Displacement - a bit wussy eh? Mirror image too...

[Dausuul]

Just like Displacement is attempted to be used at beneficial times, so would the AC bonus of Shielding Smite.

This seems disingenuous. Obviously everybody wants to use their defensive abilities at beneficial times, but how is the paladin supposed to know when a "big gun power" is about to be unleashed, let alone whom it's going to be unleashed at? All he can do is smite, throw his defensive boost on whoever looks like eating a lot of attacks next round, and hope for the best. The wizard can wait until he actually sees an incoming Horrific Spell of Doom--not only that, he can even wait until he knows the spell is going to hit--and only then expend his Displacement power.

Yeah, the HSoD might only do 5 points of damage, but much more likely it's going to do something a whole lot nastier.

This is a HUGE advantage to Displacement. Mobile defense trumps fixed defense by a mile, and that's what we're comparing here. Shielding Smite is very easy to bypass; pick a different target or wait 1 round. Displacement cannot be bypassed, ever.

As far as we can tell, Shielding Smite grants a defensive benefit more often than Displacement. The difference between standard action and immediate action is mostly offset by the additional offensive capability of Shielding Smite.

Somehow I think a 16th-level wizard attack power will do rather more damage than Shielding Smite. With Shielding Smite, the defensive power is inextricably tied to the offensive. Displacement can accompany any attack power at any level.

And, that is just one example. Even if the general consensus is that Displacement is more useful than Shielding Smite, it does not mean that there are not other Per Encounter lower level powers that are as or more useful than Displacement.

It doesn't mean there are such powers, either. Can you produce one?

 

[Puggins]

Like I said, they are not directly comparable. However, Shield Smite gives a defense without using up an immediate action, hence, allowing the Paladin to still use an immediate action in that round.

Shielding Smite is like using up an attack action plus gaining defensive benefits without using up an Immediate action to gain the defensive benefits.

You're making the odd assumption that having an immediate action available is more important than having a standard action available. While I'm sure there a plenty of cases where this is true, you should acknowledge that having the freedom to take whatever standard action is most helpful (maneuver, attack, use a skill) is a far more common situation. Displacement gives you this flexibility.

Not necessarily true. The Effect portion of Shielding Smite is not in the Hit section, hence, it implies that the AC bonus always occurs.

True enough. In fact, after reviewing, I'm willing to say that this implies that it is indeed independent of the hit. I'll remove this point.

Also, Displacement activating is not a guarantee of success. It might help, it might not, it might makes things worse. The AC bonus does not ever make things worse.

Well, the AC bonus is not a a guarntee of success, either. An extremely good die roll will bypass the bonus altogether, just as a good second roll bypasses displacement.

Let me add something else which I chose to leave out due to mathematical rigor- in a situation where the number needed to hit is somewhere between 5 and 20, displacement is far more effective.

2+ needed to hit:
shielding smite takes chance of hit from 95% to 80%
Displacement takes chance of hit from 95% to 90%

5+ needed to hit:
shielding smite takes chance of hit from 80% to 65%
Displacement takes chance of hit from 80% to 64%

10+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite takes chance of hit from 55% to 40%
Displacement takes the chance of hit from 55% to 30%

15+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite takes chance of hit from 30% to 15%
Displacement takes the chance of hit from 30% to 9%

19+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite takes chance of hit from 10% to 5%
Displacement takes chance of hit from 10% to 1%

Only in the most lopsided case does shielding smite benefit you more, and at that point the increase in your protection is really not significant- the number of times you are hit out of 100 goes down by 16%. In the case of a 10+ attack, the numebr of times you are hit every 100 attacks goes down by 45%, versus Shielding Smite's 27%.

Again, not necessarily true. For a 16th level Wizard with 50 hit points, using Displacement to stop 5 points of damage might NOT be a beneficial use. Or, stopping 5 points of damage on the Fighter might not affect the combat at all. The power states that Displacement can be used after the attack roll hits, not after the effects are specified.

But altering an attack that is a critical would probably be extremely useful- something that displacement is almost designed to do. Displacement seems to be best used to avert disastrous effects. In a 30+ round combat with a dragon, trying to avert a single claw attack seems to be a suboptimal use of displacement, and is an option that won't be used often.

Plus, Shielding Smite has the advantage that it can be used as a deterent. "Protect the Wizard Paladin!".

Yeah, I agree, the deterrent is nice, but hinges on #1 the wizard being close enough to be a target and #2 actually being the target. if, instead, the dragon has to choose between the paladin and the fighter for his attacks, shielding smite becomes far less useful. I'll say the deterrent more than offsets this, but not by much.

Not necessarily always true based on what we know so far. Can immediate actions be done, even if someone is immobilized?

Via the summary sheet, immobilization prevents you from moving, not from acting. I imagine that there will be plenty of times where the paladin just won't be able to maneuver into position for a shielding smite.

Well yes, you skewed the information in Displacement's favor a bit before making that assessment.

You skewed the benefits of shielding smite at least as much. I didn't include the much-better performance in the scaling region and the ability to almost always negate critical hits.

We are making a bit of an apples and oranges comparison here, but the apple appears to have as many advantages as the orange. Not that the orange does not have different advantages, but not enough or powerful enough to be clearly better and significantly so. And definitely not 16th level better.

The issue I have here is the "definitely" that you're attaching to your judgment. Seeing as how no one has played with displacement and very few have played with shielding smite, it's hard to stick that label there. There are lots of abilities and effects that are drastically misjudged in advance- 3e haste actually made it past playtests. Tarmogoyf was judged one of the worst cards in Future Sight (sorry, I can't help it- I'm a Magic Player). The Soviet Union was going to be a pushover for the Wehrmacht. Let's see it in practice. I'm with you on level 16 PROBABLY being too high, but actual play will be the final judge.

 

[KarinsDad]

*Why vastly superior? Because the mathematical point where +3 AC is of about the same or better defensive value as a rerolled attack is if the target is presently being struck on approximately a 4+ or below, and that's WITHOUT the fact that you can choose whether to use displacement after you know whether your ally was hit, whether he got a critical, and what ability your foe chose to use for his attack. The value of Shielding Smite comes from its damage, not the AC boost.

Except for the fact that the +3 AC boost can be against 2 or 5 or more attack rolls by various opponents. With a game system where certain PCs roles try to hold the line and take all of the attacks, +3 for an entire round versus many attacks is mathematically huge compared to a single re-roll versus one attack.


Something else you did not consider:

Displacement cannot be used on the Wizard's turn (i.e. immediate actions can only be done on other creature's turns). For example, using it to prevent an opportunity attack or a different immediate action.

Some special powers (like some of the special dragon attacks) will often be done as either opportunity attacks or immediate actions.

Shielding Smite can be used against those powers if they require an AC to hit.

Displacement cannot be used at all against those types of powers or attacks.

 

[catsclaw]

The actual wizard character is actually doing something, right *after* the attack, using up his one immediate action for the round ... Displacement actively restructures the game world- and is a very meta-game spell. Its either rolling back time, or its always on (effecting everyone!), but irrelevant except for once an encounter, or its cast in negative time in order to save a party memeber.

Well, that depends on when during an attack the dice get rolled. You seem to think there's no time between rolling an attack and the attacker making contact with their target.

It's just as valid to think of the "to hit" roll happening just as you begin an attack--the slight pause when you finish pulling a sword back and start swinging it forward, or the moment when your bow string is completely taut, or the moment when the magical energy stops tingling at the tip of your finger and starts surging forward.

A lot of the reroll abilities make a lot more sense if you think about them this way. The ogre raises his club high in the air. Just as it starts to fall, the wizard mutters an arcane syllable. The rogue seems to shift a foot to the left, and the ogre is forced to adjust his aim midswing. The elven ranger pulls back on her bow, aiming at the ogre's eye. At the last possible instant she notices a subtle shift in the wind, and corrects for it.

 

[KarinsDad]

Let me add something else which I chose to leave out due to mathematical rigor- in a situation where the number needed to hit is somewhere between 5 and 20, displacement is far more effective.

2+ needed to hit:
shielding smite takes chance of hit from 95% to 80%
Displacement takes chance of hit from 95% to 90%


5+ needed to hit:
shielding smite takes chance of hit from 80% to 65%
Displacement takes chance of hit from 80% to 64%

10+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite takes chance of hit from 55% to 40%
Displacement takes the chance of hit from 55% to 30%

15+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite takes chance of hit from 30% to 15%
Displacement takes the chance of hit from 30% to 9%

19+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite takes chance of hit from 10% to 5%
Displacement takes chance of hit from 10% to 1%

Only in the most lopsided case does shielding smite benefit you more, and at that point the increase in your protection is really not significant- the number of times you are hit out of 100 goes down by 16%. In the case of a 10+ attack, the numebr of times you are hit every 100 attacks goes down by 45%, versus Shielding Smite's 27%.

Actually, I have to call mathematical foul on this one. The advantages you list range from 1% to 10% advantage for a single attack. That's hardly overwhelming.

Let's look at two attacks against an opponent in a single round for both:

2+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite 80% plus 80%
Displacement 90% plus 95%

5+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite 65% plus 65%
Displacement 64% plus 80%

10+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite 40% plus 40%
Displacement 30% plus 55%

15+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite 15% plus 15%
Displacement 9% plus 30%

19+ needed to hit:
Shielding Smite 5% plus 5%
Displacement 1% plus 10%

In every single case of two attacks against the defender, Shielding Smite averages less damage. Displacement is only better versus the first attack and is then 15% worse against all subsequent attacks. What if there are 5 attacks against the target? Displacement is hardly a blip in that case.

In a game system with opportunity attacks, immediate attacks, and PC roles where a given PC is designed to be the tank in front, +3 AC against multiple attacks is stronger than a single re-roll.

 

[catsclaw]

I do agree with Karinsdad and Plane Sailing on this point, a reroll that allows a crit seems wrong.

Eh. It gives the power a drawback, which makes it more interesting, not less.

I figure if a kobold's about to graze your left side and the wizard makes you suddenly appear a foot to the right, the kobold could correct into where your stomach actually is. Yell at the wizard, and hope the next time she makes you shift left.

 

[Cadfan]

Except for the fact that the +3 AC boost can be against 2 or 5 or more attack rolls by various opponents. With a game system where certain PCs roles try to hold the line and take all of the attacks, +3 for an entire round versus many attacks is mathematically huge compared to a single re-roll versus one attack.

That might be true, with a sufficient number of incoming attacks. See previous posts about when +3 AC is worth the same as a reroll.

Lets say your opponents are about to attack you, and somehow, magically, you know what their attacks will be. They will attack once for 3d10+3 damage, which will hit on an 11+, and four times at 1d8+1 damage, which will hit on a 13+. Apparently the first attack is a daily power like the pregen Fighter's or something.

Overall, your expected damage that you suffer is 9.75 for the first attack, and 2.2 for each other, for a total expected damage of 18.55. Not a good round for your character (for simplicity I ignored critical hits, they don't change things much).

If you have +3 AC on you from Shielding Smite, this shifts the odds. Now you suffer expected damage of 12.325.

What if, instead, you have a Wizard ready and willing to cast Displacement on you? Well, that makes things a bit tougher, because lets say the Wizard isn't going to waste his per encounter Displacement on you for a measly 1d8+1 damage. But if you get hit with the big attack, he'll use it then.

Your expected damage is a little more complex to calculate, because there are some conditions involved, but the net result is 13.675, with a 50% chance that your wizard ally never had to use up his Displacement power because the big attack missed on its own before he decided whether to expend his ability. In my view, the latter piece of information makes Displacement win the comparison, even though a slight edge goes to Shielding Smite in terms of damage prevented. Maybe it doesn't to you, but it does to me.

Now, I can construct examples that make this change. I could have all of the attackers attack versus Reflex, rendering Shielding Smite useless. I could have one gigantic attack and no little attacks, making Displacement better. I could have 10 ranged attacking minions try to pepper the character all at once, making Displacement useless. I could do a lot of different things.

But I chose this example essentially at random. The 3d10+3 ability is about what I remember the pregen Fighter as having for a daily, so it served as a benchmark, and 1d8+1 seemed a fair "generic average hit" type number. It seems fair.

 

[catsclaw]

In a game system with opportunity attacks, immediate attacks, and PC roles where a given PC is designed to be the tank in front, +3 AC against multiple attacks is stronger than a single re-roll.

I'm a little confused as to what you're arguing here. Clearly, Shielding Smite is useful at all levels (i.e., you don't "outgrow" it). And Displacement is useful at all levels (i.e., you never "outgrow" it). But they both have different advantages and drawbacks--whether they require a hit to work, whether it's an immediate or standard action to activate, whether they work against multiple attacks, whether they work against all defenses or just AC--which means each is useful in different situations.

I think the ability to choose what attack to use Displacement against is pretty powerful stuff, as well as the fact it's guaranteed to force a reroll. After all, you've no guarantee any creatures are even going to attack the person you shielded--not a problem with Displacement. But even so, the crux of your argument seems to basically be complaining that there's a level 1 power which doesn't totally suck at level 16. In my mind, that's a testament to how well the powers are designed, not how badly they're designed.

 

[KarinsDad]

What if, instead, you have a Wizard ready and willing to cast Displacement on you? Well, that makes things a bit tougher, because lets say the Wizard isn't going to waste his per encounter Displacement on you for a measly 1d8+1 damage. But if you get hit with the big attack, he'll use it then.

This has a big gaping hole assumption in it.

It assumes the DM says "The BBEG uses his big 3d10+3 daily attack against you".

We do not know the rules for attack type perception in the game, but your example has a pretty big assumption that the Wizard not only has an immediate action available (i.e. he could have used a different immediate action this round when Displacement is needed), but that he knows exactly when to use it (i.e. he knows a daily power is being used).


And as shown in Puggins math above, the advantage gained is only in the 1% to 10% range (depending on chance to hit) compared with a single Shielding Smite defended attack. Even for the 3D10+3, that's a small percentage of average damage less done on that one attack versus 15% more average done on each of the 3 D8+1 attacks.

Now, I can construct examples that make this change. I could have all of the attackers attack versus Reflex, rendering Shielding Smite useless. I could have one gigantic attack and no little attacks, making Displacement better. I could have 10 ranged attacking minions try to pepper the character all at once, making Displacement useless. I could do a lot of different things.

Precisely. All factors cannot be considered. But, the fact that you are not actually proving that Displacement is signficantly better tends to illustrate that it is at best only slightly better.

PS's and my point is not that Displacement is useless, it's that it's lame for a 16th level power. I suspect that when we compare it to other 16th level and lower level similar powers in June, this opinion of ours might be supported.

 

[KarinsDad]

I think the ability to choose what attack to use Displacement against is pretty powerful stuff, as well as the fact it's guaranteed to force a reroll. After all, you've no guarantee any creatures are even going to attack the person you shielded--not a problem with Displacement.

A 16th level ability that might not be able to be used, that may or may not protect against a single attack (or might make it worse), is not 16th level potent.

The real issue here is that Displacement is a high level power which has a fair chance of failing. 1 encounter out of 2 (or more often against BBEGs), it probably won't do a darn thing.