Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cognomen's Cassowary" data-source="post: 6876925" data-attributes="member: 6801445">Since the purpose of ADHW is nuking an area without harming your own undead pets, the best comparison seems to me to be chain lightning, which similarly allows you to harm enemies in an area without hurting your minions. So.In casting time, range, components, and duration, they are equal. ADHW fills a thirty-foot cube, for a 900 square-foot footprint and an impressive 27,000 cubic-foot volume. Chain lightning as an eighth-level spell damages six targets within thirty feet of the center-most target, notionally giving it a circular footprint of roughly 2827 square feet and an 84,823 cubic-foot volume . . . if we can conceive of chain lightning as a sphere. I think that is a bit disingenuous due to the limited number of targets, and chain lightning also stipulates that the central creature be visible to the caster, while ADHW has no visibility requirement. I would thus call size and targeting a wash between the two, with each having its advantages.That brings us to damage. In raw terms, they have the same damage, 10d8 (average 45). If we apply multipliers based on the commonness of resistance, immunity, and vulnerability, necrotic (0.962) is superior to lightning (0.936). However, the type of saving throw forced is more important. The Con save of ADHW is generally much harder to deal full damage against than the Dex of CL. If you have exactly a 60% chance to deal full damage across all ability scores and AC against all enemies in the Monster Manual, your chance to deal full damage against Con is about 47.0%, while your chance to deal full damage Dex is just above 66.5%. Both spells deal half damage on a successful save. Thus:45*0.962=43.2 damage to failed saves, and 43.2/2=21.6 to successful saves, makes43.2*0.47+21.6*0.53=31.8 damage to the average victim of ADHWcompared to:45*0.936=42.1 damage to failed saves, and 42.12/2=21.1 to successes, makes42.1*0.665+21.1*0.335=35.1 damage to the average target of CLSince chain lightning targets six creatures, its average total damage is 35.1*6=210.6. ADHW would have to encompass 210.6/31.8=6.62 enemies to equal it. Other considerations: chain lightning will not damage non-undead, non-construct PCs and NPCs; ADHW will. Chain lightning can be scaled down as far as sixth level if there are fewer targets; ADHW cannot. ADHW cannot deal damage to enemy undead and constructs, while CL can. Conversely, ADHW disadvantages plants and water elementals (the average damage rises to 35.5 against those targets), but CL has no advantages against particular types of enemies.From all of that, I would conclude that, for a sorcerer with a very limited number of spells known and limited options for reanimating the dead, Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting is a bad spell. For most wizards, it is also bad, though not quite as bad. For a wizard who can consistently cast ADHW on at least seven enemies without encompassing non-undead, non-construct allies, and who uses undead minions with enough frequency that higher-damage spells like vitriolic sphere and erupting earth would be detrimental, and who doesn't give up too much in his spellbook for it, Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting is better than chain lightning, which makes it very good.</blockquote>

Verification