Flamebrand vs. Chain Lightning

[Gromm]

That is funny you say that, my player is playing an elemental savant (air) and he memorizes all energy spells as lightning (with one of the elemental feats, can't remember what it is called)..... this spell is an obvious wversight on WotC's part imho...

I agree its ugly beyond belief (course I'm in said party so I don't mind as much). A spells elemental type shouldn't IMO be a basis for balancing. For one theres energy adj, and 80% of the things in D&D aren't immune (giants, most dragons, people, etc). Of course its basically an improved explosive cascade (which is insane in its own little way). It just sucks that they made chain lightning utterly worthless (I guess its lightning if you don't have the mixture feat).

And as far as the line of sight, its really not THAT hard to see everyone you are fighting (or at least the square they are standing in).

 

[bleedthefreak]

Hey B

I was hoping you'd see this message, I was glad to get some feedback from you. On the one hand, I am NOT going to make any changes (but did you see they made Boots of S and S 6,000gp now?) or anything, I just mostly wanted to vent, this spell pretty much cremes all the foes I throw at you guys, and the DC is insane on it (I mean come on, giants have lots of hit points, but they can't really take 2 flame brands full on and have any chance left against the two melee fighters let alone your cleric!). It hasn't been a *huge* issue or anything, I just wanted some extra takes on it, especially on Chain Lightning, which seems VERY weak comparitively.

I wonder if chain lightning would be better served if the extra bolts did the *same* damage as the primary, and the damage was capped at 15d6 for the secondary bolts? So a 17th level mage could target someone for 17d6 and then anyone nearby for up to 15d6 damage? It's long range would make it devestating, but the 30' "extra target" limit would still be prohibitive. What if the 30' limit was made large, say 45' or 60', but the damage was not touched? Hmm....

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Sorry to disagree with everyone but the problem is all these spells follow the damage guidlines in the dmg, and as is chain lightining is a high end spell by the rules. 5th level spells can be area of effect and 15d6, 6th level spells can be single target and 20d6 or area of effect and 15d6. Chain lightning does single target damage to one target, and then has additional targets for 10d6 or less than the area of effect damage. And that seems right to me.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

to add to my coments. Note in the dmg the damage caps generally go up every two levels. 0d6 area of effect for level 1, 5d6 level 2, 10d6 level3-4,15d6level 5-6,20d6 level 7-8, 25d6 level 9. Single target level same as above but gain damage for attack one level sooner so 5d6 level 1,10d6level 2-3, 15d6 level 4-5, 20d6 level 6-7, 25d6level 8-9. Personally I would allow chain versions like chain lighting at the 2nd level of that damage category. For example level 3 you could have a 10d6 primary target, 5d6 secondary targets spells. And simularly I'd allow a selective area of effect spell at one level higher so a 10d6 chhose your targets in the area of effect would be a level 4 spell.

So under those guidelines chain lightning would actually be a 7th level spell, and firebrand would be level 6.

 

[Victim]

Initial damage on a spell is very different from final damage.

Chain Lightning throwing out a 20d6 bolt will probably be better than Firebrand throwing out 15 dice bursts, even with weaker secondary shots on chain lightning.

However, at level 11, both spells do the same damage to one target, and firebrand does more to secondaries.

Similarly, an empowered fireball does 15d6 at level ten, while the cone of cold spell only would do 10d6.

Higher level spells have much better damage caps, but that does help right away. However, most people are going to first develope an opinion on the actual effect of a spell when they start using it.

 

[Gromm]

Initial damage on a spell is very different from final damage.

Chain Lightning throwing out a 20d6 bolt will probably be better than Firebrand throwing out 15 dice bursts, even with weaker secondary shots on chain lightning.

However, at level 11, both spells do the same damage to one target, and firebrand does more to secondaries.

Similarly, an empowered fireball does 15d6 at level ten, while the cone of cold spell only would do 10d6.

Higher level spells have much better damage caps, but that does help right away. However, most people are going to first develope an opinion on the actual effect of a spell when they start using it.

Consider that while a 20d6 chain lightning is good, you get it at level 20. While the firebrand is doing 15d6 to 15 targets at level 15. Firebrand is superior in every way. Personally I'd rather do 15d6 to up to 20 targets (basically everyone your fighting and then some) than 20d6 to one and 10d6 to a couple of others (due to the range limits for secondaries on CL).

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Maybe they should of increased the damage for single target spells, and spells like chain lighting that are single target+1/2 damage to some other target spells. But in the rules dmg damage caps for spells, these spells seem to pan out.

Personally I agree with you,( I see the problem in the damage caps) and I might go further even and say that for me I'd rather blast an area and maybe lose out on some targets because of friendly targets in the area than use something as cheezy damage wise as chain lightning. At 20th level it sounds like good damage, but at 12th oh no one guy gets hit for 12d6 and everyone else gets hit for a big whoppong 6d6 if they don't save. What these spells should be is that single target spells and spells that chain with 1/2 damage to secondary targets should universally not allow a save.

 

[Victim]

Some spells are better early on others are better later.

For example, sleep is a great first level spell, but it sucks after a while. Magic missile starts off little better than a crossbow bolt, but turns into a wizard's #1 choice for cheap, reliable damage after a few levels, especially against evading characters. Flame arrow is junk at level 5, but can throw out 20d6 at level 20. Chain lightning is somewhat similar, although less extreme. When you get Chainlightning, an Empowered fireball does more damage. That doesn't mean that empowered fireballs render other damage spells useless.

Also, the damage on chain lightning is targeted rather than area. In most fights with firebrand, there's not much difference. However, enemies wearing baby armor or something should probably get hit with targeted effects.

Finally, I tend to prefer more damage to one target instead of less to more. Kill one guy, then move to the next so that the enemy loses firepower faster than you.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

The probelm with the more damage to one target theory is that by the time it would actualy be doing more damage you have access to AoE spells that have the same max. Also you only see the more damage at really higher levels 16+ and the more damage is at most a measly 5d6 which is absolutley nothing at 16+levels.

 

[Roland Delacroix]

The Empowered Fireball for comparison is a little off. Sure Firebrand is better, but the Empowered Fireball takes a feat to use. By all rights the Empowered Fireball should do MORE damage since it requires a feat and has a lower DC for an equal level spell slot.