Question on Flame Blade...

[RigaMortus]

The damage itself may not be "uber" for a level 9 Druid, but the fact that it's a touch attack is what makes it appealing for me. Imagine always doing 8 points of damage with a long sword, and having it be a touch attack to boot. Not bad IMHO.

Oh and yeah, for some reason I was under the impression it was +4 to spell level. I guess Empower is +2 then?

 

[Darklone]

Yupp, Empower: +2
Maximize: +3
Quicken: +4

Too bad you can't attack with free actions with a Quickened Flameblade

 

[jgsugden]

moved to new thread ...

 

[jgsugden]

The damage itself may not be "uber" for a level 9 Druid, but the fact that it's a touch attack is what makes it appealing for me. Imagine always doing 8 points of damage with a long sword, and having it be a touch attack to boot. Not bad IMHO.

Unless you have a strength bonus. FB doesn't allow strength damage.

 

[James McMurray]

Empowered Flameblade? I'd rather use the good old Flame Strike

Even when your foe is in melee with you and your friends?

Over the course of 4 rounds, assuming you have 2 attacks which all hit and are 9th level, you will do an average of 102 damage with Flame Blade. 4 Flame Strikes would require a 26 Wisdom and all of your 4th level spell slots to do 126 damage if your foe fails all 4 saves.

Empowered Flame Blade gets even nicer when combined with haste to give a 3rd attack (153 average damage).

The Flame Blade deals more damage at the expense of having to be in melee, while the flame strikes deal less damage (if a save if made) but they deal all that damage in an area, whih could be either good or bad.

I would probably memorize one of each and use them as the situation warranted.

 

[RigaMortus]

All I'm saying is, sometimes you need to use fire against and opponent, and sometimes you can't hit them because of their heavy armor (natural or otherwise)...

Besides, the use I'd have for this spell is more for character concept than anything else.

 

[jgsugden]

Even when your foe is in melee with you and your friends?

Over the course of 4 rounds, assuming you have 2 attacks which all hit and are 9th level, you will do an average of 102 damage with Flame Blade. 4 Flame Strikes would require a 26 Wisdom and all of your 4th level spell slots to do 126 damage if your foe fails all 4 saves.

To use a flame blade for four rounds of combat, you need to cast it (1 rd) and use it (4 rds). Unless your foe is particularly vulnerable to fire, you're probably better off with a flame strike and four fournds of normal wildshaped melee attacks.

 

[DarkMaster]

They would stack with one another but not with themselves.

I look at it more like 3.0 Shield. You couldn't cast it twice in order to get +7 AC against the entire battlefield, because it wouldn't stack with itself, even if oriented differently.

From SRD
Shield creates an invisible, tower shield-sized mobile disk of force that hovers in front of you

I never quite understood the effect of a tower shield. If I understand correctly your interpretation of in front of you a tower shield provide 100% cover on all side since there are no facing in 3.5?
edit: added from SRD

 

[James McMurray]

Not if your foe has a high AC and a low touch AC. Against, for example, a dragon (not a red one of course) you'll be much better off making 2 touch attacks for 25 damage instead of 3 wild shape attacks which might not even hit. Your expected damage also increases due to the increased threat range (18-20/x2 instead of 20/x2).

For instance, at 9th level you'll have +8/+3 to hit (assuming just BAB and +2 strength) with each attack dealing an average of 12.75 damage. We'll give 4 rounds of attacks (cast + attack for four rounds).

As a wildshaped polar bear you'll have 2 claws +14 and a bite +9, with average damages of 12.5, 12.5, and 11.

If your foe is a young adult green dragon (AC 25 without spells, touch AC 9), your average damage with the Flame Blade (not including crits) will be 21.7 damage per round, or 86.8 total damage. Of course, adding haste or crits will greatly enhance this damage.

With flame blade and wild shaped attacks your average damage will be: 22 (flame strike, DC 18 for half) + 61 (claws). Total expected damage 83.

The two average damages are very close, but Flame Blade didn't factor in the chance for a critical. And if there is a spellcaster hasting the party (and there should be in every dragon fight) then your expected damage increases greatly.

 

[James McMurray]

From SRD
Shield creates an invisible, tower shield-sized mobile disk of force that hovers in front of you

I never quite understood the effect of a tower shield. If I understand correctly your interpretation of in front of you a tower shield provide 100% cover on all side since there are no facing in 3.5?
edit: added from SRD

In 3.5 tower shields grant a +4 shield bonus to AC from all directions. They can still be used to gain cover, but the default usage is +4 shield bonus to AC. Getting cover requires you to give up all your attacks. I wish they han't been so vague though. Does "give up all your attacks" mean that you have to use a standard action to get cover, or can you still cast spells and get the cover? Can you cast attack spells, or would that not be allowed because you have to "give up all your attacks."