Gravity Bow vs Lead Blades

[Barcas]

Gravity Bow:

Gravity bow significantly increases the weight and density of arrows or bolts fired from your bow or crossbow the instant before they strike their target and then return them to normal a few moments later. Any arrow fired from a bow or crossbow you are carrying when the spell is cast deals damage as if one size larger than it actually is. For instance, an arrow fired from a Medium longbow normally deals 1d8 points of damage, but it would instead deal 2d6 points of damage if fired from a gravity bow (see table on this page for associated increase/decrease in damage due to size change). Only you can benefit from this spell. If anyone else uses your bow to make an attack the arrows deal damage as normal for their size.

Lead Blades:

Lead blades increases the momentum and density of your melee weapons just as they strike a foe. All melee weapons you are carrying when the spell is cast deal damage as if one size category larger than they actually are. For instance, a Medium longsword normally deals 1d8 points of damage, but it would instead deal 2d6 points of damage if benefiting from lead blades (see page 145 of the Core Rulebook for more information). Only you can benefit from this spell. If anyone else uses one of your weapons to make an attack it deals damage as normal for its size.

Why is Gravity Bow available to both Rangers and Wizards/Sorcerers while Lead Blades is available only to Rangers? My Eldritch Knight would love to have Lead Blades. Seeing as they do just about the same thing, why the difference in allowing Wizard/Sorcerer?

[KaeYoss]

I agree, it makes no sense.

I guess they were both either on the sor/wiz list or off, and then someone changed his mind but forgot the other spell.

Also, note range/target on lead blades: range personal target touch. Doesn't make sense. It should be target you.

[Alch]

Agreed.

+1

@KaeYoss: Or, if they had wanted make it a touch spell, it should have been [Range: touch; Target: bladed weapon touched]. But then they would have had to do the same with 'gravity bow' to be consistent.

[JoelF847]

I agree in general. However, gravity bow could have been added to wiz/sor for arcane archers to have access, and they just didn't think of EKs.

[Ellington]

These spells are so super powerful. Lead blades can be especially mean when used in conjunction with enlarge person. 4d6 damage plus 1.5 STR mod, whoah momma! And increasing the damage of your longbow by 3 on average when you're firing as many arrows as dedicated archers do, geez!
Not a big fan.

I agree there's no reason that sorcs/wizards shouldn't get it though.

[Are]

Rangers need some loving too, you know :)

But I agree they should either both be Ranger-only, or both be shared.

[KaeYoss]

I don't call a +2 (or +2.5) damage bonus (on average) for a short while super powerful.

Enlarge person gives you the same dice upgrade, and also gives you a strength bonus and reach.

Combined means you used up two actions and twice as many resources as before.

[Bagpuss]

Ellington wrote:

These spells are so super powerful. Lead blades can be especially mean when used in conjunction with enlarge person. 4d6 damage plus 1.5 STR mod, whoah momma! And increasing the damage of your longbow by 3 on average when you're firing as many arrows as dedicated archers do, geez!

Not a big fan.

I agree there's no reason that sorcs/wizards shouldn't get it though.

You typically spend a round casting the spell. For a ranger archer at low level (where rolled damage dominates) the break-even is about 3 rounds of combat as I recall; for melee (where strength, etc, bonus are important even at low level) the break-even is probably later. I am not sure the spells are too good at all, and at later levels I think they probably become somewhat not-good because the round spent casting means no damage in that round (if you are in a situation where you can cast them before combat starts, then they're obviously better, but the extra total damage still seems appropriate, to me).

[Barcas]

I would greatly appreciate a developer popping his or her head in and clarifying if the difference in spells was intended. (I am hoping that the original intent was that it was supposed to be on the Wiz/Sorc spell list, so my EK can use it.)

[voska66]

Barcas wrote:

I would greatly appreciate a developer popping his or her head in and clarifying if the difference in spells was intended. (I am hoping that the original intent was that it was supposed to be on the Wiz/Sorc spell list, so my EK can use it.)

I'd house rule that in my game if the EK really wanted the spell. Having it supported RAW that way would be better of course.