Wraithstrike balance evaluation examples

[Mistwell]

Sigh - no wraithstrike is the lynchpin - that's the entire problem - it takes an effective combo (arcane strike, power attack etc.) and puts it over the top.

Actually power attack seems to be just as much of a lynchpin. Which is why some were arguing the problem is the new power attack and not this spell. A high BAB and HP and AC also all seem to be critical to this build. The builds for the most part had a lot of things in common, and Wraithstrike was far from being the only common denominator.

I get that you guys think it is overpowered. There is no need to exagerate things and pretend that wraitstrike alone does 180 points of damage without anything else. A 12th level wizard with a staff is not doing 180 points of extra damage if he casts wraithstrike, so let's not take out the context of the spell and pretend it's something it is not.

 

[AuraSeer]

Oh brother. If the spell alone could do it, you would be right. But for page after page people have been detailing just what it takes to make that one spell as effective as claimed, and it is far from just any old character casting the spell. Wraithstrike is just one of MANY things that go into that combo to make it work.

There are lots of combos that use wraithstrike to achieve ridiculous damage. You know what they all have in common? Wraithstrike! Remove any other single element, and you only nerf one of the combos. Remove wraithstrike and all of them go away.

Go ahead and try it. Pick any one of the builds, remove wraithstrike, and replace it with another spell of your choice. See if you can get it remotely close to the same damage output. I don't think it's possible with any spell under 7th level or so.

 

[Mort]

Actually power attack seems to be just as much of a lynchpin. Which is why some were arguing the problem is the new power attack and not this spell.

Power attack is usually at best an ok option - the minus to attack more than compensates in most cases. It was powered up slightly in 3.5 because so many people found it lacking in 3.0. The problem only comes in when you have something that takes away the minus to hit or makes it a non factor and still allows a full attack - this is an extremely short list. Wraithstrike is the only "obvious" way to allow a full attack while hitting is no problem.

A high BAB and HP and AC also all seem to be critical to this build. The builds for the most part had a lot of things in common, and Wraithstrike was far from being the only common denominator..
.

Of course the builds all have something in common. They are all effective fighter/mage builds.
If you have an effective fighter/mage build and you add wraithstrike - wraithstrike is overpowered.
Just like if you have an effective charge build and you add combat brute - it's overpowered.

High BAB is a side effect of having a good build.
HP and AC are essential to any good melee build - they have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion.

I get that you guys think it is overpowered. There is no need to exagerate things and pretend that wraitstrike alone does 180 points of damage without anything else. A 12th level wizard with a staff is not doing 180 points of extra damage if he casts wraithstrike, so let's not take out the context of the spell and pretend it's something it is not.

A 12th level wizard with a staff is not the concern. Most spells/feats/items that are problematic are only problematic under certain conditions. In this case the problem is caused by being able to hit so easily, and multiple times at that.

 

[Mistwell]

Power attack is usually at best an ok option - the minus to attack more than compensates in most cases. It was powered up slightly in 3.5 because so many people found it lacking in 3.0. The problem only comes in when you have something that takes away the minus to hit or makes it a non factor and still allows a full attack - this is an extremely short list. Wraithstrike is the only "obvious" way to allow a full attack while hitting is no problem.



Of course the builds all have something in common. They are all effective fighter/mage builds.
If you have an effective fighter/mage build and you add wraithstrike - wraithstrike is overpowered.
Just like if you have an effective charge build and you add combat brute - it's overpowered.

High BAB is a side effect of having a good build.
HP and AC are essential to any good melee build - they have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion.



A 12th level wizard with a staff is not the concern. Most spells/feats/items that are problematic are only problematic under certain conditions. In this case the problem is caused by being able to hit so easily, and multiple times at that.

Apparently you are determined to shift the topic back to the useless debate over frequency.

I was responding to the claim that wraithstrike alone does this, and reminding folks that the debate was about it only doing this when combined with a specific type of build (the spell alone does not do 180 points of damage - in fact the spell does no damage on its own). You and I essentially agree on that issue, and just disagree on how common that specific build is. If you agree the spell is not a problem in some cases, and is a problem in others, then what is the point of continuing this debate. We simply disagree on how often it's a problem, and whether or not people should try it for themselves or trust to a paper analysis. That is a very narrow and mostly fruitless debate that seems to have been pounded into the ground and all positions have been well voiced.

We had already moved on to a power attack discussion and calculator. Why is this "no it's not, yes it is, no it's not" debate being dredged back up again?

 

[Elemental]

True, but that damage can be made up other ways; Gr. Magic Weapon, Gr. Mighty Wallop, various "burst" qualities, etc.

Just a note--you can't use weapons at all when incorporeal--even ghost touch ones.

Since the "WS is too powerful" contingent has been very kind as to make builds, suggest builds, create spreasheets, etc. perhaps it would not be asking to much for a sample build of the type I am hearing a lot about in this thread. The, for example, "Scorching Ray" specialist doing huge damage, etc. And, to make the comparison even vaguely fair, the "Scorching Ray" specialist should manage the build using 1 spell-specific feat (power attack is the corollary for the fighter/mage build). And the "Scorching Ray" specialist should have at least two good saves and good hit points and good AC (like a typical fighter/mage). That's not asking a lot, simply... parity.

I am waiting a build. Any reasonable build. Ok. I was too restrictive. The "scorching ray" build can use THREE feats dedicated just to "scorching ray" i.e. that have little outside utility. But don't forget to get those saves and hit points high, and don't be a one-trick wonder! A Fighter/Mage with WS can also be a utility mage, have plenty of ranged feats, etc. after all.

I'd be interested to see this counter-build (or just a general guide to how it was done, if it's so blindingly obvious).

 

[The_Furious_Puffin]

Just a note--you can't use weapons at all when incorporeal--even ghost touch ones.



I'd be interested to see this counter-build (or just a general guide to how it was done, if it's so blindingly obvious).

Well, question wasn't posed to me, but counters are easy to come by for casters at this level - both wall of force or wall of thorns completely own this concept (I notice the level 12 version first post cannot fly or walk through walls, and wall of thorns may as well be (to quote frank trollman) made of arbitarium). Both spells lock down the wraithstriker, and allow you to be completely pwned by save or sucks.. what about antilife shell?

I seriously don't see wraithstrike a huge problem at level 12, when a wizard, no joke, has access to unlimited wishes via planar binding an efreet. 180 damage one per day (going off the first build) vs +5 to all stats and an arbitary number of magic items that cost less than an arbitary amount? I'll take B thanks.

 

[IanB]

Apparently you are determined to shift the topic back to the useless debate over frequency.

I was responding to the claim that wraithstrike alone does this, and reminding folks that the debate was about it only doing this when combined with a specific type of build (the spell alone does not do 180 points of damage - in fact the spell does no damage on its own). You and I essentially agree on that issue, and just disagree on how common that specific build is. If you agree the spell is not a problem in some cases, and is a problem in others, then what is the point of continuing this debate. We simply disagree on how often it's a problem, and whether or not people should try it for themselves or trust to a paper analysis. That is a very narrow and mostly fruitless debate that seems to have been pounded into the ground and all positions have been well voiced.

We had already moved on to a power attack discussion and calculator. Why is this "no it's not, yes it is, no it's not" debate being dredged back up again?

How is what a 12th level wizard with a staff does with wraithstrike remotely relevant to the question of whether or not wraithstrike is broken?

That's like arguing that golem strike is a totally useless spell because the same wizard can't use it. The spell must be evaluated in the context for which it was intended.

 

[Mistwell]

How is what a 12th level wizard with a staff does with wraithstrike remotely relevant to the question of whether or not wraithstrike is broken?

That's like arguing that golem strike is a totally useless spell because the same wizard can't use it. The spell must be evaluated in the context for which it was intended.

The argument now involves three threads, over 20 pages of back and forth debate. The explanation for what you just asked is in at least two of those threads. At the point where we are going around in circles this many times, is it really useful anymore?

To summarize, some of us were arguing that the spell should be evaluated for your average spell caster. As to why that would be a fair criteria, read elsewhere. I really can't keep going around and around like this.

 

[The_Furious_Puffin]

The argument now involves three threads, over 20 pages of back and forth debate. The explanation for what you just asked is in at least two of those threads. At the point where we are going around in circles this many times, is it really useful anymore?

To summarize, some of us were arguing that the spell should be evaluated for your average spell caster. As to why that would be a fair criteria, read elsewhere. I really can't keep going around and around like this.

I disgree. The spell should be evaluted by examining how much it increases the performance of the architype it is designed for against monsters of similar CR when compared to the performance a Wizard, Cleric or Druid will put in against those monsters. That is the performance metric.. built into the game because the game is about killing things of your CR.

That would be a fair criteria.

 

[Mistwell]

I disgree. The spell should be evaluted by examining how much it increases the performance of the architype it is designed for against monsters of similar CR when compared to the performance a Wizard, Cleric or Druid will put in against those monsters.

That would be a fair criteria.

Great.