Could someone show me--or provide a link to--the math that suppports Frostbite doing better dps than Shocking Grasp for magi at high levels?
I understand the basic concepts well enough, where a strength-based magus would use a Monstrous Physique with a lot of natural attacks to deliver a lot of frostbite touch attacks with a full attack, whereas the dex-based magus would use his weapon to instead deliver shocking grasp damage.
I've read several times on these boards folks claiming that at higher levels, frostbite wins out on overall damage, but I have a hard time seeing it, as not only are you unable to use your weapon with natural attacks without a crippling -5 penalty to all your natural attacks, but if you don't use a manufactured weapon to avoid the -5, you're essentially giving up one of the core magus abilities (the ability to put +5 worth of enchantments on your weapon), and losing the increased crit range of your weapon on your spell damage.
I'm just not seeing it.
Edit to add: A previous post of mine addressed some of the math for frostbite, but did not take into account the issue of manufactured weaponry, the penalty for using them with natural attacks, or the increased critical threat range you gain by using one.
I don't know about DpS wise, but with the trait Magical Lineage, a Level 1 Magus could use Frostbite in conjunction with the feat Rime Spell and give an opponent -6 to Dex, -2 to Strength, -2 to all attack rolls, they move half speed, and can't run or charge. No save.
My Char.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q330?WoW-Death-Knight-Frost-Knight#10
While I don't deny the effectiveness of that, I've never been very enthusiastic about the debuffer role. All my WoW characters are dps. :p
Thanks for posting your build, I'm always interested in seeing how different folks are building their magi. Have you played him? What level are you at?
Isn't there a faq about multi touch spells that specifically limits them to once per turn?Assuming it's actually legal to multi-frostbite, what do you mean by high levels? Shocking grasp caps at only 10d6 (intensified, doesn't help frostbite), or 35 damage/turn on average per cast. Frostbite does d6+level per attack, level times. Even with only 5 attacks, which is easy to do, at level 10 frostbite is already doing 67.5 damage on average per turn, and you'd get two turns out of it.
There are a couple of problems with leaving it at that, though.
A crit with Shocking Grasp adds 10d6 damage.
A crit with Frostbite adds 1d8 +10 damage.
Shocking Grasp provides a +3 attack bonus versus any foe wearing metal armor or wielding a metal weapon or made of metal, which covers a lot of ground.
Quickening Frostbite is only useful once you've used up your Frostbite charges, and even then given Spell Combat, at best it saves you from taking a -2 on attacks for the round. While Quickening Shocking Grasp can allow you to cast two Shocking Grasps in the same round, adding another 10d6 damage (with the potential to again crit on a 15-20 for double damage).
There's also the issue of being able to hit. The only way a magus is going to get the 5 attacks a round you mentioned at level 10 is through using natural attacks. But the rules state that if you combine natural attacks with manufactured weapon attacks, all natural attacks become secondary and therefore take a -5 attack penalty. That's pretty big for a 3/4 bab class.
So either you combine the natural attacks with your manufactured weapon, and suffer a significantly reduced to hit chance on most of your attacks, or you forego using a manufactured weapon, at which point your critical threat chance drops significantly, as well as any other benefits you may have garnered from your weapon.
So yeah, if you just look at the damage die and +x numbers, it would seem Frostbite simply has more damage potential. But when specifically dealing with the magus, it doesn't seem so cut-and-dried to me... >.<
frostbite can do more damage. If you are level 10, you get 10 touches for 1d6+10 damage for one 1st level spell slot and you fatigue your target. Whereas you get one 10d6 shocking grasp for one 1st level spell.
shocking grasp will average 35 points of damage, 70 on a crit for one big nova hit.
You get all three of your attacks at lvl 10 with frostbite. Three chances to crit and three hits. 13 points of cold damage a hit and you only lose a charge if you hit just like shocking grasp.
That is a potential damage of 3d6+30 per round or 40 points of damage. If you crit on one 53, crit twice 66, crit three times 79. Each additional attack improves your damage.
shocking grasp caps at 10d6. Frostbite caps at 20.
frostbite will eventually be better. It is must better for sustained damage.
Disadvantages it is nonlethal damage. Not only are cold immune creatures immune, it doesn't work against undead or constructs. Regenerating and Fast healing creatures heal nonlethal and lethal damage at their full rate each round. So if it is has Fast Healing 10, it will heal 10 lethal and 10 nonlethal in the same round. It heals double damage against a frostbite wielder versus only 10 versus a shocking grasp guy.
I like both. They are situational. Frostbite is much better to use with Empower Spell now that static bonuses also increase per Sean K. Reynolds clarification about Empower Spell affected any static number attached to a die roll.
Your WoW characters are DPS? This is an role-playing game. Maximizing your damage isn't always going to work. You better know when a situational spell will do a better job rather than being a one-trick pony.
Your WoW characters are DPS? This is an role-playing game. Maximizing your damage isn't always going to work. You better know when a situational spell will do a better job rather than being a one-trick pony.
This is a roleplaying game? Thanks for informing me, I never would have guessed. Good thing I found the time to write up a 2 page character bio, 1 page list of potential future developments and dumped skill points into background-driven knowledge skills. If this were an FPS or MMO I'd have been wasting my time!
*sigh* That comment was in direct response to the idea of taking on a debuffer role, please don't make assumptions about my playstyle because of it. Indeed I think if you look back over the posts and threads I've made on these forums, it's pretty obvious I value versatility and roleplay pretty highly. That said, dealing damage is the combat role I most enjoy, so that's the primary role I build my characters to fill.
Snarkiness aside, you still haven't taken into account the +3 hit bonus Shocking Grasp gets versus metal-wearing/wielding foes, or the fact that Shocking Grasp Will always be at your highest BAB (or -2 for Spell Combat) whereas Frostbite depends on on iterative attacks or secondary natural attacks to deliver its damage.
True, you don't lose a charge if you miss. But you also aren't dealing damage if you miss, so while there's a resource savings there, it is still a DPR loss.
This is why I was hoping someone who likes/is good at math would help out by throwing out some numbers. I am not mathy enough to see how SG's +3, the fact that its damage is at BAB or BAB-2 whereas Frostbite is going to also be at BAB-5 once or more, effects the final numbers.
In a resource-starved campaign, I can definitely see the advantage of Frostbite, but my game tends towards fewer combats each day (not always one, but very very rarely 3-4,) and my magus in particular has both a high intelligence and a custom item that grants bonus arcane pool points, so the longevity of Frostbite has less value to me.
I also definitely see the value of Frostbite versus electricity immune foes, or foes with massive full attacks (since the staggering effect could potentially put a real damper on that.) But that wasn't my purpose in posting this thread. I recognize the situation advantages of Frostbite, what I want to know is the hard math dps comparison.
And if Frostbite definitely deals higher dpr, when the turning point is, and by how much.
Another consideration is that I'm a dex-based magus, so while I get dex- to attack rolls with natural weapons due to Weapon Finesse, I don't get dex-to-damage. Dealing more attacks via natural attacks isn't as strong an option for me as it would be for a strength-based magus, who not only would be adding Frostbite damage to each natural attack, but also his strength.
You get all three of your attacks at lvl 10 with frostbite. Three chances to crit and three hits.
Except that you aren't spellstriking with frostbite except on the first attack, when you cast the spell. For all subsequent attacks, the frostbite damage would only crit on a 20, as per normal spell delivery.
Frostbite is much better to use with Empower Spell now that static bonuses also increase per Sean K. Reynolds clarification about Empower Spell affected any static number attached to a die roll.
Nice.
Not sure why quicken is relevant. You can quicken SG and then do the frostbite.
By 10th-level Frostbite allows for 10 touches, all of which have to be delivered for it to outdamage Shocking Grasp. And you can't hold one touch spell and cast another. The second cancels out the first.
Still, you've got me thinking. I wonder if you could go into Monstrous Physique and alternate between the two for maximum output. Something like:
Round 1:[Quickened SG][Spell Combat Frostbite][iterative attacks][natural attacks]
Round 2: [natural attacks][iterative attacks][Spell Combat Shocking Grasp]
Round 3: Repeat Round 1.
Or somesuch. You'd only get a quickened SG in every other round, but the combination might still have higher dpr potential than using either one on its own... Hrm...
As far as I now you cannot use frostbite in all your attacks. Please, correct me if I am wrong but the spell grants you a touch special attack that you can use multiple times. But using that touch attack in a round different than the one in which you cast the spell is a standard action (exactly the same as if you were holding the charge of the spell).
Of course you an use spellstrike ability to change that touch attack with your weapon attack (and add the effect of the spell on top of your damage), but making that attack continues to be a standard action.
Am I wrong with this?
You could reduce the -5 penalty to a -2 on secondary natural attacks by taking a feat.
Except that you aren't spellstriking with frostbite except on the first attack, when you cast the spell. For all subsequent attacks, the frostbite damage would only crit on a 20, as per normal spell delivery.
Wait, what? Of course you're spellstriking. Any time you're delivering a touch spell through your weapon, you are spellstriking (and there's no limit to spellstriking each turn, so all your iteratives can benefit).
Just going with a normal Magus (i.e. Dervish Dancing), Frostbite still stands to out-damage Shocking Grasp assuming the enemy is susceptible to nonlethal.
Sure, at early levels, Shocking Grasp obviously wins. However, once you're making multiple iterative attacks...
At level 8:
(Intensified) Shocking Grasp would, thanks to spellcombat/spellstrike, lead to three attacks. If your normal weapon damage is X, you're looking at:
8d6+3X (28+3X average)
If you use Frostbite instead, you're dealing:
3d6+24+3X (34.5+3X average)
And it just gets more lopsided from there. Now, of course, that's assuming all hits, which won't actually happen, but the fact is, much like the issue of full attacks vs. vital strike, multiple iterations of your static mods > big fistful of dice.
The Shocking Grasp is useful against more enemies (because, nonlethal, plus Cold Resistant/Immune foes are more common than lightning resistant/immune foes, even though there are more of the electricity immune guys), however, and creates bigger burst, especially on a crit, so the ultimate answer might be to just use both--you never need Intensified for Frostbite, after all, so you don't need magical lineage for it if you don't intent to Rime Spell it.
Edit: I don't mean both at the same time--just have both prepared and use them as best fits the situation.
|
Using Pourichista as a baseline (assuming a Frostbite build has TWF and a +1 agile dagger. I would also be using an agile rapier instead of dervish dancing.
.65(15.5)+.65(.3)(15.5) = 13.0975
.4(15.5)+.4(.3)(15.5) = 8.06
.79(28)+.525(.3)(28) = 26.53
DPR = 47.6875
.65(27)+.65(.3)(15.5) = 20.5725
.4(27)+.4(.3)(15.5) = 12.66
.6(23)+.6(.1)(11.5) = 14.49
DPR = 47.7225
My numbers are not exact on the shocking grasp build, but are close enough.
At eight level, assuming no Haste, you would do roughly the same amount of damage on a full attack with Frostbite as you would using spell combat with Shocking Grasp
Frostbite lasts multiple rounds and has debuffs, it also benefits from Haste. Downside: you won't get to full attack on the round you cast it.
At higher level, the dagger would have Spell Storing and hold the Frostbite spell, allowing me to open with Shocking Grasp and draw the dagger as a free action (using Quick Draw) before attacking.
to give you people more potential math to work with...
as soon as my hexcrafter will get some means to quicken spells, I intend to do the following:
single round:
quickened Elemental Touch: ACID self buff
then
spell combat rimed Frostbite full round attack
I don't see why Elemental Touch (a target=you buff) should not stack with Frostbite's touching attacks...?
that would be:
(weapon dmg + Elemental Touch + Frostbite)*number of main-hand weapon attacks
-----vs-----
quickened shocking grasp
then
spell combat intensified shocking grasp
which would be:
(shocking grasp)*2 + (weapon dmg)*number of main-hand weapon attacks
____________
the number of attacks would be
at levels 1-7 = 2 (unlikely you'll have quicken spell yet)
at levels 8-14 = 3
at levels 15-20 = 4
so the interesting levels are 8 and 15...
using a nonmagical scimitar (1d6 damage) and assuming improved crit or keen (thus crit on 15-20)
average damage:
- Elemental Touch&Frostbite (1d6weapon +1d6+1acid +1d6+8cold&nonlethal)*3 ~ 58,5+fatigued/entangled/sickened
---> you still have touches left and can do a full attack without casting, or go ahead and cast another touch attack on top of the damage left (worst case use Brand gained through hexcrafter or two-world magic trait)
- Double Shocking Grasp (1d6weapon)*3 +5d6grasp1 +8d6grasp2 ~ 56+nothing
---> no touches left, you have to cast new shocking grasps...
I guess the mass of 16d6 dice to roll looks impressive... vs the 9d6+27...?
now how do you calculate the difference in attack bonus (+3 for metal for 2/3 attacks) and how do you factor crit chance into this?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I haven't read the whole thread, but I'll say this:
Don't compare shocking grasp and frostbite. At least as far as the magus is concerned, one is a damage spell while the other is a buff spell. Compare SG to, say, a Close Range'd snowball; compare frostbite to, say, bull's strength/cat's grace. But don't compare them to each other.
'fraid not. Take another look at Spellstrike:Except that you aren't spellstriking with frostbite except on the first attack, when you cast the spell. For all subsequent attacks, the frostbite damage would only crit on a 20, as per normal spell delivery.Wait, what? Of course you're spellstriking.
At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon’s critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.
Emphasis mine. If you aren't casting a spell, you aren't spellstriking. Spellstrike does not apply to any and all touch attacks a magus might make, only the free touch attack he converts into a melee attack when he casts the spell.
My numbers are not exact on the shocking grasp build, but are close enough.
At eight level, assuming no Haste, you would do roughly the same amount of damage on a full attack with Frostbite as you would using spell combat with Shocking Grasp
Frostbite lasts multiple rounds and has debuffs, it also benefits from Haste. Downside: you won't get to full attack on the round you cast it.
At higher level, the dagger would have Spell Storing and hold the Frostbite spell, allowing me to open with Shocking Grasp and draw the dagger as a free action (using Quick Draw) before attacking.
Thanks for the reply Artanthos, I have a lot of respect for your numbers (I've been following the "imbalance" thread discussion on fighter versus monk lately.)
Question: If you use monstrous physique to get a form with, say, six natural attacks so you can deliver frostbite charges more quickly, does that bring it out ahead, or does the loss of your manufactured weapon bonuses cause it to even out?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
'fraid not. Take another look at Spellstrike:Except that you aren't spellstriking with frostbite except on the first attack, when you cast the spell. For all subsequent attacks, the frostbite damage would only crit on a 20, as per normal spell delivery.Wait, what? Of course you're spellstriking.At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon’s critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.Emphasis mine. If you aren't casting a spell, you aren't spellstriking. Spellstrike does not apply to any and all touch attacks a magus might make, only the free touch attack he converts into a melee attack when he casts the spell.
Please refer to this FAQ
Basically, the spellstrike gives the magus more options when it comes to delivering touch spells; it’s not supposed to make it more difficult for the magus to use touch spells
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you aren't casting a spell, you aren't spellstriking. Spellstrike does not apply to any and all touch attacks a magus might make, only the free touch attack he converts into a melee attack when he casts the spell.
Although you're correct that Spellstrike doesn't necessarily apply to any and all touch attacks he might make, it does work with held charges. For example, see the second paragraph of this FAQ:
On a related topic, the magus touching his held weapon doesn’t count as “touching anything or anyone” when determining if he discharges the spell. A magus could even use the spellstrike ability, miss with his melee attack to deliver the spell, be disarmed by an opponent (or drop the weapon voluntarily, for whatever reason), and still be holding the charge in his hand, just like a normal spellcaster. Furthermore, the weaponless magus could pick up a weapon (even that same weapon) with that hand without automatically discharging the spell, and then attempt to use the weapon to deliver the spell. However, if the magus touches anything other than a weapon with that hand (such as retrieving a potion), that discharges the spell as normal.
As you can see, a magus can hold a charge (and also drop his weapon and pick up a different one) and then proceed to deliver the charge through the weapon (i.e., use Spellstrike).
Don't compare shocking grasp and frostbite. At least as far as the magus is concerned, one is a damage spell while the other is a buff spell. Compare SG to, say, a Close Range'd snowball; compare frostbite to, say, bull's strength/cat's grace. But don't compare them to each other.
An interesting point of view, but the main reason I'm making the comparison is because others on these boards have often done exactly that, claiming that as a damage spell, frostbite is superior to shocking grasp at higher levels.
Combine Monsterous Physique with Spell Combat:
Spell Combat is a full-round action with heavy limitations; it is not the full-attack action.
I'd forgotten about that. Good catch.
It will only work when you make an actual Full-Attack which precludes the Spell Combat extra spell. So you could do the following:
Round 1) Cast {Shocking Grasp, Quicken}, Spellstrike(Scimitar); Spell_Combat {Cast {Frostbite}, Spellstrike(Scimitar), Spellstrike(Scimitar) Spellstrike(Scimitar)}; End_Turn()
Round 2) Full-Attack {Spellstrike(Scimitar), Spellstrike(Scimitar), Spellstrike(Scimitar), Spellstrike(Claw), Spellstrike(Claw), Spellstrike(Bite), Spellstrike(Boot Blade)}; Cast {Shocking Grasp, Quicken}, Spellstrike {Scimitar}; End_Turn()
So you can combine natural attacks with manufactured attacks to deliver frostbite charges, you just don't get to Spell Combat in any round you do so. *nods*
As you can see, a magus can hold a charge (and also drop his weapon and pick up a different one) and then proceed to deliver the charge through the weapon (i.e., use Spellstrike).
No, you are talking about two different things. The magus can deliver the frostbite charges through his weapon attacks, yes.
But that's not all spellstrike does. Spellstrike also allows the spell to benefit from the weapon's critical threat range. Spells usually only crit on a roll of natural 20/x2. If you spellstrike, you substitude that 20 for the weapon's threat range instead, which for almost all magi, winds up being 15-20, increasing the spell's chance to do double damage by 600%.
In the example in the faq cite you gave, the magus uses the spellstrike ability to start, misses, then drops his weapon, draws a different weapon, and is able to deliver the spell regardless. It does not say or indicate that the second delivery is also a spellstrike. Nothing in the faq entry or the description of the ability suggests it would be. Indeed, as I pointed out, the ability description strongly suggests it would not.
Please refer to this FAQ
I'm familiar with the FAQ, I just don't see it as indicating every touch attack the magus delivers is therefore a spellstrike.
Then again, to be honest, as a magus player, I'd rather you guys were right. :p
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It does not say or indicate that the second delivery is also a spellstrike.
It does say, explicitly, that the second delivery uses the weapon he just picked up. So if it's not Spellstrike, what mechanic is he using to deliver the held charge through the weapon?
I'm going to put my vote in for (C) They're both good, bring both.
There are so many variables, how do you account for it? You're not always fighting creatures with armor or metal weapons. Some creatures are immune to cold, some are immune to electricity. frostbite makes you a bit harder to hit and makes your opponent do less damage by causing them to be fatigued. It lowers their AC and reflex saves by one by reducing their dex. I think you should just give it a try and see if you can find some good uses for it.
And as far as I know Spellstrike works with multiple attacks. I used to play it like you, until I read the rules text with a more discerning eye.
Spellstrike (Su): At 2nd level, whenever a magus casts a spell with a range of “touch” from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack. Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, a magus can make one free melee attack with his weapon (at his highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. If successful, this melee attack deals its normal damage as well as the effects of the spell. If the magus makes this attack in concert with spell combat, this melee attack takes all the penalties accrued by spell combat melee attacks. This attack uses the weapon's critical range (20, 19–20, or 18–20 and modified by the keen weapon property or similar effects), but the spell effect only deals ×2 damage on a successful critical hit, while the weapon damage uses its own critical modifier.
That first compound sentence is the key to understanding the ability. Isolate that sentence from the rest. The rest of the text explains how it interacts when you aren't using Spell Combat and are using Spell Combat. The first compound sentence explains the ability.
What this means:
Every time you cast a spell with a range of "touch" from the magus spell list, he can deliver the spell through any weapon he is wielding as part of a melee attack.
Is this:
You can deliver touch spells you cast from the magus spell list through a weapon you wield as a melee attack.
It is not a requirement that you cast at the time of delivery. It's the long way of saying what I shortened.
Also note it does not say one use of the spell nor does it say the spell you cast is used up on the single hit. It says you can deliver touch spells through your melee weapon. If a spell grants multiple touches, you can keep delivering it through your weapon until the touches run out.
stuffI note you carefully avoid the second sentence of that ability which entirely contradicts your argument.
Instead of the free melee touch attack normally allowed to deliver the spellFrostbite grants one free melee touch attack 'normally,' when you cast the spell. Ergo, you may spellstrike with it once, when you cast the spell.
I did not carefully avoid it. That's why I posted it. The first compond sentence is independent of the second. Read it again. The first sentence is not a slave to the rest of the text. The text for Spellstrike explains how to use the entire ability. The first sentence is the key to understanding Spellstrike. The rest is the key to understanding how spellstrike works with standard action casting of a touch spell and Spell Combat.
frostbite does not cease to be a touch range spell. Did it's range suddenly change after you cast it? Duration has nothing to do with it being a "touch" range spell. Spellstrike has nothing to do with duration. Not a single mention of duration in all of Spellstrike.
It doesn't become a buff. It is a "touch" range attack spell you can use multiple times. That is it.
You're making assumptions.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
they explicitly state that spellstrike only works on the ONE free touch granted by the spell.
They state that Spellstrike works on the one free touch granted by the spell. However, the "only" (bolded above) is something you inserted yourself, not something that Paizo published. Please read more carefully before jumping down other people's throats and accusing them of being dishonest.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So the line about 'the free melee attack' is literally meaningless.
Secondly, spellstrike isn't restricted to the free touch attack you get as part of casting the spell; you can use spellstrike on a held charge in subsequent rounds, as shown by the FAQ describing missing on your spellstrike attempt (thus, holding the charge), losing your weapon, and then retrieving your weapon or drawing a new one and delivering the spell via spellstrike from a held charge. Remember, that you're "holding" the charge even on the turn you cast the spell, as you can take move, swift, or immediate actions, or a 5' step between the casting and the delivery. Thus, if "holding the charge" were to preclude you from using spellstrike, it would cease to function as that case would always apply from the moment you cast the spell.
You responded to an argument by (1) failing to address any of the points contained therein, and (2) making a claim about what the argument would lead to without actually describing how it leads to that conclusion.
When you include no points of your own and don't address those presented to you by others, people have very little reason to take you seriously. We're replying to you, clearly ready to listen; give us something to listen to, and maybe we can see where you're coming from.
|
|
Agreed, Paizo certainly was aware that some spells allow multiple touches, and, they explicitly state that spellstrike only works on the ONE free touch granted by the spell. Your reading of this literally makes that sentence meaningless.
This is what an explicit statement looks like.
At 4th level, a myrmidarch can use spellstrike to cast a single-target touch attack ranged spell and deliver it through a ranged weapon attack. Even if the spell can normally affect multiple targets, only a single missile, ray, or effect accompanies the attack.
Emphasis mine.
There are so many variables, how do you account for it? You're not always fighting creatures with armor or metal weapons. Some creatures are immune to cold, some are immune to electricity. frostbite makes you a bit harder to hit and makes your opponent do less damage by causing them to be fatigued. It lowers their AC and reflex saves by one by reducing their dex. I think you should just give it a try and see if you can find some good uses for it.
Funny you should say that. I'd intended to have it before starting the thread. :p But aside from my group's most enthusiastic roleplayer I'm also an optimizer. I constantly tweak my character's projected build and, at the end of the day, I found myself wondering if it'd be more effective to bolster Frostbite with feats, etc. rather than Shocking Grasp. There are some feats that require a hard choice on which you're going to use as your "go-to" ability. Spell Perfection, for instance.
I posted a while back that at level 17, my current plan is to take Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Focus. Folks' praise of frostbite also got me wondering whether maybe Rime Spell and something else bolstering Frostbite might be more effective than a flat +2 to hit.
Things like that. I know that you can't account for every variable, but then I've seen the math wizards on these forums such as Artanthos (and you actually, with your mock combat featuring the magus versus ranger a few weeks back,) come up with some complex and highly illuminating numbers on occasion. I was hoping to maybe get that now, so I'd have a good idea on how much in character resources I should put into strengthening the frostbite option.