|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
...what does 3d6 go up to when a ranger who has cast affected a greatsword (among other weapons) with Lead Blades -- then swigs a potion of Enlarge Person?
(Since Lead Blades doesn't actually increase the size of the ranger's weapons, there's not a stacking issue.)
...what does 3d6 go up to when a ranger who has cast affected a greatsword (among other weapons) with Lead Blades -- then swigs a potion of Enlarge Person?
Thats really ugly.
4d6
1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.
|
Well, your 3d6+15 character is now dealing an average 43 damage on a vital strike (4d6 -> 8d6+15) instead of 35.
Personally, I prefer to use an oversized bastard sword, even without the Lead Blades spell. Not optimal, but funnier-looking when imagining the sheer terror of a Small creature hit by a mighty Large trunk of iron by an enraged barbarian.
|
Well, your 3d6+15 character is now dealing an average 43 damage on a vital strike (4d6 -> 8d6+15) instead of 35.
Personally, I prefer to use an oversized bastard sword, even without the Lead Blades spell. Not optimal, but funnier-looking when imagining the sheer terror of a Small creature hit by a mighty Large trunk of iron by an enraged barbarian.
How exactly does a 4th level ranger take Vital Strike? And your math is off.
Mike, you pointed out one of the few reasons to choose a weapon with an higher damage dice like an axe or a straight sword (longsword, bastard sword, greatsword..).
Apparently, if you boost the damage die in this way they become "reliable" weapons for constatnd damage, with decent criticals but not spectacular like picks or likely like scimitars.
|
|
How exactly does a 4th level ranger take Vital Strike? And your math is off.Well, your 3d6+15 character is now dealing an average 43 damage on a vital strike (4d6 -> 8d6+15) instead of 35.
Personally, I prefer to use an oversized bastard sword, even without the Lead Blades spell. Not optimal, but funnier-looking when imagining the sheer terror of a Small creature hit by a mighty Large trunk of iron by an enraged barbarian.
Yeah, because the "4th level ranger" concept was totally discussed in this topic before you brought it from your pocket. Go read back the three previous posts and please quote it, I'm waiting.
You are right about the damage difference though, it's 43 with 8d6+15 and 36 with 6d6+15, not 35. My mistake.
|
|
How exactly does a 4th level ranger take Vital Strike? And your math is off.
Yeah, because the "4th level ranger" concept was totally discussed in this topic before you brought it from your pocket. Go read back the three previous posts and please quote it, I'm waiting.
You are right about the damage difference though, it's 43 with 8d6+15 and 36 with 6d6+15, not 35. My mistake.
The +15 were for a ranger of that level, at later levels the bonus damage will be much higher.
|
|
The +15 were for a ranger of that level, at later levels the bonus damage will be much higher.
How exactly does a 4th level ranger take Vital Strike? And your math is off.Yeah, because the "4th level ranger" concept was totally discussed in this topic before you brought it from your pocket. Go read back the three previous posts and please quote it, I'm waiting.
You are right about the damage difference though, it's 43 with 8d6+15 and 36 with 6d6+15, not 35. My mistake.
This doesn't mean I'm supposed to guess the level and build of the character, when using a simple random example of damage dice + bonus would do the trick.
A question to Shifty though : how did you get the damage table right ? When I look at this, some things are really off : like 2d8 becoming 2d6 by shifting to huge size. By this logic, a Large bastard sword wielded by an enlarged medium character (so a huge weapon in hands of a large creature) would do less damage than a normal one.
That's a typo for sure. And is ot a table from the original spell in APG IIRC - PFSRD just added it for ease.
|
|
A question to Shifty though : how did you get the damage table right ? When I look at this, some things are really off : like 2d8 becoming 2d6 by shifting to huge size. By this logic, a Large bastard sword wielded by an enlarged medium character (so a huge weapon in hands of a large creature) would do less damage than a normal one.
That table is incorrect for that row at least. Shifty's progression is correct.
|
|
Mike, you pointed out one of the few reasons to choose a weapon with an higher damage dice like an axe or a straight sword (longsword, bastard sword, greatsword.)
Yep: -- Is that a d12 greataxe on your back, or a large-sized 2d8 waraxe?
d12 > 3d6 > 4d6
2d8 > 3d8 > 4d8
...so he's picking up +4 dmg off a -2 att with the larger weapon; kind of a sideways version of Power Attack that doesn't cost a feat, and one which makes AoO-fishing and the Vital Strike chain very attractive. (At BAB11 he's swinging 12d8 on any move-in-a-not-straight-line-and-smack-yo-head with ImpVS.)
A question to Shifty though : how did you get the damage table right ? When I look at this, some things are really off : like 2d8 becoming 2d6 by shifting to huge size. By this logic, a Large bastard sword wielded by an enlarged medium character (so a huge weapon in hands of a large creature) would do less damage than a normal one.
Thats a typo on that table, the 2d8 SHOULD BE 4d6.
A correct progression would be this
|
|
In my opinion the feat plus a -2 attack is not worth the measly extra damage you get out of wielding a large bastard sword
Look at the greataxe vs. large waraxe comparison above. -- With Improved Vital Strike, you are -2att/+12dmg on a highest-bonus single attack, which is double the -4att/+12dmg trade-off ratio of Power Attack at BAB12.
|
|
p143: Waraxe, Dwarven ... Dmg(M) d10
A large waraxe is a 2d8 weapon which medium-sized persons are -2 to use.
Lead Blades makes it 3d8; Enlarge Person makes it 4d8; Improved Vital Strike at BAB12 makes it 12d8 versus 12d6 for the same stunt with a greatsword. Factoring STR, PA and other bonuses, that's about 80pts minimum for a plain-vanilla "move-and-smash-face" single attack -- meaning the large weapon trick provides 17-20% more damage when combined with IVS.
waraxe = dwarven waraxe 1d10, battleaxe is the 1d8 version
|
|
Yeah, this is a neat trick, but I kind of think it would work better with the ole double crossbow and gravity bow. 12d6 at 6th level, and crossbow mastery for free so you do it every round.
It's a feat-hog (because you need EWP/PBS/PS/RapidReload/CrossbowMastery/VitalStrike to glue it together, and you don't have room at 6th to also take Improved Precise Shot, the real cat's meow for archer-rangers) -- and many DMs will disallow Vital Strike bonuses to the second bolt (meaning you're 8d6 rather than 12d6; assuming a +1 weapon at 6th, that's only 32 average points of damage -- it's a healthy whack, but hardly exceptional enough to be worth all the trouble...oh, and twice the nerfing versus DR).
The extra -4 attack penalty for CBx2 and move-action requirements are deal-killers (you're locked into only 5's to Vital Strike every round).
Now, if only their damage bonus wasn't horrible.... maybe four levels in the crossbow fighter?
Which nerfs Lead Blades (since it's a 1min/lvl spell, which means you're frequently casting it in combat or roasting wands instead of having it up-and-running when you need it.
I know this is a minor gravedig, But has there been any dev commentary on lead blades stacking with enlarge person? I'm going round with my DM over it. I faq'd it just in case.
