Please rate Divine Vengeance

[Archer]

If the feat is supposed to give +2d6 damage for 2 rounds per attempt expended then its a 6. Its better than weapon specialization if you are fighting undead and useless otherwise.

If the feat gives +2d6 damage for 1 round after spending the previous round activating the power then it is unequivocally a 1. There is no conceivable situation in which using this feat would have a better result than not using this feat.

Ideally no divine feat would require extra turning as a prereq. If someone wanted it to power their many divine feats that would be fine but to require it is wrong.

 

[reapersaurus]

Ridley's Cohort has it exactly right.

Li Shenron has some very interesting points.

Archer, you are exactly correct that unless Divine Vengeance (and other Divine Feats) are errated or FAQ'd, then their benefit is so slight as to be negligable, especially for the high price of the feat(s).

I voted a 2, since it technically is not useless, it's just a very bad idea to waste your feats and actions this way.

Currently, by the rules, Divine Vengeance takes a standard action to activate - ALL the time, it is better to do something else with your action.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If the feat gives +2d6 damage for 1 round after spending the previous round activating the power then it is unequivocally a 1. There is no conceivable situation in which using this feat would have a better result than not using this feat.

Like, for example, the second-level cleric with no magic weapons confronted with an undead with 5/+1 DR?

His 5 damage with his morningstar twice over two rounds has no effect... his 5 damage + 7 sacred damage in one round actually makes a mark...

(I'm not saying it's a good reason to take the feat... but it's a conceivable situation where using the feat has a better result than not using the feat )

-Hyp.

 

[Archer]

And which undead has 5/+1 DR again? The cleric should cast magic weapon and beat on the undead with the +1 morning star which now averages 6 damage past DR for the rest of the combat rather than 7 damage for 1 round. Only a human cleric would have enough feats at 2nd level to have divine vengeance. I still say there is no situation in which using this feat is better than not using it going by the so called official interpretation.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The cleric should cast magic weapon...

... which relies on having it memorised. DV he can call upon spontaneously.

-Hyp.

 

[Marshall]

Re: Re: What sort of action does it take to activate?

1) This is a Divine Feat
2) DoF says all Divine feats require a standard action to activate.
3) FAQ, says Divine Mightdoes not require an action to activate.
4) There is nothing in the errata or FAQ to indicate that all Divine feats have been changed to 'not an action'.

Therefore Divine Vengeance take a standard action to activate.

Wasn't there a post a week or so ago that had a "Sage Response" where he 'clarified' the FAQ to say that

1.) Using Divine Might is a free action
2.) Activating Divine Might is still a Standard Action

That sounds much more like the average Sage response than the FAQs "It's FREE!!!"

 

[reapersaurus]

Re: Re: Re: What sort of action does it take to activate?

Wasn't there a post a week or so ago that had a "Sage Response" where he 'clarified' the FAQ to say that

1.) Using Divine Might is a free action
2.) Activating Divine Might is still a Standard Action

noooo.
He stated that was his personal opinion, but was overridden by WotC with the FAQ text.

Now, if anyone plays D&D by The Sage's personal rules opinions that are stated in one email to one person on the planet, then Yes - Divine Might is a standard action.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I am seriously started thinking the whole "standard action to activate" thing was a serious mistake by the author of the book, and it was probably added at the last second before printing because they noticed that the author haven't written anything about how much time it takes to use every single divine feats.

...

Sorry if I sound harsh, but I really think the divine feats are very different from each other, and not all of them look like an action, some look like just a bonus to another action, and I wouldn't expect them to be standard actions only because a Turn Undead attempt is.

I think you raise some interesting points. In my mind Divine Cleansing, Divine Resistance, and Divine Vengeance are painfully stupid feats if they require a standard action to use. However, I could see, say, Divine Resistance as being a usuable feat if you get to invoke it at the instance a Fireball lands on your party.

D. Cleansing, D.Resistance, and D. Vengeance are so bad I doubt I would even bother using them if the DM gave them to my Paladin character for free. That is a sure sign that someone botched the design process.

Even the best of the bunch, DMight, DShield, and DVigor are only so-so as standard actions because of the steep prereqs. With a standard action to activate, I wouldn't give any of the lot better than a '5' rating.

If my Paladin or Cleric is going to spend feats on a feat tree, it better do something pretty impressive.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Actually, it's slightly better than that. The 2d6 is sacred energy damage so it all bypasses DR thus averaging 7 points of damage per hit, even against DR 10/+2 undead.

It could also be useful for a dual wielding character or a character with whirlwind attack who did not begin the combat within melee range of his foes but expected to be charged the next round. Come to think of it, it could be very good for a spiked chain (or glaive) paladin with combat reflexes who anticipated being charged by a horde of skeletons or zombies. +2d6 on each AoO and then +2d6 on all of his attacks in the next round.

Of course, it's only useful if a character anticipates fighting lots of undead, isn't very good at turning, and is set up to maximize his advantage from the feat. It's not a good feat but it isn't as useless as some are making it out to be either. It's certainly no Eagle Claw.

And which undead has 5/+1 DR again? The cleric should cast magic weapon and beat on the undead with the +1 morning star which now averages 6 damage past DR for the rest of the combat rather than 7 damage for 1 round. Only a human cleric would have enough feats at 2nd level to have divine vengeance. I still say there is no situation in which using this feat is better than not using it going by the so called official interpretation.

 

[Marshall]

Re: Re: Re: Re: What sort of action does it take to activate?

noooo.
He stated that was his personal opinion, but was overridden by WotC with the FAQ text.

From reading that response I got the impression(especially the part where he says 'somebody who actually reads') that the above IS what the FAQ is trying to say and its only the phraseology that is all screwed up.

IOW, the FAQ needs a FAQ.