Is the Spell Assassin's Senses too powerful?
- Thread starter Thistleknot
- Start date
James McMurray
First Post
By not as bad, I meant that the damage the two spells seem to deal out is not even comparable. Assassin's Senses doesn't help you get crits near as well as Keen does, and since it is a cleric spell with personal range, unless the cleric is buffed with Divine Favor, they won't be hitting near as often as the fighter-type whose sword has had keen cast on it. Finally, its base 1 round per level duration is an incredible balancing factor. I think you'll find that most clerics would prefer the hour per level combat buff spells, unless you run campaigns where one fight per day is expected.
Crothian said:
double dipping as in instead of applying one obvious element apply two smaller elements whose impact is multiplicative.
battle axe on keen... crits one more time in 20 for +200% damage... +10% net...
battleaxe on this thang... crits one more time in 20 for +300%... +15% net.
Simply put, for weapons with crit on 20, Ok for those slow in the audience lets say many simple weapons, this gives you all the impact, all the bam, all the bang of KEEN ***plus*** an increase in damage multiplier.
So we are already producing MORE than the gross effect of the third level spell for the weapons commonly used by the class.
DOH!
Now we begin to spin it...
"but its duration will only be enough for one combat"
lowering the duration is fine but usually is NOT a tremendous deal when comparing magnitude. I am not dismissing it but its not gonna override the bang.
Lets put it another way...
would you allow bull strength, cats grace, etc at first level spell if they only lasted for 1r/l? If so my sor would love you.
would you allow Poly self at 3rd level spells if it only lasted 1r/l? If so my sor would love you.
would you allow GMW at second level spells if it only lasted 1r/l/ if so my sor would love you.
But fortunately in this case we have a different thing. The spell is EVEN more powerful other than duration. So even if in all the above cases you said "sure that seems close but fair" this spell is more powerful than keen.
Now they line up outside to protest... "but but but it isnt more powerful than keen if cast on other weapons than, well, the ones a cleric will typically use"...
to which the answer is "well DOH... there are weapons which keen would be better on, but guess what rocket scientist, the caster WONT THROW IT ON THOSE WEAPONS.
Bull strength is a pretty useless spell when cast on a turnip. How many levels should we reduce it as a spell based on this? NONE.
When balancing a spell you gotta figure it will be cast intelligently.
James McMurray
First Post
Yes to all three. Why you may ask? Because it mens that you will have to use an all-important combat action to cast your Bull's Strength, Poly Self, or GMW, rather than a trivial pre-combat action. Combine that fact with intelligent opponents who know to run for a minute after seeing a sorcerer turn into an ogre or buff a friend's sword, and you have spells whose effectiveness are greatly reduced.
You're absolutely right. Instead, the cleric would cast it on himself. Since Keen affects the weapon and assassin's senses affects the caster, they will stack. Also, as a side note, typing in all caps (i.e. shouting) rarely enhances ones argument. Speaking of which, talking down to people rarely enhances one's argument. Just a friendly FYI, MAKE OF IT WHAT YOU WILL.
As for your mathematical evidence, it is very convincing. However, How many people who are wanting to crit often actually use weapons with a 20 crit range? Try to reapply the math to higher crit-ranged weapons and I think you'll find that assassin's senses doesn't quite outshine keen, in fact, in many cases it will be worse. Granted, I'm too lazy to do the math myself, so I could be wrong, if so, please show me.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Presumption, the enemies have nothing TO FIGHT FOR. This is just a pickup battle for them. They can pull away for a minute and have no concerns whatsoever over what the party can do in that minute. In my games, the serious fights usually have a reason and as such pulling back and giving the area to your enemy for a minute is not NORMALLY a good thing.
"Ok and now we are... uhh boss whiel we were gone they wrecked the alter and left. Can we do that big ritual of yours without the altar made of 1000 bones from hanged men? boss? Are you crying?"
Again even if these are Ok, the one in question provides more than the longer version.
snip the " you aren't posting like i want you to crap"
How can you be wrong when thats what i said above?
Ok i will try this again since you did not get it the first time...
On low crit chance weapons, this spell beats keen hands down in its effect. this happens to coincide with the clerics base weapons list pretty well.
On high crit chance weapons, the spell is worse than keen. of course, the clerics wont throw this spell if he is using those weapons. This is therefore not important.
Example: Bull strength when cast on a fighter is a wonderful spell. Bull strength when cast on a turnip is a lousy spell. Should we take the turnip thing into account and make bull strength a cantrip? NO! no one will cast bull strength on a turnip so it doesn't matter.
if you want to claim balance because if used poorly the spell doesn't do as much as a HIGHER level spell, then that shows a great deal about your sense of balance.
For my money, i want to see how much it does when used intelligently by those who can use it.
In my game, this spell would not be second level. it can be a cantrip in yours if you wish.
enjoy your games.
And a spell level down instead of an all important higher level spell.James McMurray said:
Presumption, these intelligent enemies know how to tell the difference between these and the longer ones. Not a valid case in at least half the combats i see.James McMurray said:
Presumption, the enemies have nothing TO FIGHT FOR. This is just a pickup battle for them. They can pull away for a minute and have no concerns whatsoever over what the party can do in that minute. In my games, the serious fights usually have a reason and as such pulling back and giving the area to your enemy for a minute is not NORMALLY a good thing.
"Ok and now we are... uhh boss whiel we were gone they wrecked the alter and left. Can we do that big ritual of yours without the altar made of 1000 bones from hanged men? boss? Are you crying?"
No, you have lower level spells with different goals.James McMurray said:
Again even if these are Ok, the one in question provides more than the longer version.
Which has little to do with a comparison but does indeed add one more point of benefit to this spell.James McMurray said:
snip the " you aren't posting like i want you to crap"
irrelevent. the question is about what the spell does and can do when used properly. not about who would want what weapon. The cleric's weapon list is pretty good for low crit chance weapons. That;s the same set of weapons this spell beats keen at.James McMurray said:
James McMurray said:
How can you be wrong when thats what i said above?
Ok i will try this again since you did not get it the first time...
On low crit chance weapons, this spell beats keen hands down in its effect. this happens to coincide with the clerics base weapons list pretty well.
On high crit chance weapons, the spell is worse than keen. of course, the clerics wont throw this spell if he is using those weapons. This is therefore not important.
Example: Bull strength when cast on a fighter is a wonderful spell. Bull strength when cast on a turnip is a lousy spell. Should we take the turnip thing into account and make bull strength a cantrip? NO! no one will cast bull strength on a turnip so it doesn't matter.
if you want to claim balance because if used poorly the spell doesn't do as much as a HIGHER level spell, then that shows a great deal about your sense of balance.
For my money, i want to see how much it does when used intelligently by those who can use it.
In my game, this spell would not be second level. it can be a cantrip in yours if you wish.
enjoy your games.
Last edited:
Petrosian said:
Actually, I showed above that for a sword (19-20/x2 crit), assassin's senses is just as useful as it is for an axe (20/x3 crit). You won't get as many crits as with keen edge, but each crit will be much worse. A x3 crit is nothing to be sneezed at, especially if you have bull's str and enhancement bonuses adding to the damage.
James McMurray
First Post
Did I say I would allow both a round per level version of the spells you mentioned and a hour per level version? No? Also, add to the equation the fact that the odds of being hit by dispel magic are greater if the enemy has actually seen you cast buffing spells and you'll find that the round per level spells don't always last their entire duration.
I ususally have enemies with something to fight for as well. That doesn't mean that they have to fight to the death though. So the 1000 bone altar is destroyed? at least the bossman is still alive, and his minions are as well. they cn rebuild. If they hang around and fight against buffed opponents they deserve the death tey get. and, since PCs generally win, the outcome will be the same, the altar will still be destroyed.
As for "you aren't posting like I want you to" I could care less how you post, I just thought that if you're going to be engaging in discussions on the internet, you might enjoy a little friendly advice on how to get your point across. If not, that's fine by me, it isn't as if one more persno who thinks that typing in all caps is going to make their points mre valid is going to bring the exchange of intellectual ideas to a grinding halt.
I contend that the mathematical part isn't irrelevant. A fireball is much more effective against a white dragon than against a titan, should we raise the fireball's spell level because if that? 10d6 x 2 certainly isn't fair for a 3rd level spell from a 10th level caster, so if we're going to be balancing spells based on only a fraction of the situations in which they could be uesd, we'd better nerf the fireball spell a bit don't ya think?
I disagree with your point that this spell beats keen hands down even on the low crit weapons. Sure, Assassin's senses increases the percentage damage gained from crits, however, keen will end up dealing much more damage per casting due to its ability to last through several combats.
I'm not claiming balance based on poor use of the spell. To take your examples further, let's say that over the course of a day a 5th level (high enough to cast both keen and assassin's senses) party enters into 4 fights, and those fights each last 10 rounds each.
An assassin's senses boosted cleric will get 4 rounds of attacks from his club that day. However, if keen is used, that same cleric will get 40 rounds of attacks. Do you really think that Assassin's Senses is more powerful than keen in this instance? Of course not. Granted, in situations where the party is facing a single battle per day, lower level spells with 1r/lvl durations are going to be better.
I will enjoy my games. I doubt I'll be making the spell a cantrip though. Besides, wouldn't that be an orison?
Hong: Just reread your posts. Good points, I'd missed them the first time through. However, I still don't think Assasin's Senses needs to be increased in level, simply because as you say, its much less useful for Pcs unless they're fighting the boss. ny other situation and the low duration means you'll be taking out a few lowly underlings with it, something that could probably have been done without it.
I ususally have enemies with something to fight for as well. That doesn't mean that they have to fight to the death though. So the 1000 bone altar is destroyed? at least the bossman is still alive, and his minions are as well. they cn rebuild. If they hang around and fight against buffed opponents they deserve the death tey get. and, since PCs generally win, the outcome will be the same, the altar will still be destroyed.
As for "you aren't posting like I want you to" I could care less how you post, I just thought that if you're going to be engaging in discussions on the internet, you might enjoy a little friendly advice on how to get your point across. If not, that's fine by me, it isn't as if one more persno who thinks that typing in all caps is going to make their points mre valid is going to bring the exchange of intellectual ideas to a grinding halt.
I contend that the mathematical part isn't irrelevant. A fireball is much more effective against a white dragon than against a titan, should we raise the fireball's spell level because if that? 10d6 x 2 certainly isn't fair for a 3rd level spell from a 10th level caster, so if we're going to be balancing spells based on only a fraction of the situations in which they could be uesd, we'd better nerf the fireball spell a bit don't ya think?
I disagree with your point that this spell beats keen hands down even on the low crit weapons. Sure, Assassin's senses increases the percentage damage gained from crits, however, keen will end up dealing much more damage per casting due to its ability to last through several combats.
I'm not claiming balance based on poor use of the spell. To take your examples further, let's say that over the course of a day a 5th level (high enough to cast both keen and assassin's senses) party enters into 4 fights, and those fights each last 10 rounds each.
An assassin's senses boosted cleric will get 4 rounds of attacks from his club that day. However, if keen is used, that same cleric will get 40 rounds of attacks. Do you really think that Assassin's Senses is more powerful than keen in this instance? Of course not. Granted, in situations where the party is facing a single battle per day, lower level spells with 1r/lvl durations are going to be better.
I will enjoy my games. I doubt I'll be making the spell a cantrip though. Besides, wouldn't that be an orison?
Hong: Just reread your posts. Good points, I'd missed them the first time through. However, I still don't think Assasin's Senses needs to be increased in level, simply because as you say, its much less useful for Pcs unless they're fighting the boss. ny other situation and the low duration means you'll be taking out a few lowly underlings with it, something that could probably have been done without it.
[/B][/QUOTE]
to start throwing dispels. After all, if they equip their guys with these toys... why would they have to see them being cast to consider the possibility that maybe somehow someone else in the cosmos has figured it out too?
YMMV.
snip the even more "how you post" stuff...
Apples are not oranges.
oranges are not apples.
Some creatures are vulnerable to a fireball, some are immune. Thats a built in nature of ENERGY attacks in the system.
IF the caster got to choose which opponents he faced. IF the caster got to choose to have all his enemies be fire vulnerable. IF those issues were in his control 99% of the time, then YES fireball would be balanced using the damage it does 99% of the time. it would be silly to balance it against the damage it did 1% of the time, right?
The spell we were discussing is not relying on any special vulnerabilities outside of his control. Its not relying on random weapon allotment. The same guy who throws the spell will CHOOSE which weapons he uses while it is up.
Read the last two paragraphs again. Got it? OK.
So the thing your argument fails to even consider is the frequency with which the given levels of effect will occur.
Unless the caster is stupid he will be castiung the spell at times when he is using weapons that it does good for the vast majority of the time. Therefore, that is the proper case to consider for the bulk of the balancing. (Unlike with fireball where its not his choice as often as not.)
That you missed that distinction entirely says a lot about your ability to analyze for balances.
There are at least two distinct things at work... MAGNITUDE... how big the bang is ... and DURATION...how long you enjoy the benefits.
I kept them distinct, giving the nod to duration being an edge to keen.. you seem to want to count duration again and again until you get the spell down far enough.
And i am not arguing that overall, all things considered the spell is MORE powerful a spell, i am actually arguing it is the same. You are arguing it is weaker.
Now i must admit i am wrong... the following numbers go for comparison of KEEN vs MUNCHKIN SENSES for a variety of weapons representing a variety of weapons over a variety of ranges and multipliers"
MACE (20/x2) KEEN+5% MS+15%
BattleAXE (20/x3) KEEN+10% MS+20%
LONGSWORD (19-20/x2) KEEN+10% MS+20%
RAPIER (18-20/x2) KEEN+15% MS+20%
SCYTHE (20/x4) KEEN+15% MS+20%
Example of math to show results.
LONGSWORD KEEN adds 2 in 20 chances of +100% to damage over normal for a net +10%.
Longsword Munchkin Senses adds 1 chance in 20 for +200% damage for +10% AND increases damage on already existing 2 in 20 critical chances by an additional 100% for another +10% adding up to a net +20%. (The improvement on already existing threat range damage was where i erred before.)
So, in fact, the magnitude of the effect for Munchkin Senses is greater for a wide variety of weapons, including those often sought by those "wanting criticals" and those normally available to the cleric.
its just MORE. That pretty much reduces the fireball vs dragon attempt you made above to only an example of your "analytical strengths"
So in short, even if one accepts that having the SAME EFFECT but only for rounds vs hours is indeed ONE SPELL LEVEL DOWN, you then run headlong with this one into it being rounds vs hours BUT MORE EFFECT during that period.
Maybe you can ignore this, since apparently in your games player choose their enemies as easily as they choose their weapons, but others might not.
So eben if you
No you didn't, i just had no reason to believe that in your campaign or in your balance considerations the notion of a sorter duration version and a longer duration at higher level would be an automatic no-no. I have no idea as to why this would be the case, but if for you it is to be presumed, that says more about your balancing logic.James McMurray said:
Usually by round 1 or 2 of serious battles in my games the enemy has seen magic at use and is considering dispels if he has a chance. Since its COMMON for magically powerful adversaries to use buffing spells, my int 20 wizards don't have to wait and SEE for themselves that the mage is casting buffs or that the fighter is bull strengthed or that those blinding fast bonuses to Ac from haste are not a natural thingJames McMurray said:
to start throwing dispels. After all, if they equip their guys with these toys... why would they have to see them being cast to consider the possibility that maybe somehow someone else in the cosmos has figured it out too?YMMV.
Again, there are typically tactical options but in most serious fights there is something being fought over. of course if the other option is certain death, they will flee... but if the other option is certain death, coming back a minute later because the clerics has now lost his faux-keenness is a little silly.James McMurray said:
snip the even more "how you post" stuff...
Ok we will try again...James McMurray said:
Apples are not oranges.
oranges are not apples.
Some creatures are vulnerable to a fireball, some are immune. Thats a built in nature of ENERGY attacks in the system.
IF the caster got to choose which opponents he faced. IF the caster got to choose to have all his enemies be fire vulnerable. IF those issues were in his control 99% of the time, then YES fireball would be balanced using the damage it does 99% of the time. it would be silly to balance it against the damage it did 1% of the time, right?
The spell we were discussing is not relying on any special vulnerabilities outside of his control. Its not relying on random weapon allotment. The same guy who throws the spell will CHOOSE which weapons he uses while it is up.
Read the last two paragraphs again. Got it? OK.
So the thing your argument fails to even consider is the frequency with which the given levels of effect will occur.
Unless the caster is stupid he will be castiung the spell at times when he is using weapons that it does good for the vast majority of the time. Therefore, that is the proper case to consider for the bulk of the balancing. (Unlike with fireball where its not his choice as often as not.)
That you missed that distinction entirely says a lot about your ability to analyze for balances.
Uhh... but wait... i thought you were already accounting duration in lowering the spell level. Now you also want to assess duration against the magnitude too?James McMurray said:
There are at least two distinct things at work... MAGNITUDE... how big the bang is ... and DURATION...how long you enjoy the benefits.
I kept them distinct, giving the nod to duration being an edge to keen.. you seem to want to count duration again and again until you get the spell down far enough.
No one is dispouting the notion that duration favors keen. You have a spell with REDUCED DURATION and INCREASED magnitude...James McMurray said:
More powerful in EFFECT, in MAGNITUDE, not in duration. i never disputed duration favoring KEEN.James McMurray said:
And i am not arguing that overall, all things considered the spell is MORE powerful a spell, i am actually arguing it is the same. You are arguing it is weaker.
Or in situations where they are fighting FEW MAJOR battles and several lighter ones in a given run. Like say a typical raid where you encounter sentries and guards with some degree of surprise and such and eventually run into organized opposition.James McMurray said:
Now i must admit i am wrong... the following numbers go for comparison of KEEN vs MUNCHKIN SENSES for a variety of weapons representing a variety of weapons over a variety of ranges and multipliers"
MACE (20/x2) KEEN+5% MS+15%
BattleAXE (20/x3) KEEN+10% MS+20%
LONGSWORD (19-20/x2) KEEN+10% MS+20%
RAPIER (18-20/x2) KEEN+15% MS+20%
SCYTHE (20/x4) KEEN+15% MS+20%
Example of math to show results.
LONGSWORD KEEN adds 2 in 20 chances of +100% to damage over normal for a net +10%.
Longsword Munchkin Senses adds 1 chance in 20 for +200% damage for +10% AND increases damage on already existing 2 in 20 critical chances by an additional 100% for another +10% adding up to a net +20%. (The improvement on already existing threat range damage was where i erred before.)
So, in fact, the magnitude of the effect for Munchkin Senses is greater for a wide variety of weapons, including those often sought by those "wanting criticals" and those normally available to the cleric.
its just MORE. That pretty much reduces the fireball vs dragon attempt you made above to only an example of your "analytical strengths"
So in short, even if one accepts that having the SAME EFFECT but only for rounds vs hours is indeed ONE SPELL LEVEL DOWN, you then run headlong with this one into it being rounds vs hours BUT MORE EFFECT during that period.
Maybe you can ignore this, since apparently in your games player choose their enemies as easily as they choose their weapons, but others might not.
So eben if you
Victim
First Post
If you made Bull's Str first level with a 1 round/level duration and greater magic weapon with 1 round per level a 3rd level cleric spell, I wouldn't use those versions. The main point of persistent spell is to turn a spell that has a short duration and thus uses up a combat action into a spell doesn't need a combat action since it's always up. Similarly, Quicken spell also turns a combat action into a trivial action. Both cost 4 spell levels. In most cases, going the other way around for one level spell is a waste.
However, looking at the numbers you have up, Assassin's senses does seem better than keen if we assume the that duration vs spell level is wash. I'm not too sure on this, but keen edge is only 10 min, so it's probably close. However, am I the only person who thinks Keen Edge sucks? The only reason I've seen people learn it is to make keen weapons, not to cast it during adventures. Compared to other buffing level 3 spells like GMW, keen edge feels weak. In other words, just because Keen Edge sucks, doesn't mean all other similar spells should be forced down.
However, looking at the numbers you have up, Assassin's senses does seem better than keen if we assume the that duration vs spell level is wash. I'm not too sure on this, but keen edge is only 10 min, so it's probably close. However, am I the only person who thinks Keen Edge sucks? The only reason I've seen people learn it is to make keen weapons, not to cast it during adventures. Compared to other buffing level 3 spells like GMW, keen edge feels weak. In other words, just because Keen Edge sucks, doesn't mean all other similar spells should be forced down.
James McMurray
First Post
Well, looks like we'll have to agree to diagree then, because I make it a point to leave discussions once the word munchkin gets bandied about, since it is such an ambiguous term and has come to mean "anything that doesn't fit my idea of what power level should be".
Victim: I'd hav to disagree with keen edge sucking, since its much easier to cast keen edge than it is to make keen weapons, and also given the fact that the +1 you would have gotten from keen is a +1 you can gve to flaming or shock or something along those lines. Granted, in my cmpaign the party rarely casts keen, and even then only if they know they'll be in a fight soon. however, the cleric almost always has persistent Assassin's senses up unless he knows he'll need those level slots for other spells.
Victim: I'd hav to disagree with keen edge sucking, since its much easier to cast keen edge than it is to make keen weapons, and also given the fact that the +1 you would have gotten from keen is a +1 you can gve to flaming or shock or something along those lines. Granted, in my cmpaign the party rarely casts keen, and even then only if they know they'll be in a fight soon. however, the cleric almost always has persistent Assassin's senses up unless he knows he'll need those level slots for other spells.
Similar Threads
