Lead blades and gravity bow aren't worth it in my opinion.
A standard action to cast those spells usually isn't worth it because the damage increase just isn't very significant compared the the damage you would have dealt by actually making a full attack.
They can be useful if you find yourself without much else to do in the turn, but when I played a ranger I just never found those spells to be worth it.
Generally look at ranger rather than druid spells because many are lower level than the druid equivalents.
Cheetah's Sprint, because sometimes you want to be somewhere else far away.
Entangle, Spike Stones or similar if your charisma is very high.
If you want to buff yourself for combat there's a ranger spell or three for you no matter what your combat style. Exactly which depends on what that style is.
I will say that I think Barkskin and Named Bullet are great choices. I don't think Greater Named Bullet is really necessary though.
I think Sirocco is a better 6th level spell because of the no save fatigue/exhaustion effect along with a little damage. It has a good amount of utility to it.
Lead blades and gravity bow aren't worth it in my opinion.
A standard action to cast those spells usually isn't worth it because the damage increase just isn't very significant compared the the damage you would have dealt by actually making a full attack.
They can be useful if you find yourself without much else to do in the turn, but when I played a ranger I just never found those spells to be worth it.
Big difference between a ranger and a bard.
From 7-13th level a bard is probably going to use his first move action in combat to start up inspire courage, leaving him with just a standand action. While there are plenty of options out there for bard spells that could be cast, these two are decent contenders.
|
Lead blades and gravity bow aren't worth it in my opinion.
A standard action to cast those spells usually isn't worth it because the damage increase just isn't very significant compared the the damage you would have dealt by actually making a full attack.
They can be useful if you find yourself without much else to do in the turn, but when I played a ranger I just never found those spells to be worth it.
Big difference between a ranger and a bard.
From 7-13th level a bard is probably going to use his first move action in combat to start up inspire courage, leaving him with just a standand action. While there are plenty of options out there for bard spells that could be cast, these two are decent contenders.
But at 7th level you have access to haste, being able to inspire/haste on opening turn is much more useful for difficult fights than inspire/lead blades. If it's not a difficult fight or if you're out of 3rd level slots, okay, but it's still niche.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lead blades and gravity bow aren't worth it in my opinion.
A standard action to cast those spells usually isn't worth it because the damage increase just isn't very significant compared the the damage you would have dealt by actually making a full attack.
They can be useful if you find yourself without much else to do in the turn, but when I played a ranger I just never found those spells to be worth it.
Big difference between a ranger and a bard.
From 7-13th level a bard is probably going to use his first move action in combat to start up inspire courage, leaving him with just a standand action. While there are plenty of options out there for bard spells that could be cast, these two are decent contenders.
That depends largely on what kind of style the OP goes with the bard.
Most bards I've played with have been so kind as to start combat with Inspire Courage followed by Haste.
Keep in mind, this is a bard casting lead blades. The highest damage dice weapon they are proficient with is the longsword. It will go from 1d8 to 2d6 damage, which is 4.5 avg damage to 7 avg damage. A difference of only 2.5 per attack. Same damage scaling for gravity bow too.
Heck, even Allegro is probably a better choice than either of those spells. Now, Allegro isn't a 1st level spell, but my point is that the bard has a lot of options and choices for what to do in combat. The only time lead blades or gravity bow is useful is when you can cast it before combat starts.
Yeah, I've been seeing a bit of that and it could potentially change things for certain classes. But my understanding is that both those weapons are exotic, which still makes it a difficult thing to consider building around.
As I haven't seen the complete stats for either weapon I can't be sure of their overall value.
|
|
Yeah, I've been seeing a bit of that and it could potentially change things for certain classes. But my understanding is that both those weapons are exotic, which still makes it a difficult thing to consider building around.
As I haven't seen the complete stats for either weapon I can't be sure of their overall value.
Hornbow is just a normal composite bow with more damage and less range (80). Butchering axe is unwieldy and has a -2 to hit unless you have a STR of 19 or more.
Wow. The hornbow is a terrible idea then.
Range is almost never a problem. Trading up to 2d6 from 1d8 for a slight range reduction is totally irrelevant. That's just terrible.
Butchering axe isn't quite as bad, but any full BAB class is unlikely to care after a few levels and would pick up the butchering axe.
Seems like some cases of blatant power creep.
Wow. The hornbow is a terrible idea then.
Range is almost never a problem. Trading up to 2d6 from 1d8 for a slight range reduction is totally irrelevant. That's just terrible.
Butchering axe isn't quite as bad, but any full BAB class is unlikely to care after a few levels and would pick up the butchering axe.
Seems like some cases of blatant power creep.
Both are exotic, though the hornbow is actually the "orc hornbow" so it's martial for orcs.
But for the cost of a feat for the better weapons, I'm happy to see it, make exotic weapon actually worth looking at.
Oh, if they're exotics and the butchering axe has the additional strength requirement then I would consider that acceptably balanced.
|
|
Oh, if they're exotics and the butchering axe has the additional strength requirement then I would consider that acceptably balanced.
Yeah, they are actually worth the EWP feat, but they aren't unbalanced due to it. Half-orcs do get familiarity with the hornbow, but the feats archery needs mean not being human hurts.
Though this makes half-orcs extra good as archers. They still don't get the additional feat, but they'll treat the hornbow as a martial weapon so it works out almost the same.
A human archer going for the hornbow will be at the same progression as an orc archer using the hornbow.
|
|
Though this makes half-orcs extra good as archers. They still don't get the additional feat, but they'll treat the hornbow as a martial weapon so it works out almost the same.
A human archer going for the hornbow will be at the same progression as an orc archer using the hornbow.
Yes, but the human has the option of picking it up much later in thier career and using a normal longbow until then, while the half orc has to have the hornbow first to add the extra damage, but they will have to delay precise shot, manyshot, and so on until later. It's not as bad if you're a zen archer or ranger and get bonus feats to cover you, but for a Inquisitor/bard archer they are really sacrificing for it.