Case Study: Wraithstrike

[Lonely Tylenol]

I would like to point out that all of the text you quoted was written before Swift Actions were created and I seriously doubt anyone at WOTC went back and reconsidered the SRD afterward.

Just a side point. Not trying to take a side.

BTW, isnt there a PrC that lets you make really high level potions? I could see persistent potions of this spell being sold for boatloads by said PrC's to any fighter with a brain.

I think Pinotage's post above covers this particular objection.

Also, barring any changes to pricing made by said PrC, each such potion would cost 12k. Which is as much as about half again as much as a +2 weapon. That might actually be balanced by the cost alone. I dunno.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That just means that the minis handbook is wrong, Pinotage.

 

[Hypersmurf]

That's not what the Miniatures Handbook says, though.

That agrees with the rules for potions (though potions aren't spell trigger or spell completion) and with the rules for wands (assuming a spell with a casting time not more than a standard action) but not with the rules for scrolls that appear in the DMG.

Should one assume that this passage overrides the section in the DMG for long casting times? Does a scroll of Summon Monster now take a standard action too, since the Mini HB says so?

If you concede that the first statement isn't entirely true, why should the second statement enjoy the presumption of total accuracy?

-Hyp.

 

[Mistwell]

That's still far less damage than the character in my simple example will do on a single full attack. Throughout the battle. With no need to worry about SR or fire immunity.

1) No, it's more damage, for a standard action as opposed to a full round action. That was the example you used, so I am going with it. You want to become a moving taget, then I will happily add in quickend spells and occular the occular eye feat etc.. to the example. Your example was 50 or so. That's what we should be talking about.
2) You may need to worry about SR as your wraitstrike might well be cancelled by someone's SR (I am not positive how that would work). Also need to worry about DR. They balance each other. In fact, they were created specfically for the reason of balancing. And SR is *WAY* easier to deal with than DR, since it's one type. DR varies based on each creature, while SR can often be overcome by having a single feat (or two, if you REALLY worry about SR).
3) If you really need to worry about immunity, searing spell takes care of that, or energy substitution. In fact, if your tactic was just scorching ray, you would have that feat. I used scorching ray just off the top of my head. I could easily switch it to something else.

Furthermore I fail to see how the option to lay down the smack with spells in addition to dominating melee is a downside. (!) If you want to claim that a wizard is useless in melee, compare him with other melee characters.

You had to devote your build to that tactic. It involves feats, armor, weapons, magic items, ability scores, etc... You do NOT get the same advantage of spells as a normal caster. It's going to be one or the other for you...not both.

(And scorching ray gives you a maximum of three rays, not four. +1 ray at level 7, +2 rays at level 11.)

Your right, it's 63. I was probably thinking of one of the feats that adds a ray, or fiery spell. Still, much more damage than you did with a standard action, for a LOT less effort.

Where do I begin?

The sword is not "otherwise useless". Remove wraithstrike and a well built melee wizard can still beat the crap out of just about any fighter-type. If it was "otherwise useless", that's beside the point since a persistent wraithstrike can be in effect 24/7.

If you are really a Gish, you don't have all wizard levels. You are not a 15th level wizard then. So, we are not talking about a "well-built" melee wizard. We are talking about a straight wizard who took some fighter feats and has a sword, but still has extremely bad hit points, bad saves, bad base attack bonus, and relatively bad AC. The sword is therefore not the thing you want to be investing all that money in, not to mention the other magic items you mentioned, none of which benefit your primary spellcasting stat or your spells or your hit points or your AC or your saves (all weak points of that build).

Power Attack is not "otherwise useless " at all - it's an excellent feat, especially for a character with lower BAB and a (potentially) high attack bonus.

You don't even have a potentially high attack bonus. Even with your polymorphing and magic items, it's still not anywhere near a comparable fighter. And, it's not useful OUTSIDE of this tactic, so again it's putting all your eggs in a sub-par basket.

Your argument seems to boil down to:

1. Wizards are useless in melee, even with wraithstrike.
2. Because of [1], no wizard will make an effort to be good at melee.
3. Because of [2], go to [1].

How about Wizards are sub-optimal in melee, and wraithstrike makes them simply adequate in that tactic. THAT is my argument. Wraithstrike doesn't result in an unbalanced character, it just makes melee a reasonable option for a straight wizard build where it was not a reasonable option before. But the end result is nowhere near "overpowered". Indeed, because you have to devote so much to it, I still think it's slightly underpowered.

Spot the flaw...
A 15th level wizard can easily do 12d6 + 196 damage every round (with haste effect activated) with the basic setup I posted. Remind me - which "out of the box players handbook spell" can do that for me?

First, you are not calculating that correctly I think. But more importantly, if we are talking about full rounds, I can do a LOT more with an out of the box wizard. 15th level is high level. TONS of instant death spells exist at that level, and modifications with metamagic and other spells and such will change the senario more, and adding in full round actions changes it even more. Those instant death altered spells will NOT be as potent with your build.

So lets stick to the example you set forth, and not change the example mid-stream. That's what leads to endless discussions with no point, as everyone is a moving target and will continually shift and posit strawman until someone just gets tired.

 

[Mistwell]

But can't you feel that bite in the air?

The problem with a spell like Wraithstrike is that it's fine in the original context, for caster wizards. However, you can't expect a spell to be limited to just them; players are creative and will find ways to get access to the nifty toys.

And my point is that such a concept is mostly myth. Nobody has come out and said wraithstrike broke their game. All they did was say that, if you devote almost EVERYTHING to the concept, you can probably kill someone quickly with it. Nevermind that if you devote almost EVERYTHING to Tasha's hideous laughter or phatamsal killer (both relatively low level spells) you can do the same thing, from a safer position.

If you devote almost EVERYTHING to almost any concept, it will be effective. The question is, is this particular tactic unbalanced when compared to the other ones. I say it is not. I think this is a bunch of hypothetical paranoia about a percieved overpowered spell that, in use, is not at all overpowered. Same exact thing that happened with the Warlock.

 

[Deset Gled]

Not to get too far away from the original topic, but could someone please explain the word "gish"? I'm pretty I know what it means from context, but its a funny looking word.

 

[Mistwell]

Not to get too far away from the original topic, but could someone please explain the word "gish"? I'm pretty I know what it means from context, but its a funny looking word.

It's the Gith word for a fighter-mage (Githyanki and Githzeri, from Fiend Folio).

 

[Iku Rex]

1) No, it's more damage, for a standard action as opposed to a full round action. That was the example you used, so I am going with it.

When was that the example "I used"? You were talking about the "weak damage" from a wizard's attack. I pointed out that a wizard can easily deal more damage per attack than most fighters. Now all of a sudden I've committed myself to comparing single melee blows with high level spells?

2) You may need to worry about SR as your wraitstrike might well be cancelled by someone's SR (I am not positive how that would work).

There's absolutely no reason why wraithstrike would be affected by SR. Inventing artificial "difficulties" is not going to make wraithstrike well-balanced.

Also need to worry about DR. They balance each other. In fact, they were created specfically for the reason of balancing. And SR is *WAY* easier to deal with than DR, since it's one type. DR varies based on each creature, while SR can often be overcome by having a single feat (or two, if you REALLY worry about SR).

Right. SR (or magic/energy immunity) can prevent damage altogether. Even if a melee character can't beat the DR (and why is a wizard less likely to do so than a fighter?) that's only going to delay the opponent's defeat by a couple of attacks.

You had to devote your build to that tactic. It involves feats, armor, weapons, magic items, ability scores, etc... You do NOT get the same advantage of spells as a normal caster. It's going to be one or the other for you...not both.

Are you for real? I post a couple of lines demonstrating the damage of a single attack and all of a sudden I've "devoted my build to it"? It involves less than 20% of the characters wealth at 15th level, one feat, and at worst an ability score at 13. Yes, a melee focus is going to make you less good at blaster spells once you factor in the other obvious items, spells, feats and buffs you'll want. But for one thing you won't need those blast-spells much.

Pointing out that an archer specialist fighter won't be that powerful with a 2d10 greatsword does not prove that greatsword damage can be safely increased...

Stop trying to "prove" that a high level wizard allowed to unload his highest level spells on a vulnerable target is dangerous. That's not the issue. Melee characters should be compared with melee characters. And if said melee characters can fly, cast wizard protective spells and blast the occasional enemy then that's not a balancing factor in their favor.

If you are really a Gish, you don't have all wizard levels. You are not a 15th level wizard then. So, we are not talking about a "well-built" melee wizard.

Oh great. Now you're trying to prove wraithstrike balanced by pointing out that my 50+ damage per hit example is sub-par compared to a character that can really take advantage of the spell.

Like I said, I picked 15th level wizard because that's the first time you can get a persistent wraithstrike (8th level spell). I know that there are better "builds" than straight wizard for melee. However, in this case that wasn't important.

We are talking about a straight wizard who took some fighter feats and has a sword, but still has extremely bad hit points, bad saves, bad base attack bonus, and relatively bad AC. The sword is therefore not the thing you want to be investing all that money in, not to mention the other magic items you mentioned, none of which benefit your primary spellcasting stat or your spells or your hit points or your AC or your saves (all weak points of that build)

If I had posted a real "build", you'd have seen that such a character can have decent hit points (or lots and lots of hit points as per Skip Williams' polymorph ruling), better saves, better AC and far better protections in general than a conventional melee fighter in a typical fight.

You don't even have a potentially high attack bonus. Even with your polymorphing and magic items, it's still not anywhere near a comparable fighter.

Let's see. 11 (BAB) + 3 (enhancement) + 16 (Str) -1 (size) = +29.

I do believe that's an automatic hit against just about anything you'll encounter at CR 15. And it can be further improved with spells like heroism, greater invisibility/blink or some other buff spell. Seems like the option to trade attack bonus for damage might come in handy. :\

(I'd like to see your example of a basic 15th level fighter with an attack bonus well beyond +29 with the same investment in gold.)

First, you are not calculating that correctly I think.

Which calculation is it you're disagreeing with? 4x3=12 or 4x49=196?

So lets stick to the example you set forth, and not change the example mid-stream. That's what leads to endless discussions with no point, as everyone is a moving target and will continually shift and posit strawman until someone just gets tired.

So if you were to say that a wizard is going to deal "weak damage" you'd be honest and admit to being wrong if someone pointed out that that's easily not the case? Good. You had me worried.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

But can't you feel that bite in the air?

The problem with a spell like Wraithstrike is that it's fine in the original context, for caster wizards. However, you can't expect a spell to be limited to just them; players are creative and will find ways to get access to the nifty toys.

Err, what makes you think wraithstrike was meant for caster wizards? What would they do with it? And, perhaps more to the point, it appeared in Complete Adventurer, home of a horde of spells that are WotC's gift to multiclass characters. Critical Strike. Bladeweave. Instant Locksmith. Touch of the Master. Wracking Touch. Distract Assailant. Etc. Etc. They're all aimed at multiclass casters. Why wouldn't you assume that wraithstrike is too?

The real problem with wraithstrike is that it's at least two to four levels too low. As for combining wraithstrike with persistent spell... the problem is Persistent Spell. There is very little that Persistent Spell works on that is not either pathetically weak or hideously broken (Persistent Divine Power for instance).

 

[Zimbel]

(I'd like to see your example of a basic 15th level fighter with an attack bonus well beyond +29 with the same investment in gold.)

I agree with your general thrust; that wraithstrike is a problematic spell at high levels.

I also agree that Wizards (and all major spellcasters) are too strong relative to non-major spellcasters at high levels.

If you really want to see such a build (note that it merely uses a different spell that's problematic):
Rogue 1 / Fighter 14. Max out UMD. UMD = 19 (assuming +1 Cha)
Feats: Spirited Charge, Power attack. WF, GWF, WS, GWS
Mount
Items: 1 wand of True Strike. (cost: 750)
+2 Heavy Lance (8,310)
+2 Gauntlets of Ogre Power (4,000)
Inital Str 15. Current 18 (20).
Bab = +14. Lance +2 Str +5 Charge +2 Feats +2= +25 +20 for True Strike = +45.

Yay! +45 >> +29

Of course, more realistically, +31 will do fine to hit nearly all the time (particuarly since, unlike your Wiz, we're spending a standard action to get this bonus). This gives damage of:
+2 lance +28 Power attack +5 Str +4 feats +1d8 (base) * 3 = 3d8 + 117. Every other round. Far worse than your Wiz for damage, unless it both has total concealment (which your Wiz dosen't defeat for some reason), and a rather high DR for CR 15 (say 20/-). Your Wiz would need to actually cast spells to do more damage then.

Frankly (other than HP), I don't think this is as good of a build as your Wiz. Yes, with tweaking I could do marginally better. If I left core, I could do better eoungh to be competative with your build. See the True Strike thread for a non-core build.