Bull’s Strength, Scorching Ray
3rd – (6) Displacement x2, Haste, Vampiric Touch x2, Fireball
4th – (5) Stoneskin, Dimension Door, Fire Shield, Confusion, Improved Invisibility
5th – (5) Baleful Polymorph x2, Feeblemind x2, Teleport
6th – (5) Heroism, Disintegrate, Repulsion, Flesh to Stone x2
7th – (4) Spell Turning, Finger of Death x2, Delayed Blast Fireball
8th – (3) Maze x2, Polar Ray
9th – (1) Time Stop
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Abilities Str 20 (26), Dex 14, Con 14, Int 18 (24), Wis 9, Chr 8 (25 pt buy)
Special Qualities Get +1 Skill point per level and +4 SK Pts 1st level, Bonus Feat, -10% to arcane spell failure in armor
Action Points 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feats Extend (1), Empower (1), Scribe Scroll (1), Summon Familiar (1), Lt/Md/Hvy Armor proficiency (2), Simple/Martial Weapons (2), Weapon Focus Two Hand-handed sword (2), Power Attack (3), Improved Familiar (3), Practiced Spellcaster (6), Sudden Maximize (7), Arcane Strike (9), Improved Initiative (9), Improved Critical Greatsword (12), Power Critical Greatsword (15), 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skills (110/10)  Per player use with normal for wizards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possessions Belt of Fire Giant Str +6 (36000), Elven Chainmail +5 (29150), +6 Headband of Intellect (36000), Tome of Clear Thought +3 (82500), Amulet of Natural Armor +5 (25000), Cloak of Resistance +5 (25000), Manual of Gainful Exercise +2 (55000), Ring of protection +5 (25000), Shocking Burst Greatsword +5 of Speed (200000), MW Composite Longbow Str +2, quiverw/20 arrows, 2900 GP for other supplies
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 22, 2007)

I decided to post example characters in a new thread: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=3295389#post3295389 .It's a 12th level character and I'm curious:

_Is it reasonable for a 2nd level spell to effectively add 180 damage as a swift action?
_


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 22, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> Upon reading the text of the spell in the Complete Adventurer, I am getting the feeling the text would imply that strength based damage or power attack damage would not be applicable. I doesn't explicitely say either way but 'your melee weapons or natural weapons become ghostly and nearly transparent for a brief time.' It would be hard in my opinion utilize strength based damage.



It _does_ "say".  Unless otherwise stated, melee attacks follow the default rules for melee attacks. There is no ambiguity in the RAW here. 

It would be a _major_ oversight to "forget" to mention something like that if it was the "intent", especially considering that wraithstrike attracted a lot of attention when it was first published in Complete Adventurer, and (as far as I can tell) was re-plublished unchanged in the Spell Compendium. (As mentioned earlier the SC made a lot of balance changes to spells from the Complete books.) 

From an in-game point of view I see no reason why it would be "hard to utilize Strength based damage" with "ghostly and nearly transparent weapons". What happens when you use  wraithstrike with your staff? Does it create a staff-shaped opening through the victim's body with no resitance? You'd think that'd deal _more_ damage than a regular attack - you're effectively tearing through flesh as a creature with infinite Strength... Actual wraiths don't deal Str damage but that's becasue they don't _have_ Str. 

Still, as a house rule it might help to make wraithstrike identical to a brilliant energy weapon. No damage to undead or constructs, and natural armor applies to AC.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 22, 2007)

By this logic, can't we say Mirror Image is overpowered?  Let's take a look at Mirror Image.



> Mirror Image
> Illusion (Figment)
> Level: Brd 2, Sor/Wiz 2
> Components: V, S
> ...




We have a 2nd level spell (same as Wraithstrike) which gives us a HUGE benefit to defense.  Cast at the minimum level (3rd for a Wizard) and rolling the Minimum on the d4 die roll, you create 2 images.  This gives the caster a 66% chance of being missed in combat by a melee attack.  If you ever get to the point where you can create 8 images, you will be missed by a melee attack  approx 11% of the time.  Do you know of any other defensive spell that protects you from a melee attack 89% of the time?  The only other spells that come close to this are Invis and anything that grants total concealment, both of which only offer 50% miss chance.

Eventually, as your images "pop", the percent chance of you getting hit goes up.  But guess what?  If you are that concerned about not getting hit, cast it again!

So is this spell over powered for a 2nd level spell?  How are melee combatants supposed to hit you?  It's not fair!  I wonder if this would be a good spell to protect against Wraithstrike?


----------



## Votan (Jan 22, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> I decided to post example characters in a new thread: It's a 12th level character and I'm curious:
> 
> _Is it reasonable for a 2nd level spell to effectively add 180 damage as a swift action?
> _




It depends, to be brutally frank.  Many things can add significantly to the damage output of an attack or a series of attacks as a swift action (Divine Metamagic comes to mind with spells).  

If you have a focused build where this level of performance is the outcome then it might be okay at 12th level.  This is especially true of high level play with many splatbook options (you are using at least the Complete Series if that spell is around).

I still think the spell level is about a level or two too low (probably one level low) but that is more to focus focus.  A true fighter/mage should be deadly at attack because they sure aren't going to be as defensive as a pure melee character.


----------



## Votan (Jan 22, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Do you know of any other defensive spell that protects you from a melee attack 11% of the time?




I think, rather, it protects you 89% of the time giving an 11% chance to hit and dividing potential damage massively.  It is also a good candidate for quickening (only 6th level) and contingency options.  

Good point.


----------



## PallidPatience (Jan 22, 2007)

The enemy closing his eyes makes mirror image useless.

I'd just like to point that out.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 22, 2007)

PallidPatience said:
			
		

> The enemy closing his eyes makes mirror image useless.
> 
> I'd just like to point that out.



Making someone close their eyes and effectively be blind is certainly not useless.  No attacks of opportunity, no spotting, etc.


----------



## PallidPatience (Jan 22, 2007)

Surely you can close and open your eyes as a free action, though, right? If not, that's just insane.

So you take a single attack with your eyes closed, then open them (worst case scenario) so you're not "blind" and can take AoOs. If you HAPPEN to have Blind-fight, or some other sense (Blindsense, Blindsight, Tremorsense), then you've got an even better chance to at least know if the target moves. Blindsight even makes it pointless in its entirety.

I'd also like to point out that a defensive spell is probably a poor comparison with an offensive one. After all, Mirror Image can only hope to prolong the battle. With wraithstrike, one can end it prematurely.


----------



## Mort (Jan 22, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> By this logic, can't we say Mirror Image is overpowered?  Let's take a look at Mirror Image.
> 
> ....
> 
> So is this spell over powered for a 2nd level spell?  How are melee combatants supposed to hit you?  It's not fair!  I wonder if this would be a good spell to protect against Wraithstrike?




Sorry but the two spells are leagues apart.

Mirror image gives a (rapidly diminishing) miss chance. at best it can save the mage from a few attacks. Also, even a 1st level fighter can have cleave and most DM's rule hitting a mirror image as droping it (this view is supported by the FAQ); once you have great cleave the mirror images are toast. There are plenty of other ways around mirror image; making it a decent but not overpowered spell. 

RigaMortus2, I'm going to ask you the same question I asked Mistwell. Have you seen wraithstrike in mid to high level play? I also thought the spell was fine, but having seen and used it, I've changed my opinion.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jan 22, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Sorry but the two spells are leagues apart.
> 
> Mirror image gives a (rapidly diminishing) miss chance. at best it can save the mage from a few attacks. Also, even a 1st level fighter can have cleave and most DM's rule hitting a mirror image as droping it (this view is supported by the FAQ); once you have great cleave the mirror images are toast. There are plenty of other ways around mirror image; making it a decent but not overpowered spell.




QFT.

First of all, even if we were comparing exact opposites, there is as huge different between a spell that causes 100 hp of damage, and a spell that negates 100 hp of damage.  Just look at the Inflict/Cure spells: when you inflict damage, you need to make a touch attack roll, and must overcome SR.  When you heal, you touch for free, and the target can volutarily lower SR.  Exact same numbers, but there are two extra safeguards against inflicting damage.  

Second, Mirror Image can be countered in a number of ways.  Multiple attacks.  AoE spells.  Dispell magic.  True Seeing.  Wraithstrike can only be countered by boosting touch AC, or readying a dispel magic.

Third (and most important), Mirror Image takes a standard action to cast.  Sure, a sorcerer could cast Mirror Image many times in a row and keep themselves protected.  But he's not going to be any real threat, because he won't be casting any other spells.  Wraithstrike is a swift action, and is combined with other attacks that are already a threat themselves.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 22, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Sorry but the two spells are leagues apart.
> 
> Mirror image gives a (rapidly diminishing) miss chance. at best it can save the mage from a few attacks. Also, even a 1st level fighter can have cleave and most DM's rule hitting a mirror image as droping it (this view is supported by the FAQ); once you have great cleave the mirror images are toast. There are plenty of other ways around mirror image; making it a decent but not overpowered spell.




Sure, there are definately ways around Mirror Image.  By the same token, there are ways to defend against Wraithstrike, Mirror Image being one of them.  Invisibility is another.  Staying out of range via Fly is another.  Concealment is another.  Having a high touch AC is another.  Counter-spelling or dispel magic Wraithstrike is another.  There are plenty of other ways to defend against Wraithstrike; making it a decent but not overpowered spell.  I think all that we have established here is that there is always a way to defend against 2nd level spells.



			
				Mort said:
			
		

> RigaMortus2, I'm going to ask you the same question I asked Mistwell. Have you seen wraithstrike in mid to high level play? I also thought the spell was fine, but having seen and used it, I've changed my opinion.




Nope.  Never seen it in play.  At all.  Ever.  You might say "Then how do you know it's not over powered if you've never seen it in play?".  I might say, "It must not be over powered if I have never seen someone pick the spell up and use it in play in the 3 years since CAr has been out."

Listing numbers and stats and percentages to hit, and damage per round is fine and all, but in practice, I don't think it is going to come up all that often.  Sure, every once in awhile, a Wraithstrike optimized character is going to shine (just as any other class), other times there will be other factors in play that prevents them from going ballistic 

Characters do run out of spells occassionally.
Characters sometimes don't have time to rest to get their spells back.
Characters often face multiple encounters in a day.
Characters are known to roll a nat 1 from time to time.
Characters eventually face things with high touch ACs.
The list goes on...


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 22, 2007)

PallidPatience said:
			
		

> The enemy closing his eyes makes mirror image useless.
> 
> I'd just like to point that out.




I am glad you did...  All this shows is there are ways around Mirror Image.  Bravo.  Look at my post above for some ways to defend against Wraithstrike (one of which is NOT closing your eyes sadly  ).


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jan 22, 2007)

Deset Gled said:
			
		

> Second, Mirror Image can be countered in a number of ways.  Multiple attacks.  AoE spells.  Dispell magic.  True Seeing.  Wraithstrike can only be countered by boosting touch AC, or readying a dispel magic.




As I have listed above, there are more ways to defend against Wraithsrike than you think.  Or is Flying away and attacking at range suddenly not a viable option?  What about grappling?  Is that also not a viable option?  What about concealment (magical or otherwise)?  If you are worried about Wraithstrike, surely negating 50% of the attacks is something worth considering.  What about Invisibility?  What about Mirror Image?

Why is it that everyone likes to post ways to get around Mirror Image, but are unwilling to accept valid (and often used in-game) defenses against Wraithstrike?


----------



## Nail (Jan 22, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Why is it that everyone likes to post ways to get around Mirror Image, but are unwilling to accept valid (and often used in-game) defenses against Wraithstrike?




 

Question: Is wraithstrike a 2nd level spell?

Answer: Well, the opponent could have Mirror Image up!

???????


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 22, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> As I have listed above, there are more ways to defend against Wraithsrike than you think.  Or is Flying away and attacking at range suddenly not a viable option?  What about grappling?  Is that also not a viable option?  What about concealment (magical or otherwise)?  If you are worried about Wraithstrike, surely negating 50% of the attacks is something worth considering.  What about Invisibility?  What about Mirror Image?
> 
> Why is it that everyone likes to post ways to get around Mirror Image, but are unwilling to accept valid (and often used in-game) defenses against Wraithstrike?




Point taken but I don't seem to have impressed you with mine.  At 20th level if you get a full attack, you can do about 400 hp of damage without counting critical hits.  There is a problem here.  On another wraithstrike thread, a 12th level character doing about 225+ HP damage a round shows that this again is a problem.  Once you get past 8th level this spell becomes problematic with characters optimized to wraithstrikes advantages.

As a 2nd level spell, it's too good.  A quickened true strike which affects the next attack (one) is a 5th level spell.  Wraithstrike affects all of your attacks in the round cast baring specials.  My 10th, 15th and 20th level EK builds show that the problems are the spell.  Make the spell non-existant or serious changes in level and what it affects are the solutions.  

Discounting this doesn't lead to a solution that a great many people see.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jan 22, 2007)

There's a couple of things to consider with mirror image. Its a great spell, no one is questioning that, but it does have some limitations:

1) Every time the fighter swings and doesn't hit the mage he takes out an image. Now, as said, the mage can just recast the spell. But, that deprives him of casting another spell. Or if he quickens it, well then its really a 6th level spell he is casting. Wraithstrike is a swift spell, the fighter doesn't suffer an action cost from using it.

2) Mirror image is only 1 min/level. That means you have to have some foreknowledge to use it, or again spend a precious action in combat to cast it. Wraithstrike is used when needed, its never wasted.

As for counters to wraithstrike, if the counter is taking a melee monster out of melee range, then the party has already won. I've just effectively lowered the CR of the encounter, and I didn't even have to cast the spell!

I think wraithstrike is a monster monster buff spell, however, as has been mentioned there are situations when its not very useful.

So here's the main two questions for wraithstrike builds:

1) How effective is the build in melee when wraithstrike cannot be used? Aka, in sitations where the spell wouldn't be effective, or you've simply run out of them.

2) How many times can wraithstrike be used per day in these builds? Can you use the spell often in a fair number of combats, or do you have to be stingy and hoard them?


Finally, let's stop looking at this spell from a player's use perspective, and put it in the hands of an npc. Let's used that 12th level build from the other thread. The party's 12th level fighter goes into melee, because that's what he does. The npc counters, and with a pitiful touch AC on the fighter, the npc is virtually guarranteed to hit everytime. He does a good 200 damage to the fighter and kills him outright. No save, no SR, a perfectly normal CR for a 12th level fighter, and he's dead. Doesn't seem right to me.


----------



## Mort (Jan 22, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Nope.  Never seen it in play.  At all.  Ever.  You might say "Then how do you know it's not over powered if you've never seen it in play?".  I might say, "It must not be over powered if I have never seen someone pick the spell up and use it in play in the 3 years since CAr has been out."
> 
> Listing numbers and stats and percentages to hit, and damage per round is fine and all, but in practice, I don't think it is going to come up all that often.  Sure, every once in awhile, a Wraithstrike optimized character is going to shine (just as any other class), other times there will be other factors in play that prevents them from going ballistic




So you have never seen it in play and the fact that several people have chimed in (including myself) and stated that IN PLAY the spell is seriously overpowered has no bearing? can't really argue with someone who simply refuses to believe something despite evidence to the contrary.



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Characters do run out of spells occassionally.



Completely besides the point. By that logic a 1st level spell that does 1,000 points of damage once per month is ok, because, well, you run out of it.



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Characters sometimes don't have time to rest to get their spells back.



Again, so what, this is the balancing factor to all spells and has no bearing on whether a spell is overpowered. 



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Characters often face multiple encounters in a day.



Casters have lots of 2nd level spells per day too. Again totally irrelevant as to balance of any given spell verses other spells. 
But if you like, use a 3rd level slot to have extended wraithstrike - all attacks as touch attacks for 2 rounds. You'll have plenty for when you need them.



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Characters are known to roll a nat 1 from time to time.



I'll settle for a 95% chance to hit.



			
				RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> Characters eventually face things with high touch ACs.



Wrong, characters occasionally face things with high touch ACs but as a general rule, touch ACs do not scale with CR. Take a good look at the high CR monsters, look at their regular AC then look at their touch AC.


----------



## PallidPatience (Jan 22, 2007)

The build posted in the accompanying thread has 7 2nd level slots a day, can cast spontaneously, and still has higher level slots.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jan 22, 2007)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> As I have listed above, there are more ways to defend against Wraithsrike than you think.  Or is Flying away and attacking at range suddenly not a viable option?  What about grappling?  Is that also not a viable option?  What about concealment (magical or otherwise)?  If you are worried about Wraithstrike, surely negating 50% of the attacks is something worth considering.  What about Invisibility?  What about Mirror Image?
> 
> Why is it that everyone likes to post ways to get around Mirror Image, but are unwilling to accept valid (and often used in-game) defenses against Wraithstrike?




The problem is that none of your solutions are specific to Wraithstrike.  You are just citing ways to negate melee combat.  People are willing to use defences against Wraithstrike, but not when that defence is to never get into melee combat.  Now, making a spell only usefull in certain situations is certainly a way to balance it.  But limiting it to only being usefull in melee combat is hardly a limitation, as it's what most D+D battles are built around.

Even with your limitations, though, Wraithstrike is still overpowered.  Yes, it's still useful in a grapple, because you can still cast it and attack in a grapple.  And yes, it's still overpowered against a spell that negates 50% of attacks, because that only lowers the expected damage ouptut by 50% (180 damage to 90 damage) and is still a better option than other 2nd level spells that aid melee combat.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 22, 2007)

PallidPatience said:
			
		

> Surely you can close and open your eyes as a free action, though, right? If not, that's just insane.



 Well, a beholder can't do it!  What makes you think you're better than a creature that is basically _all eye_?


----------



## Seeten (Jan 23, 2007)

Lets say I am level 12 as a Gish, and have Wraithstrike optimized. I'll also have 1-2 metamagic feats for metamagicking Wraithstrike. Lets say Heighten, and Extend.

I can now fill all level 2 slots, all level 3 slots, all level 4 slots and all level 5 slots with wraithstrikes. How many encounters does it take to blow thru these?

Alternatively, soon, the party will be meeting many wraiths and ghosts =)


----------



## Nail (Jan 23, 2007)

Err.....a _Heightened_ Wraithstrike will do what, now?


----------



## Nail (Jan 23, 2007)

Ah-ha.  I bet I see the problem:

You *can* fill higher level slots with lower level spells.  No need to _Heighten_ them.


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 23, 2007)

Seeten said:
			
		

> Lets say I am level 12 as a Gish, and have Wraithstrike optimized. I'll also have 1-2 metamagic feats for metamagicking Wraithstrike. Lets say Heighten, and Extend.
> 
> I can now fill all level 2 slots, all level 3 slots, all level 4 slots and all level 5 slots with wraithstrikes. How many encounters does it take to blow thru these?
> 
> Alternatively, soon, the party will be meeting many wraiths and ghosts =)




Yet another reason that wraithstrike should with all of it's advantages be higher level.  If it was sixth level, an extended spell would be worth it but too many more wouldn't.


----------



## Seeten (Jan 23, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> Ah-ha.  I bet I see the problem:
> 
> You *can* fill higher level slots with lower level spells.  No need to _Heighten_ them.




Might as well empower, extend, still, silent, or whatever them, also. Why not? Heh.

If your built to wraithstrike, you have a LOT of slots to use on wraithstrike.


----------



## Nail (Jan 23, 2007)

No argument there.  As a 2nd level spell, there are lots of slots above it to fill.


----------



## Infiniti2000 (Jan 23, 2007)

Nail said:
			
		

> Ah-ha.  I bet I see the problem:
> 
> You *can* fill higher level slots with lower level spells.  No need to _Heighten_ them.



 It depends on whether you're in a (lesser) globe of invulnerability (and how you rule said globe).


----------



## wildstarsreach (Jan 27, 2007)

Here is something to consider. The closest equivalent.

True Strike. 1st level, stand action, next attack, +20 to attack, ignores miss chance. This spell companion attack is subject to DR if itd attack was melee/ranged attacks with weapons and not spells.

Wraithstrike. 2nd level, swift action, all attacks that round, anything from 0 to +60? since it changes attacks to touch attacks. As touch attacks, this spells affect bypasses DR.

A quickened true strike would be 5th level. A second level spell if extended for this affect a second attack or seventh level spell for persistant spell to make this last all day.

This spell should be at least 5th if not sixth which is what my original thread started. Looking at comparable power levels of spells should be the gage for allowing spells or not. Wraithstrike is not a fairly balanced spell from this perspective. From levels 9-20, it is easy to abuse by focused melee spellcasters.


----------



## Slaved (Jan 27, 2007)

wildstarsreach said:
			
		

> As touch attacks, this spells affect bypasses DR.




This is not true. Besides, it does not hurt your point any to just leave it off.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 27, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> From an in-game point of view I see no reason why it would be "hard to utilize Strength based damage" with "ghostly and nearly transparent weapons".




There are two cases I can find in the Core rules that could be used as precedent to support this line of argument.

The first is ghosts, who can manifest in an incorporeal state.  Incorporeal creatures have Str --; the sample ghost has a Str of 16.  Against an ethereal creature, the sample ghost's incorporeal touch attack deals 1d6+3 damage; against a material creature, it only deals 1d6.  The Str bonus is inapplicable, since as an incorporeal creature, the ghost has a Str of -- on the material plane.  But with his Ghost Touch bastard sword, he deals 1d10+3 regardless of whether he's attacking an ethereal or material opponent.  To the material opponent, the sword is considered corporeal; thus, apparently, it includes the Str bonus even though the ghost is incorporeal.

By extrapolation, we might rule that a 'ghostly' weapon would not include the Str bonus, even if the wielder were corporeal.

The second is the Flame Blade spell, which states "Since the blade is immaterial, your Strength modifier does not apply to the damage."  This might be considered a precedent that could be applied to other immaterial blades - such as one rendered 'ghostly' by a spell, perhaps.

I think the Wraithstrike spell as written does not prohibit Str bonus to damage; but I think one might make the case that such a ruling is not _completely_ out of left field... 

-Hyp.


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 28, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> There are two cases I can find in the Core rules that could be used as precedent to support this line of argument.
> 
> The first is ghosts, who can manifest in an incorporeal state.  Incorporeal creatures have Str --; the sample ghost has a Str of 16.  Against an ethereal creature, the sample ghost's incorporeal touch attack deals 1d6+3 damage; against a material creature, it only deals 1d6.  The Str bonus is inapplicable, since as an incorporeal creature, the ghost has a Str of -- on the material plane.  But with his Ghost Touch bastard sword, he deals 1d10+3 regardless of whether he's attacking an ethereal or material opponent.  To the material opponent, the sword is considered corporeal; thus, apparently, it includes the Str bonus even though the ghost is incorporeal.
> 
> By extrapolation, we might rule that a 'ghostly' weapon would not include the Str bonus, even if the wielder were corporeal.



Where does it say that ghosts get to use their Str with a ghost touch weapon? In order to attack the ghost must manifest and become incorporeal. If so, _"t has no Strength score, so its Dexterity modifier applies to both its melee attacks and its ranged attacks." This is not contradicted in the ghost description as far as I can see. 

If it does use it's Str the situation is somewhat similar to wraithstrike. "An incorporeal creature’s attacks pass through (ignore) natural armor, armor, and shields, although deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against it." Nowhere in the ghost touch ability description does it say this rule doesn't apply for ghost touch weapons. So, this would support applying Str damage and Power Attack with wraithstrike.

If you rule that ghosts don't bypass armor and natural armor with a ghost touch weapon it's no longer a meaningful precedent, since the weapon is 100% material during the attack. The whole point was that wraithstrike makes the weapon "ghostly and nearly transparent". 


			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		


			The second is the Flame Blade spell, which states "Since the blade is immaterial, your Strength modifier does not apply to the damage."  This might be considered a precedent that could be applied to other immaterial blades - such as one rendered 'ghostly' by a spell, perhaps.
		
Click to expand...


Blade of pain and fear (SC), ice axe (SC) and mood blade (SC) use the same wording. They're not all immaterial, but all are spell effects. The wraithstrike damage is not from a spell effect. 

And surely any precedent here would be this: If a character's Strength modifier does not apply, the spell description will say so. 



			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		


			I think the Wraithstrike spell as written does not prohibit Str bonus to damage; but I think one might make the case that such a ruling is not completely out of left field... 

Click to expand...


Bah. _


----------



## Korak (Jan 29, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> Where does it say that ghosts get to use their Str with a ghost touch weapon? In order to attack the ghost must manifest and become incorporeal. If so, _"t has no Strength score, so its Dexterity modifier applies to both its melee attacks and its ranged attacks." This is not contradicted in the ghost description as far as I can see.
> _



_

If the ghost is using a ghost touch weapon, he need not manifest to strike.  He may stay wholly on the ethereal plane and swing his ghost touch weapon (will the full strength bonus he still possesses) using it to strike non-ethereal targets to whom the blade counts as corporeal._


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 29, 2007)

Korak said:
			
		

> If the ghost is using a ghost touch weapon, he need not manifest to strike.  He may stay wholly on the ethereal plane and swing his ghost touch weapon (will the full strength bonus he still possesses) using it to strike non-ethereal targets to whom the blade counts as corporeal.



Nope. You can't affect the material plane from the ethereal plane. The ghost must manifest first._ "A manifesting ghost can wield the weapon against corporeal foes."_ -- ghost touch ability.


----------



## Korak (Jan 29, 2007)

I stand corrected.  Good catch.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 29, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> Where does it say that ghosts get to use their Str with a ghost touch weapon?




I'm looking at the sample Ghost in the MM.

Its incorporeal touch attack deals 1d6, or 1d6+3 vs an ethereal opponent.

Its ghost touch bastard sword deals a flat 1d10+3; there's no distinction drawn between attacking material or ethereal opponents.



> If you rule that ghosts _don't _bypass armor and natural armor with a ghost touch weapon it's no longer a meaningful precedent, since the weapon is 100% material during the attack. The whole point was that wraithstrike makes the weapon "ghostly and nearly transparent".




A ghost with a non-ghost-touch bastard sword couldn't affect a material opponent at all; it would be wielding an incorporeal weapon against a corporeal creature to no effect.

The Ghost Touch ability allows the weapon to be considered corporeal if that is advantageous, as in this case - but as a corporeal attack, it wouldn't bypass armor or natural armor.

My point was not that this showed a meaningful precedent for a ghostly weapon; it was that it showed a precedent for an attacker and a weapon in differing states of ghostliness.  In the case of the manifested incorporeal ghost with the ghost touch weapon, we have a ghostly attacker with a non-ghostly weapon, to which Str bonus to damage applies per the stat block.  So we might postulate that a non-ghostly attacker with a ghostly weapon might not get to apply Str bonus to damage.



> Blade of pain and fear (SC), ice axe (SC) and mood blade (SC) use the same wording. They're not all immaterial, but all are spell effects. The wraithstrike damage is not from a spell effect.




But Flame Blade doesn't say "You can't apply your Str modifier to damage because it's a spell effect", it says "You can't apply your Str modifier to damage because it's immaterial".

A weapon used with Wraithstrike is not a spell effect, but it's immaterial...

-Hyp.


----------



## satori01 (Jan 29, 2007)

Of course the 'ghostly weapon' part of Wraithstrike is is probably flavor text, else the spell would refer to that attack being an Incorporeal Touch Attack.  

This would actually be  a good and flavorful fix to Wraithstrike.  You could use the spell to hit incorporeal beings.  Mage Armor,  Shield and the like would still apply, and STR damage could be removed from any damage dealt.


----------



## Iku Rex (Jan 30, 2007)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I'm looking at the sample Ghost in the MM.
> 
> Its incorporeal touch attack deals 1d6, or 1d6+3 vs an ethereal opponent.
> 
> Its ghost touch bastard sword deals a flat 1d10+3; there's no distinction drawn between attacking material or ethereal opponents.



There's no need for a distinction. The example ghost _can't attack material opponents_.  It does not have a magic weapon, much less a ghost touch weapon. _"A ghost retains all the attacks of the base creature, although those relying on physical contact do not affect creatures that are not ethereal."_


			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> A ghost with a non-ghost-touch bastard sword couldn't affect a material opponent at all; it would be wielding an incorporeal weapon against a corporeal creature to no effect.
> 
> The Ghost Touch ability allows the weapon to be considered corporeal if that is advantageous, as in this case - but as a corporeal attack, it wouldn't bypass armor or natural armor.



The _weapon_ is considered corporeal. The _ghost_ is not. As written, the ghost's attacks bypass armor when it's incorporeal. (I quoted the rule in my last post.) We could argue about the _intent_, but even the ghost touch ability states that the weapon is corporeal or not depending on what's "more beneficial to the wielder". One could argue that it's "more beneficial to the wielder" for the weapon to be incorporeal when determining the opponent's AC.


			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> A weapon used with Wraithstrike is not a spell effect, but it's immaterial...



Depends on what is meant by "ghostly". Besides, a brilliant energy weapon is also "immaterial". Do you think the same argument applies to that?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 30, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> The example ghost _can't attack material opponents_.  It does not have a magic weapon, much less a ghost touch weapon.




Ah, yup - quite right.  I think I somehow managed to mix up "A manifested ghost can strike with a ghost touch weapon" into meaning "A manifested ghost has a ghost touch weapon"... or something.



> As written, the ghost's attacks bypass armor when it's incorporeal. (I quoted the rule in my last post.) We could argue about the _intent_, but even the ghost touch ability states that the weapon is corporeal or not depending on what's "more beneficial to the wielder". One could argue that it's "more beneficial to the wielder" for the weapon to be incorporeal when determining the opponent's AC.




Hmm.

I'd have read it that the Ghost Touch weapon (wielded by an incorporeal creature) ignores the 50% chance for a corporeal creature to avoid damage from an incorporeal magic weapon _by being considered corporeal_; that if it is considered incorporeal, the Ghost Touch quality is effectively not being utilised.  If the 50% 'miss chance' is avoided by the Ghost Touch quality, this is occuring because the weapon is being considered advantageously corporeal... which would allow armor bonuses to apply.

Now I'm not sure.



> Depends on what is meant by "ghostly".




True, and I said from the beginning that as written, I don't believe Wraithstrike disallows Str bonus 

-Hyp.


----------



## Bagpuss (Jan 30, 2007)

Iku Rex said:
			
		

> There's no need for a distinction. The example ghost _can't attack material opponents_.




Not with its sword but it can with its touch attack, hence the distinction there.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 30, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Not with its sword but it can with its touch attack, hence the distinction there.




Yeah, but my point was based on a faulty assumption that the stat block showed a Str bonus with the sword against material opponents.

-Hyp.


----------

