Oh boy, a player consensus is going to be hard to get on many parts of this. I think the one thing we can all agree on is that the quantity of rice rolls is unnecessary. Whatever is done with the ability, less dice rolls is a good thing. As for where to go with the power of the ability, I think that the PDT had the right idea in reducing the damage output of the ability, though I would be OK with the reduction being slightly less than originally proposed. I think you guys were spot on that this should not be better than archery for a bard.
Personally, I would like to see the ability be 1d6 sonic damage per caster level (max 10d6?) without a touch attack and a fort save for half. This greatly reducs e the number of rolls and removes the problem of dr completely shutting down the ability. I think the range should stay 30 feet and I would like to see the charisma modifier to damage removed. The 30 foot range is consistent with other similar class abilities, and most of them also so not get their caster modifier to damage. At this damage level, I think it would be OK to allow the weird world's the effect one additional target within range per X levels (maybe 2, 3,or 4) above six for an extra round of performance.
My 2 cp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So far, there isn't anything remotely resembling a player consensus on this issue, so we're waiting to see what the discussion turns up.
Well, that's probably because there are two vocal groups opposed to each other on the issue :)
Although, I think there has been a consensus reached that 1 round / word is quite excessive.
Well it seems like Group A is fine with the rewrite as it was posted, and think that Weird Words (if allowed as a single target attack) is overpowered as written. I tend to agree with the latter.
Group B seems to think that the rewrite nerfs the ability into irrelevance, which I also agree with.
Those are two relatively disparate viewpoints.
So let me just restate the goal of the rewrite:
"The role of the sound striker archetype is a bard who can supplement his spellcasting, support, and weapon damage roles with a direct-damage use of his bardic performance currency (rounds of bardic performance). It is not intended to make the bard as ranged-effective as an archer. In other words, it is intended to augment the bard's melee abilities (just as its 3rd-level ability replaces inspire competence with a more martial use of performance rounds), but not replace them. If you're a bard who never uses inspire competence or suggestion, and at the end of the adventuring day you still have many rounds of performance left over, you could consider the sound striker archetype as an option that lets you use those "wasted" (meaning they went unused during the day) performance rounds to deal direct damage to opponents.
With that in mind, we'd like to hear more feedback."
So,
(1) Ability should scale differently (currently gained at 6 and caps at 10)
(2) Ability should be a direct damage use of performance
(3) If single target, damage is too high, if not too low.
(4) Ability should NOT be as good as Archery.
Those seem to be the main issues, and any suggestion for a rewrite should follow these.
Player Concerns:
(1) Too many dice!
(2) Multiplicative application of Cha modifier (if single target)
(3) Power level relative to replaced ability
(4) Overall relevancy and appeal of the Archtype as a whole.
Your probably right, so I'll try and break it down from my perspective. I will start off by saying I didn't see what the argument was about at first, but have shifted my focus and gone over to the probably OP side. I will be using highly optimized for what they do on each build, and I will examine it at level 8.
Sound Striker Bard: Our highly optimized for weird words bard at level 8 is rocking a 26 Charisma and a 22 Dexterity. He has a +6 BAB, so has a base of +12 against touch on each word. As these are not weapons I don't think they benefit from even precise shot, so are often firing at a -4. Let's go with the in between and say they're at +10 altogether. So your 8 attacks will hit many enemies all of the time, and you may only hit with 3/4 or half against someone who worked on touch (maybe less against an optimized monk.) We need to pick a number though, so lets say average touch is probably 13(I found average AC but not touch on the Monster stats by CR, so this a guess). Assuming averages across the board he will likely hit with 6 or 7 of them, but he may also crit with one. Lets say 7 hit and he crits on one because it gives us a nice round number. He will hit for 8d8+64, or an average of 100 damage, which can be halved with a Successful DC 22 Fort Save. If the creature has DR other than slashing/bludgeneoning/Piercing this number will get reduced further. A DR of 5 drops this down to 60 or 30 on a saves. At this level probably 25% of encounters will feature DR, when you include how many humanoids you still fight.
Damage: 100 (50) (may be affected by DR)
Range: 30 feet
Investment: Loosing 2 minor class features, min/max attributes
Times per day: 26
Admixture Wizard 7/Varisian Tattooed Cross-blooded orc/draconic (we'll say gold-fire, why not): Our highly optimized wizard (Int 26) took a trait magical lineage fireball so that he could metamagic that spell and only raise it one level. He also has taken spell focus (evocation), Greater Spell Focus (Evocation), Elemental Focus (Fire), Greater Elemental Focus (Fire). Because of the varisiain tattoo he doesn't lose a level while casting evocation spells. He casts a Fireball at a DC 25 and it deals 8d6+16 damage, or an average of 44 damage. He can empower it 4 times per day and deal 66 damage. He can deal with many resistances by changing the admixture to another element, but the DC drops to 23, and the damage drops to 36 or 54 if empowered. This can hit multiple enemies, but it can be cut in half, and even saved against completely. We'll say its hitting 2 enemies with it since that is not unreasonable. It also may need to overcome DR.
Damage: 122 (61) (0) or if not fire: 108 (54) (0) Affected by elemental resistance and SR Single Target: 66 (33)
Range: Really Far
Investment: 4 feats, one level dip into sorcerer, one trait
Times per day: 4 (6 more not empowered)
Alchemist Bomber: Our optimized Bomber has Int: 26 and Dexterity 22. He has all the right feats and discoveries to throw bombs fast and reduce his miss chance. He took orc or tiefling as his race so that he can add +1/2 to his damage. Unfortunately, he can't have force bomb and fast bombs at this level, so he can't overcome all DR/ER. He did pick up concussive bomb, since nearly everything is affected by sonic too. He throws three bombs in a round, and because of precise shot they all hit the touch AC we figured earlier. The bomber does 12d4 + 36, but nearly everything takes damage from sonic, so we will ignore ER and DR for the alchemist. This bomb deals 66 damage, no save, while the splash (hitting the other enemy in the fireball earlier) takes 48 splash damage, which he can save for half, or even reduce to nothing if he has evasion, with a DC 22 saving throw. At least unlike the fireball wizard he can leave his allies out of the blast.
Damage: 114 (90) (66) Single Target: 66
Range: 20 feet
Investment: at least three feats, three discoveries
Times/Day: Roughly 5-7
Musket Master5/Fighter (Weapon Master) 3: Our Musket master is rocking 26 Dex and 22 wis for max grit. He has all the normal gunslinger goodness that comes with the territory. He's rocking a +19 to hit total, but he is using rapid shot and deadly aiming, bringing him down to 14/14/9. He wears the weapon training gloves to increase his training by 2. He deals 1d12+18 per hit. While he may miss on his low hit, its not unforeseeable that all bullets may hit, so lets say they do. So he deals 3d12+57 damage, or 76. This does get affected by DR, but he has clustered shots, so its only factored in once.
Damage: 73 - DR
Range: 40 feet
Investment: 5 feats, 3 level dip, gloves
Times/day: Unlimited
So, in my conclusion, the damage doesn't seem incredibly out of whack with what other classes can do. The problems I see with it is 1) Nearly no investment of resources and 2) So many uses per day.
I have 2 solutions I personally like, both have the following requirement:
Only roll 1 attack roll/target, target only gets one save. Rolling 20 dice just to calculate damage is pretty gnarly. They both need to cost 4-5 rounds of bardic performance.
1) Get rid of the damage from charisma and make them function as magic weapons of one damage type of the bards choice. This really makes it more suited to the archer bard. A human level 8 bard could have point blank, precise shot, deadly aim, clustered shot and arcane strike. They would be striking for 1d8+6, if your fully invested into the path. This makes there be a feat investment. It still comes out to 84 damage, which can be saved for half, but at 4 rounds of bardic performance you only have 6 a day. This makes it a good ability still, but it needs investment into it to make it so, and doesn't leave you with 26 uses. This leaves it in line with the number of times a wizard or alchemist can go nova.
Damage: 84 (42) - DR once
Range: 30 feet
Investment: 5 feats
Times/day: 6
2) Make it one for every 2 levels. I'm not the biggest fan of this way, though I think it does fix the problem of being OP. The problem I think is no one will want to take it. I guess if you leave rounds used at 1 this method works out actually.
Damage: 50 (25) (may be affected by DR)
Range: 30 feet
Investment: Loosing 2 minor class features,
Times per day: 26 (or 6)
Anyway, thats my two cents. I like option one from above myself, but I'm sure some people will hate it. Good luck, I'll be watching this one.
Actually, in looking at the Sound Striker archetype a bit closer, it seems that what I'd suggested is rather close to the 3rd level ability Wordstrike...
Would it instead make more sense to make the 3rd level ability equal to what I had suggested earlier and either replace or remove the 6th level ability completely? Either way, here's what I have in mind - whether for the 3rd level ability, or the 6th level ability: (It's written for the 3rd level ability, but could easily be changed to be written for the 6th level ability.)
Wordstrike (Su): At 3rd level, a sound striker bard can spend 1 round of bardic performance as a standard action to direct a burst of sonically charged words at a creature or object within 30 feet. At every 4th level beyond 3rd, a sound striker may target one additional creature or object within 30 feet by spending an additional round of bardic performance. Each Wordstrike deals 1d6 points of sonic damage per caster level (max 10d6) to a creature or 1d4 points of sonic damage per caster level (max 10d4) to an object. Creatures effected by a Wordstrike can half the damage with a successful Fortitude saving throw.
(1) Ability should scale differently (currently gained at 6 and caps at 10)
(2) Ability should be a direct damage use of performance
(3) If single target, damage is too high, if not too low.
(4) Ability should NOT be as good as Archery.
Proposal Scorecard:
1) Check - gained at 3rd level and scales linearly through 10th in damage to a single target with option beginning at 7th and growing beyond that to target additional enemies for additional rounds of performance.2) Check.
3) Solved - damage increased for single target, but reduced by not allowing multiple words per target.
4) Average of 11.5 damage is solid at 3rd level, but the save will be made fairly frequently, meaning it's probably similar to archery at 3rd level. It will not, however, keep pace with Archery as levels increase since there are essentially no ways to increase the damage for this ability. That said, this proposal is a zero feat investment archetype that allows you to deal sonic damage at a reasonable rate. The damage is not what it currently is if all words hit 1 target, but better than the PDT proposal. It's at least situationally very good for those nasties with DR and/or SR that your party is having problems with, due to the low amount of monsters that resist SR.
Thoughts?
I think that you have two different wants within the community.
I have always assumed that the sound striker concept was meant to offer a sort of damage dealer archetype to people who like the bard chassis, which I think is what some others seem to take the archetype for as well.
The other group seems to have the basic expectation that all bard archetypes should never alter the bards role from support, so (obviously) the weird word performance was wildly outside of that expectation.
I think it is important to make changes that fall within one of these expectations such that one party is satisfied with the outcome. Further down the line, I would suggest satisfying the other party.
I think the best route to go in currently is to take the sound striker archetype and push it back into the support role. The reason I believe this would be the best route to go is really to do with the awkwardness of the performance changes. The support archetype "party" seem to see the damage potential of weird words combined with the fact that it doesn't take away the major buffing potential of the bard as game breaking despite the problems associated with using multiple performances in a round. I think the only way to do it, given the wording of each spell, is to use shadow bard which is very high level (thus, really eliminating this as an option for most of the game).
I would like very much to see a magical combat class and I believe that the bard is a great chassis to use to accomplish this feat. I don't think that the sound striker can be altered to accomplish this without a large amount of backlash from the support party. To that end, I think that a bard archetype that could fulfill this potential should be made manifest in the future.
Just my thoughts.
MechE's idea is really good too. That does significantly nerf it, but with how few things are resistant/immune to sonic, it would still have its purposes without being a go to ability.
I would also like to point out some relative comparison points for how rounds of performance should be considered as a resource.
(1) Legato Piece o the Infernal Bargain, Cost 10 rounds, effect: Planar Ally, Spell level 6th
(2) The Lullaby of Ember the Ancient, Cost 1 round, effect: Deep Slumber, Spell level 3rd
(3) Winds of the Five Heavens, Cost 3 rounds, effect: Control Winds, Spell Level 5th
Note: Each of these costs 1 feat or 1 spell slot, so they are not exactly 1 to 1 comparisons, but they give an idea.
(4) Suggestion, cost 1 round, condition: target must be fascinated, effect: suggestion, spell level 2nd.
(5) Extra Performance, 1 feat = 6 rounds of performance. Compare to 1 feat = 2 extra bombs, 6 rounds of rage, 2 Arcane Pool points, 2 channels, 2 lay on hands, 2 Ki etc.
Additional Consideration: Perhaps Sound Striker should replace both suggestion and Mass Suggestion, since Mass Suggestion references that it works "Just like suggestion" which is a performance that Sound Strikers do not get.
MechE's idea is really good too. That does significantly nerf it, but with how few things are resistant/immune to sonic, it would still have its purposes without being a go to ability.
Thank you - that was actually my intention, to make it situationally very good, but not a replacement for archery (at the suggestion of the PDT.) If it's too weak, it could be made 1d8 damage per caster level, or the max could be increased (12d8?), etc. Though I think that taking the PDT's initial suggestion as guidelines, 1d6/caster level is probably about the strongest we could expect the ability to turn out.
As an aside, I don't actually understand how an ability that has a range of thirty could be considered better than archery. Thirty feet is enough range to avoid getting into close combat with something, you will still have to pull out your bow if you are trying to fight something that flies.
As an aside, I don't actually understand how an ability that has a range of thirty could be considered better than archery. Thirty feet is enough range to avoid getting into close combat with something, you will still have to pull out your bow if you are trying to fight something that flies.
Increasing the range is an option, I'm sure. Actually, the original Wordstrike ability had no specific range limitation, so increasing the range to 60 feet might be acceptable and would basically solve the range problem, though that does push this ability closer to archery in terms of it's power/usefulness. I had left the wording of the ability I wrote at 30 feet for the purpose of keeping with the convention of other similar damaging class abilities.
My suggested fix.
- start with the original ability.
- if one target is hit more than once, they get one Fort save, with a +1 for each Word past the first that targets them, for half damage.
- damage starts at 1d8. If more than one Word targets the same creature, it goes down one damage dice, to a minimum of 1d4 a word.
- add Charisma modifier to damage once, no matter how many Words target the same creature.
- 1 round of performance to use.
This lowers damage and makes increases the chance of all the damage being cut in half by giving the target a bonus to fort saves against multiple Words.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say that if one of the requirements is being worse than archery, then I don't have any interest in the ability whatsoever.
If I could pull out a bow and do better, then I just don't see why I'd ever spend an action (or a performance round) on it, when I could just maintain Inspire Courage and shoot my bow instead.
It must be better than archery, at least in some circumstances, or it is a pointless ability.
The proposed ability above that deals 1d6/level sonic damage with a fort for half is a good start. I think it should probably scale every 3 levels, not every 4, but that's minor.
However, I think you need specific language so that Undead and Constructs are not immune to it/only subject to xd4 rather than the full xd6 like they should. After all, I would think those would be exactly the kinds of enemies a Bard would want this ability for most.
I also think something needs to be done about the damage to objects. It's way too low to actually be effective against items. 10d4 averages 25, which is then halved against objects (since it's energy damage) to 12 before hardness, so yeah, you're probably better off just power attacking with a longspear or something when you want to break stuff.
As an aside, I don't actually understand how an ability that has a range of thirty could be considered better than archery. Thirty feet is enough range to avoid getting into close combat with something, you will still have to pull out your bow if you are trying to fight something that flies.Increasing the range is an option, I'm sure. Actually, the original Wordstrike ability had no specific range limitation, so increasing the range to 60 feet might be acceptable and would basically solve the range problem, though that does push this ability closer to archery in terms of it's power/usefulness. I had left the wording of the ability I wrote at 30 feet for the purpose of keeping with the convention of other similar damaging class abilities.
I appreciate your position, I just think that the premise that the original weird words was better than archery at range despite the fact that it is completely ineffectual at 35' is a pretty glaring logical failure.
I think that any combat viable option for the bard will at least have to be comparable to a completely mundane bow and arrow, I just think that this particular archetype will never see this kind of return due to how its performance ability is laid out. Hopefully, an archetype will fulfill this promise in the future.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, weird words
Amendment 1. Replaces Suggestion and Mass Suggestion
Suggestion is a single round usage of Bardic Performance that emulates a 2nd level spell. It does not disrupt Fascinate.
Step 1 Proposal: Weird Words should emulate a 2nd level spell. It should not disrupt another performance, but rather should require that the Bard be using an Audible bardic performance. This is balancing for a few reasons. 1. Weird words can't work in silence. 2. Wierd words precludes stealth 3. Wierd words cannot be activated while benefiting from Lingering Performance.
Suggested spell to emulate at 6: Sound Burst: You blast an area with a tremendous cacophony. Every creature in the area takes 1d8 points of sonic damage and must succeed on a Fortitude save to avoid being stunned for 1 round. Creatures that cannot hear are not stunned but are still damaged.
Scaling: Replacement of Mass Suggestion (level 5 bard level 6 wiz) should determine the top end. So we need a spell comparable to Sound Burst that is level 5 bard or level 6 wizard to determine top end, and one that fits the theme of weird words.
Proposed top end marker spell to emulate at 18: Greater Shout: This spell functions like shout, except that the cone deals 10d6 points of sonic damage (or 1d6 points of sonic damage per caster level, maximum 20d6, against exposed brittle or crystalline objects or crystalline creatures). It also causes creatures to be stunned for 1 round and deafened for 4d6 rounds. A creature in the area of the cone can negate the stunning and halve both the damage and the duration of the deafness with a successful Fortitude save. A creature holding vulnerable objects can attempt a Reflex save to negate the damage to those objects.
Modify the spell to focus on damage (developer requirement) and remove control element.
Bottom end spell, range close, area 10 ft burst = area 12 squares, damage 1d8 sonic, no save
Top end spell, range cone, area 60ft cone = area 104 squares, damage 10d6 (double damage vs. objects). save for half.
Increase damage slightly to offset loss of control elements by adding charisma to damage. Convert 10d6 to 8d8 (avg damage 35 vs 36)
Range: 10 ft.-40 ft.
Proposed scaling:
6: 2d8+charisma 10ft.
8: 3d8+charisma 15ft.
10: 4d8+charisma 20ft.
12: 5d8+charisma 25ft.
14: 6d8+charisma 30ft.
16: 7d8+charisma 35ft.
18: 8d8+charisma 40.ft
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL RESULT
Weird Words (Su):
At 6th level, a sound striker can use his performance to blast an area with a tremendous cacophony. To use this ability, a sound striker must be maintaining a performance with an audible component. Using this ability does not disrupt the performance effect, but it does require a standard action to activate (in addition to the free action to continue the performance). Each enemy within 10ft of the sound striker takes 2d8 points of sonic damage plus the bard’s Charisma bonus (Fortitude half). Every two levels after 6th the damage increases by 1d8 and the range increases by 5ft, to a maximum of 8d8 and 40ft at level 18.
This performance replaces Suggestion and Mass Suggestion.
been watching this discussion for awhile now and finally decided to pipe in.
maybe its just us but the amount of dice rolled was never an issue with our group. but then again it sounds like people are talking about rolling out each hit one at a time. rolling all or even half the attacks at once and then comparing to AC, then saving for what hit all at once, etc.
when you have to target multiple enemies is where things can get tricky. each one will potentially have different AC, saves, penalties, dr, etc.
so while sure it may seem like a cumbersome amount of dice rolls, its only as bad as you make it really. and really it isnt like there arent other occasions which can call for a lot of dice rolls from the use of a single ability.
Edit- a few thoughts that i forgot to put in.
1) allow for stacking on a single target but limit how many can be stacked. "a single target can be effected by up to x words generated from the same performance"
2) allow full stacking but make it 1 attack roll/1 save. allows for the larger hits but puts more of a risk into putting all your notes in the one basket.
3) honestly just let it hit multiple words on the same target and otherwise leave it as it is. each word is subjected to DR, and a fort save. Leaving in the CHA to damage and even allowing for interaction from various feats/spells will allow this to stay on an average footing not surpass other offensive modes available to the bard.
I appreciate your position, I just think that the premise that the original weird words was better than archery at range despite the fact that it is completely ineffectual at 35' is a pretty glaring logical failure.
I think that any combat viable option for the bard will at least have to be comparable to a completely mundane bow and arrow, I just think that this particular archetype will never see this kind of return due to how its performance ability is laid out. Hopefully, an archetype will fulfill this promise in the future.
Maybe a future archetype will give a better answer for what you want.
For now, remember that 30' of range for Weird Words is only a standard action, where effective using a bow is a full attack action. Also, since it's only a standard action, you still have your 30 feet (or 60 if you've cast haste for your party as you probably should at mid to high levels) of movement speed before using the ability. Finally, in order to be fully effective with archery, you're looking at a 4 feat investment. All in all, a 30 foot range would frequently be a problem against flying enemies, but not often a problem against other enemies unless the battlefield is very open/large.
This change reduces the potential nova damage, and the static Charisma damage in favor of scaling damage dice. Since it's sonic, it bypasses damage reduction, and there is no fortitude save necessary. This all adds together to drastically reduce the number of rolls made at the table.
By limiting the number of words produced to the BAB of the bard, it reduces the nova damage, but the scaling damage and clarification that they benefit from standard buffs helps keep the damage viable, but not overwhelming.
This functions as an alternative to archery, but may not be inherently better than archery.
At 20th level, a Bard would be capable of unleashing 4 Weird Words including the haste) at a range of 75 ft., with each one word dealing 10d6 points of sonic damage. This averages out to 140 points of damage, and costs the bard 4 rounds of bardic performance.
An Archery focused bard would be capable of dealing significantly more damage, but at a greater feat investment. I see Weird Words operating as more of a back-up ranged weapon, than a main attack force. NPC Sound Strikers benefit from this the most, as they have less wealth to augment a ranged attack, while Weird Words basically scales for free.
Since it replaces Inspire Competence, Suggestion and Mass Suggestion (and removes the Wordstrike ability), it's hardly overpowered.
The attacks aren't halved against objects, so it is a viable method of breaking objects, where as before a Sound Striker would have to spend several rounds unleashing Wordstrike just to break through a 2x4 board.
SKR - I don't think that you will find community consensus on this option, I'm not sure that is possible on any issue that is subject to interpretation.
The current rule proposed is very conservative in its approach to damage and resources. I think you need to find the sweet spot between it is so great every bard will take it and it is so bad no one will take it. Currently it is on the pretty darn poor side. Unfortunately nearly every suggestion has been even more complicated than the original wording.
It replaces Suggestion which can easily be a save and win or useless ability and it should be "roughly" equivalent. Suggestion for a round of performance is a very powerful ability likely one of the most powerful ability as the DC scales and suggesting some one surrender or go home, or jump in a lake is an easy way to end combat.
The only spell that I can think of that is similar to how weird words was worded is Fiery Shuriken. Maybe the power should take inspiration from that spell it is roughly a 2nd(ish) level spell like Suggestion. Granted it is different as a spell and energy damage. So maybe as Fiery Shuriken but sonic damage. Nice and simple and using existing rules.
I think the related issue here though which really blows up the weird words problem is what abilities can be added to a weapon-like spell (or effect) and what can not. How are they different from projectiles and does anything that is not a "Ray" count. People are married to the word Ray and I think maybe it should be clarified one way or the other.
Such examples earlier in this thread are using Arcane Strike, Inspire Courage, Good Hope to up the damage because it takes a ranged attack roll and does hit point damage etc. etc. etc... Due to the FAQ of Inspire courage affecting Ray spells. http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9oag is a fiery shuriken a weapon like spell to gain those effects or only rays Rays?
PS - SKR next time you get a writing block please listen to the following. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DDdM66_nSI I Love "Die Vampire Die!" from title of show and thought you may too.
Suggestion in bardic performance is tough, because you have to have them fascinated first. Once combat begins, fascinate is a no go. It requires 2 saves or a minimum of two rounds outside of combat. Additionally, you must speak the same language. It cannot be used in an ambush as hostilities have already begun. Weird words has none of these restrictions.
I see a lot of RP use for suggestion though, but replacing out of combat abilities with powerful in combat abilities is not comparative.
Personally I'd like to see a highly optimized sound striker do about 50-60 damage per round at level 8, and for it to use more resources than it currently does and perhaps for the archetype to replace another ability (not inspire please) so it's more costly to be a sound striker.
Personally I'd like to see a highly optimized sound striker do about 50-60 damage per round at level 8, and for it to use more resources than it currently does and perhaps for the archetype to replace another ability (not inspire please) so it's more costly to be a sound striker.
At 8th level, my (below) proposal would deal 8d6 (28 average damage) to an individual enemy for a single round of performance. For a second round of performance, with the same action, you can deal that same damage (28 average) to a second enemy within range. Note that a fort save by each creature can reduce this to half and that there is no way to "optimize" this at all, so it might not be exactly what you want. That said, if you want to optimize a bard, you should probably just wield a bow. The ability as I'm suggesting it is weaker than a bow, but does not require optimization, so you can still focus on being a support caster, but whip out the occasional direct damage when your party needs it.
Wordstrike (Su): At 3rd level, a sound striker bard can spend 1 round of bardic performance as a standard action to direct a burst of sonically charged words at a creature or object within 30 feet. At every 4th level beyond 3rd, a sound striker may target one additional creature or object within 30 feet by spending an additional round of bardic performance. Each Wordstrike deals 1d6 points of sonic damage per caster level (max 10d6) to a creature or 1d4 points of sonic damage per caster level (max 10d4) to an object. Creatures effected by a Wordstrike can half the damage with a successful Fortitude saving throw.
I was too busy to post for a few weeks, but it looks like this discussion is still going strong. I don’t really like the proposals to turn the ability into an AoE or targeted damage with a Fort save. I don’t see a game balance problem with them, but they seem a little dull. Giving the Bard a sound themed ranged touch seems exciting and different. I also think that continuing to use ranged touch attacks should be less disruptive to existing PCs, who otherwise might find that they have the feats to be poor archers rather than RTA specialists. We just need to be careful that the power level doesn’t get out of hand. I think that sticking close to long established abilities like Scorching Ray is a pretty good way to go about that.
Anyhow, it sounds like PDT is looking for player consensus on this ability, and I’m hoping we can build some. Here’s a rehash of my proposal, which several folks seemed to like reasonably well:
- eliminate the Fort save
- limit the words to 3 per round (you could get a word at levels 6/8/12 or maybe 6/9/12)
- allow the words to target the same or multiple foes (2-3 words against a single foe would do enough damage to make the ability worth using without making it seem like “the best power in the game”)
I realize that some folks might have concerns about using attack rolls since they open up more potential for buffs, but any Bard can go buy a wand of Scorching Ray and get 3 buffable touch attacks per round. There shouldn’t be any new abuses here that I can think of. Weird Words wouldn’t have to beat SR, but Scorching Ray doesn’t have to beat DR and can be enhanced with metamagic.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1 round / word is quite excessive.
It is only excessive if the ability can target a single target or if it's damage output is even close to half of archer or melee output.
looking at the Sound Striker archetype a bit closer
Wordstrike (Su):
Thoughts?
It is amazing, I never noticed this. The really interesting thing is how similar the two abilities will be now. I'm with you, the 6th level ability should be abandoned entirely and keep the 3rd level ability.
Here is my take on a replacement:
Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can expend 1 round of performance as a standard action, lashing out with up to 1 potent sound per bard level (maximum 10), each sound affecting a different target within 30 feet. Each target shall make a DC 10 + Bard Level + Charisma save or be dazed for 1 round. This is a mind-affecting compulsion effect and may not affect the same target for 24 hours.
This performance replaces suggestion and mass suggestion.
Sound Striker Bard: CHA 26 DEX 22 Reject Precise Shot
Damage: 100 (50) (may be affected by DR)Admixture Wizard 7/Varisian Tattooed Cross-blooded orc/draconic
Damage: 122 (61) (0) or if not fire: 108 (54) (0) Affected by elemental resistance and SR Single Target: 66 (33)Alchemist Bomber
Damage: 114 (90) (66) Single Target: 66Musket Master5/Fighter (Weapon Master) 3
Damage: 73 - DR
I’m going to do similar, but I disagree with some elements and I’ve derived actual numbers for others:
AC 23.031835206
Touch AC 11.8352059925
Fort +11.1181988743
53 have DR 5, 196 have DR 10, 7 have DR 15 of 534 monsters
0.0992509363 DR 5
0.3670411985 DR 10
0.0131086142 DR 15
5 have Evasion or Improved Evasion
Weird Words save DC = 10 + 8/2 + 8 = 22
Wealth of 33,000 gp
I believe all ranged attacks take Precise Shot and other feats into play, and I use a SKR post essentially saying as much.
Sound Striker
CHA 26 DEX 18 (+4 CHA item 16,000 and +2 DEX item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
Attack = +6 BAB +6 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot = +14
Damage = 8d8 + 8*8 + 1*8 Point Blank Shot = 8d8+65 = 108
.95*(4.5+8+1)*8+.05*(4.5+8+1)*8 = 108 before DR and Save
108 * .45 + 108 * .55 / 2 = 78.30 after save DC
(78.3 / 8 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (0 due to DR) * 0.3670411985 + (0 due to DR) * 0.0131086142 + 78.3 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 41.2380852108 after everything
Fighter Archer
DEX 26 STR 18 (+4 DEX item 16,000 and +2 STR item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
Attack = +8 BAB +8 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Weapon -3 Deadly Aim = +19
Damage = 2d8 (Vital Strike) + 4 (STR) + 2 (Focused Shot) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec = 2d8+4+2+1+2+6 = 24
.90*(24)+.05*(24)*3 = 25.2 before DR
(25.2 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (25.2 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (25.2 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 25.2 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 20.8367041204 after everything
These are optimized Standard Action DPR. I'll calculate full attack after sleep.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I corrected some "sleepy" errors in basic arithmetic in the Fighter Archer from last night, and I calculated an optimized Full Attack Sequence.
Fighter Archer
DEX 26 STR 18 (+4 DEX item 16,000 and +2 STR item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
Attack = +8 BAB +8 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Weapon -3 Deadly Aim = +19
Damage = 2d8 (Vital Strike) + 4 (STR) + 2 (Focused Shot) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec = 2d8+4+2+1+2+6+2 = 26
.80*(26)+.05*(26)*3 = 24.70 before DR (Need 23 to hit, so 4 on the roll, so .80)
(24.70 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (24.70 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (24.70 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 24.70 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 20.3367041204 after everything
Full Attack Fighter Archer
DEX 26 STR 18 (+4 DEX item 16,000 and +2 STR item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
8 Feats: Weapon Focus, Precise Shot, Point Blank Shot, Clustered Shot, Deadly Aim, Manyshot, Rapid Shot, Weapon Spec
Attack Sequence: -2 (double arrow) -2 (primary) -7 (iterative)
Attack = +8 BAB +8 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +2 Weapon -3 Deadly Aim -2 Rapid Shot = +16
Damage = 1d8 (Arrow) + 4 (STR) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec = 1d8+4+1+2+6+2 = 19.5
.70*(19.5*2)+.05*(19.5)*3 +.70*(19.5)+0.05*(19.5)*3+.45*(19.5)+0.05*(19.5)*3 = 58.50 before DR
(58.50 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (58.50 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (58.50 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 58.50 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 54.1367041204 after everything
There is no way that it is fair this ability should be doing 76% of the damage of a full attacking optimized archer with a standard attack.
Plus it is doing 103 % more damage than a standard attack Vital Strike Fighter Archer.
I'll work up 2 Handed Overhand Chop optimization tonight.
Fighter Archer
DPR 20.84
DEX 26 STR 18 (+4 DEX item 16,000 and +2 STR item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
Attack = +8 BAB +8 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Weapon -3 Deadly Aim = +19
Damage = 2d8 (Vital Strike) + 4 (STR) + 2 (Focused Shot) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec = 2d8+4+2+1+2+6 = 24
.90*(24)+.05*(24)*3 = 25.2 before DR
(25.2 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (25.2 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (25.2 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 25.2 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 20.8367041204 after everything
I think you missed weapon training for the fighter archer, unless you had him actually take the archer archetype, which is not a "DPR" archetype. Also, if you add in weapon training, gloves of dueling are better than the +2 Str item and the increase from +2 to +4 dex. Hence:
DEX 24 STR 16 (+2 DEX item 4,000, Gloves of Dueling, 15,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 23,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
Attack = +8 BAB +7 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Weapon +3 Weapon Training -3 Deadly Aim = +21
Damage = 2d8 (Vital Strike) + 3 (STR) + 2 (Focused Shot) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec +3 Weapon Training = 2d8+3+2+1+2+6+3 = 26
.90*(26)+.05*(26)*3 = 27.3 before DR
(27.3 - 5) * 0.099 + (27.3 - 10) * 0.367 + (27.3 - 15) * 0.013 + 27.3 * .521 (no DR) = 22.9 after everything
EDIT: I calculate full attack damage as 72.7 before DPR (I use a complex spreadsheet that takes attack rolls vs armor class into consideration - AC assumed as level + 14 = 22) Since we have room for the Clustered Shots feat with this build, the reduction is on average (5*.099+10*.367+15*.013) 42.6 which brings our DPR down to 68.34 on a full attack.
Note that in order to get here, the Archer fighter had to spend all all 9 of his feats (Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Deadly Aim, Many Shot, Clustered Shots, Greater Weapon Focus) and can do little other than damage. A sound striker bard took an archetype that traded out abilities he would use infrequently, at best, and still has access to inspire courage and his great list of buffing spells.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
you missed weapon training for the fighter archer
gloves of dueling are better than the +2 Strspreadsheet that takes attack rolls vs armor class into consideration - AC assumed as level + 14 = 22)
The beauty of airing this math in public, is we can both take advantage of each other double checking the math.
I had forgotten Weapon Training. He couldn't afford the Gloves without Reducing the to hit by 5 %, I haven't check to see if a further 5 % reduction in to hit chance is worth +2 more to damage.
In regard to the AC of 22. I calculated the exact average AC of all monsters CR 8, CR 9, CR 10, CR 11, and CR 12. The Average AC was 23.031835206 and the average Touch AC 11.8352059925. I'd prefer if we used these instead of the chart in the back of Bestiary.
I also included Clustered Shot in the Full Attack sequence already, but noticed that I calculated the X3 critical damage as always hitting. But it should be subject to the normal to hit of the attack that crit. This reduced the damage.
So newest changes with all your points included:
Weapon Master Fighter Archer
DEX 26 STR 18 (+4 DEX item 16,000 and +2 STR item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
Attack = +8 BAB +8 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +1 Greater Weapon Focus +2 Weapon -3 Deadly Aim +2 WT = +21
Damage = 2d8 (Vital Strike) + 4 (STR) + 2 (Focused Shot) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec +2 WT = 2d8+4+2+1+2+6+2 = 28
.90*(28)+.05*(28)*3*.90 = 28.98 before DR (Need 23 to hit, so 2 on the roll, so .90)
(28.98 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (28.98 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (28.98 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 28.98 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 24.6167041203 after everything
Weapon Master Full Attack Fighter Archer
DEX 26 STR 18 (+4 DEX item 16,000 and +2 STR item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
+2 Longbow (8,000 gp) for total spent = 32,000 gp
8 Feats: Weapon Focus, Precise Shot, Point Blank Shot, Clustered Shot, Deadly Aim, Manyshot, Rapid Shot, Weapon Spec
Attack Sequence: -2 (double arrow) -2 (primary) -7 (iterative)
Attack = +8 BAB +8 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot +1 Weapon Focus +2 Weapon -3 Deadly Aim -2 Rapid Shot +2 WT = +18
Damage = 1d8 (Arrow) + 4 (STR) + 1 Point Blank Shot +2 Weapon +6 Deadly Aim + 2 Weapon Spec +2 WT = 1d8+4+1+2+6+2 = 21.5
.80*(21.5*2)+.05*(21.5)*3*.80 +.80*(21.5)+0.05*(21.5)*3*.80+.55*(21.5)+0.05*(21.5)*3*.55 = 70.36 before DR
(70.36 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (70.36 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (70.36 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 70.36 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 65.9967041203 after everything
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Correcting error on critical hit.
Sound Srtiker
CHA 26 DEX 18 (+4 CHA item 16,000 and +2 DEX item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
Attack = +6 BAB +6 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot = +14
Damage = 8d8 + 8*8 + 1*8 Point Blank Shot = 8d8+65 = 108
.95*(4.5+8+1)*8+.05*(4.5+8+1)*8*.95 = 107.73 before DR and Save
107.73*.45 + 107.73*.55/2 = 78.10 after save DC
(78.1 / 8 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (0 due to DR) * 0.3670411985 + (0 due to DR) * 0.0131086142 + 78.1 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 41.1314840872 after everything
Keep in mind all these stats (including the Archer ones) include DR percentages based on real monster data and the Fort save for half based on real monster + to Fort saves.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'm heading to the game store, to run two PFS games today.
So I'll dig back into this later tonight with Overhead Chomp.
But the take away is there is no valid reason the Bard should outdamage a top of class Archer in a standard action much less do 62 % of a maximum optimized Archer Full Attack.
It looks like the proposed Fighter is being compared to the original version of Sound Striker with the assumption that all 8 words can target a single target. There’s probably no need to “prove” that is too powerful since the PDT has already toned the ability down quite a lot from that, arguably too much. I guess an underpowered ability is better than an overpowered ability, but I think that a working balance can probably be found.
I’d hate to see this thread turn into a protracted argument about whether Fighters suck and whether that means everybody else should suck too. I’d like to reply to a few specific points though.
Standard vs Full Round Action - I think full attack vs standard action is less relevant for ranged combat since getting in full attacks with a bow is usually pretty easy (you just stand and shoot). With just 30’ range the Sound Striker might need to move. I really can’t think of a lot of exciting ways to abuse that move action except to get in range. It also isn’t uncommon for magical attacks such as Scorching Ray to allow a “volley” as a standard action.
Damage Per Round - Assuming my proposed changes the 8th level Sound Striker would have at most 2 Words per round to hit enemies with. I don’t know if most games really include cracked pale green ioun stones, but working with existing assumptions means less math for me (and hopefully more agreement about the results). Anyhow, using James Risner’s build with my house rule I got an expected DPR of 26.9. I found his DR math a little confusing, but it seems safe to say that an ability which averages 13.5 damage will be pretty useless against the 7 monsters with DR15 and not much good against most of the 196 with DR10. An archer can get a +1 holy bow and a variety of special material arrows. A Sound Striker who wants to beat DR probably has to either multiclass or go adventuring with a high level Paladin. If the damage were changed to sonic I might agree with the PDT idea of charging 1 round of bardic performance per word.
CHA 26 DEX 18 (+4 CHA item 16,000 and +2 DEX item 4,000 and Pale Green Cracked 4,000 = 24,000 gp spent
Attack = +6 BAB +6 DEX +1 Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 Point Blank Shot = +14
Damage (with Point Blank Shot) = 2d8+18 = 27
The 95% chance to hit on each attack with a 4.75% chance to crit practically cancel each other out, so the expected DPR is around 26.9
Is 27 damage too much at 8th level? Is 40 too much at 12th level? If so what would be reasonable? It strikes me that an Alchemist and a Bard have the same BAB and a similar spellcasting progression. An 8th level Alchemist with 26 Int would have 16 bombs per day, 20 if he were a gnome. Each bomb would do 4d6+9 (~23) with Point Blank Shot. With Fast Bombs the Alchemist could throw 2 bombs per round for 8-10 rounds per day at a DPR of around 46. The Bard has 26 rounds of bardic performance per day. If we charge 1 round per word that’s about 8-9 rounds of DPR 27, clearly not stealing the Alchemist’s thunder IMO. The Alchemist would also be able to enhance the bombs with discoveries and would have more options for going nova. Whether some of those options are themselves overpowered is probably a discussion best left to another thread.
@MechE - The power you've proposed would be fairly useful as an AoE substitute which is easier to fit into a combat than Fireball and less likely to be resisted. Since many monsters have high Fort saves I suspect the damage level vs single foes would be pretty disappointing though. I'm also not sure if you're requiring a ranged touch attack or not. I think the chance for crits and fumbles would be amusing and might help separate Weird Words from Ear Piercing Scream, Sound Burst, etc. There's a 5th level sonic RTA spell called Deafening Song Bolt, but if shooting deadly words at people is your schtick you probably don't want to wait until 13th level to get started.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
original version of Sound Striker with the assumption that all 8 words can target a single target.
argument about whether Fighters suck
DR calculations hard to follow
Game in two minutes, but I wanted to clear this up.
There are a lot of people in this thread that continue to say "even multiple hits on on target isn't too powerful" and my primary desire is to disprove that assertion. It is too powerful.
Until the people who want it supercharged stop asking for it to be left alone, we will never have consensus.
Let us make the assumption for this thread, that Fighters are awesome. But I'll pull out a fire based optimized.
The DR calculations were taking the various DR (0, 5, 10, 15) and using the percentage change of each DR. I'm totaling the individual percentages and using the rest as DR 0 (no DR.)
@James Risner - I think Paizo clearly agrees that 10 words on one target is a bit over the top. That said, it seems impossible to prove something is or isn't overpowered unless folks can agree about what power level is appropriate. I've seen people say that 500 damage per round is OK, and I've seen a DM get pretty angry because somebody did 100. We can try to gain some insight by comparing new abilities to long established ones, but I think Weird Words matches up more closely with other ranged touch attacks like Scorching Ray instead of archery. I thought some Bomb comparisons might be appropriate too though honestly Bombs can be a lot stronger if optimized.
In the spirit of consensus I'll ask you if you think my version of Weird Words is still too powerful. If so can you tell me why it seems wrong and how you'd propose fixing it? I'll warn you that changing it to an AoE or targeted save for half ability won't appeal to me and more importantly probably won't appeal the Sound Striker intransigents you're presumably trying to confront with your evidence.
@TGMaxMaxer - Your version seems ok to me, but it doesn't do much to cut down on the die rolls in some situations. I also don't think that creating another "nova" ability where PCs want to go nuts for a fight or two and then sleep for a day is desirable.
@All - I feel a little silly pushing my own agenda so hard, but if I could get people to agree then I guess we'd have a consensus...
Clearly, this isn't the popular opinion, but I think the Sound Striker archetype should be able to forego a weapon entirely and kill people just by shouting at them. If Weird Words cannot be used as the Bard's primary attack, I have no interest in the archetype. Is the 'multiplicative application of Charisma' any different than an archer making a full attack with a composite bow? I suppose the problem there would arise from the fact that the bard can do it as a Standard Action, for more damage dice. That probably is too much, though considering that the Bard must spend limited Performance rounds to make his attacks, where the archer can far more easily replenish his supply of arrows, Weird Words do need to pack more of an individual punch.
Here's a thought. what about spending a round of performance to get a sonic weapon of their choice that deals 1d8+charisma? You would have to use your attack actions the same way any combat class would. It would sort of be like flame blade without the good critical threshold. It would be nice to be able to use 5 rounds of performance all at once so you could use your support abilities as well...
If one were to use my proposed changes* an 8th level Sound Striker would have, at most, 3 attacks at +7/+7/+2 (with Haste). Each attack would be capable of dealing 4d6 points of sonic damage on a hit. Against a single target, if all attacks hit, a Sound Striker would average 54 points of damage if all three attacks hit. This costs the Bard 3 rounds of performance, a full attack, and the party isn't benefiting from Inspire Courage.
In retrospect, 1d6/2 levels may be a bit too powerful, but it's also possible the ability starts off strong, and wanes at higher levels as the static buffs begin increasing by leaps and bounds. My proposed changes gain static bonuses from normal spell buffs, but adds no static damage from ability scores at all.
My suggestion, round two:
Weird Words(Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can start a performance as a full round action, lashing out with up to 2 potent sounds, plus 1 additional potent sound for every 6 sound striker levels.(@6th:3 words. @12th:4 words. @18th:5 words.) You can have them each strike a single creature or split them between several creatures. Touch attacks to hit per potent sound. Each deals 1d8+cha. P/S or B. 30ft range. This ability uses 2 round of performance. If multiple potent sounds hit the same opponent, total the damage from all hits before applying that opponent’s damage reduction. Using this ability does not interupt an ongoing bardic performance.
.
.
.
This gives the sound striker a full round option. The 3rd level ability can be used as a standard action. This one packs more punch, but takes a full round, and consumes more rounds of performance. The functionality is similar to but weaker than an archer type using rapid shot, but is close range. It also has built in clustered shots, because it otherwise has funky scaling issues with variable DR targets.
Edit/Addition: That is a DPR of 35.68 using the example Risner provided for an optimized striker. Average damage per use being 40.5, so anywhere between 25.5 to 40.5 average depending on target's DR.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just going to again propose making it a swift action. It can be far less powerful as a swift action than as a standard, and still be worth using.
9th level is when a Wizard first becomes able to cast Quickened Magic Missile, so we can use that as a comparison instead of archery.
QMM at 9th level is a swift action which deals 5d4+5 damage (average: 17.5) and requires a significant expenditure of resources 5/34ths of the spell slots the wizard has available (before bonus spells from high stat, and ignoring the fact they can't redivide their slots). That's around 15% of their spellcasting for the day, to deal around twice their level in damage, with no save, no attack roll, and very little that can resist force damage.
The equivalent for the 9th level Sound Striker bard would be 3-4 rounds (out of their 22 base rounds) to deal around 18 damage - the average of 4d8. We could bump up the power by adding a save or an attack roll, or bump it down slightly by making it sonic instead of force. Lets call it 4 rounds and no-save-no-attack sonic damage.
So based on that, here's what I have:
They'd only be able to use it at full strength once or twice a day, which is similar to the slots an equivalent wizard would have for QMM. But unlike the wizard, the bard can split it up into smaller units. And because it's a swift action, it allows the bard to attack normally (although without Arcane Strike if they have that feat).
I'm just going to again propose making it a swift action. It can be far less powerful as a swift action than as a standard, and still be worth using.
9th level is when a Wizard first becomes able to cast Quickened Magic Missile, so we can use that as a comparison instead of archery.
QMM at 9th level is a swift action which deals 5d4+5 damage (average: 17.5) and requires a significant expenditure of resources 5/34ths of the spell slots the wizard has available (before bonus spells from high stat, and ignoring the fact they can't redivide their slots). That's around 15% of their spellcasting for the day, to deal around twice their level in damage, with no save, no attack roll, and very little that can resist force damage.
The equivalent for the 9th level Sound Striker bard would be 3-4 rounds (out of their 22 base rounds) to deal around 18 damage - the average of 4d8. We could bump up the power by adding a save or an attack roll, or bump it down slightly by making it sonic instead of force. Lets call it 4 rounds and no-save-no-attack sonic damage.
So based on that, here's what I have:
Swift action
Bard can fire up to 1 missile / 2 levels
Each missile costs 1 round of music and does an automatic 1d8 sonic damage to the target, with no save. They'd only be able to use it at full strength once or twice a day, which is similar to the slots an equivalent wizard would have for QMM. But unlike the wizard, the bard can split it up into smaller units. And because it's a swift action, it allows the bard to attack normally (although without Arcane Strike if they have that feat).
Truthfully, Force is better than Sonic, as Force effects are almost impossible to negate, while Sonic Effects can be resisted by energy resistance. Also, Force Effects have full effect on incorporeal creatures, while sonic is half damage automatically.
While I do like this ability, for the most part, the two problems I have are the 1 round per missile and I think the damage is a little low. Especially when you compare it to the Thundercaller at higher levels. For instance, a Thundercaller bard, at 13th level, can use his Thunder Call ability as a swift action each round, and deals 5d8 sonic damage (average 22.5) in a 10 ft radius spread. So they can make a full attack, and drop a sonic bomb every round, and it only costs them 1 round of performance, but the enemy gets a save for half and could potentially be stunned for 1 round.
A 13th level Sound Striker with your proposed ability would be able to fire 6 missiles, each dealing 1d8 points of damage, for an average of 27 points of damage, and costing the Bard 6 rounds of performance. Fortunately, it's a no-save, no-attack damage.
The Sound Striker does slightly more damage, but also expends 6 times the resources, doesn't get a crowd control mechanic, but it is a no-save auto-hit ability.
However, between the two, I would pick the Thundercaller every time. The other benefit that the Thundercaller has over the Sound Striker, is that, if someone pops a Resist Energy (sonic), he can switch to using Call Lightning, while the Sound Strike is screwed.
I do think your ability is the way to go. But I would drop the 1 round per missile and maybe add a static damage bonus of +1 per 4 bard levels, to each missile. My biggest concern is that Sound Striker would be the go-to combat bard. An archer/Sound Striker bard would be a terrifying foe, full attacking and blasting people all in the same round.
So, in that respect, I would say that the Sound Striker should benefit from starting quicker performances, working it's way up to swift action missiles at 13th level. This stops archer bards from making martials look like wimps when they unlock their ability, but they can still be a threat in that they could blast and cast in the same round, or move and blast.
Swift action results in this ability scaling too well into the late game. Comparing it to quickened magic missiles is not very fair, since quickening a magic missile gives up using a spell of FOUR levels higher to do so. Making this a swift action? It still only costs 1 round of bardic performance - That's too much benefit for the cost and I'm firmly against that idea.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
you think my version of Weird Words is still too powerful.
eliminate the Fort save
limit the words to 3 per round (6/9/12)
allow the words to target the samechanging it to an AoE or targeted save for half ability won't appeal to me
I think any version that is a better single target damage source for the Bard than his 3rd level ability is the wrong direction. It should be an AoE.
Sound Striker should be primary attack
archer making a full attack with a composite bow
To be clear, the signs are that it will be toned down. It shouldn't be a primary attack doing 72% of a Full Attack Archer.
a round of performance to get a sonic weapon of their choice that deals 1d8+charisma?
This may be different enough from the 3rd level ability to not look awkward. Flesh it out and I can do a DPR. Keep in mind the 'uses per day" need to be on par with a Sorcerer Scorching Ray spell slots if the damage is similar.
I've redone my final original SS ability adding in Lingering Song Inspire Courage.
Sound Srtiker
Attack = +6 BAB +6 DEX +2 Inspire Courage +1 Point Blank Shot = +15
Damage = 8d8 + 8*8 + 1*8 Point Blank Shot +2*8 IC = 8d8+67 = 124
.95*(4.5+8+1+2)*8+.05*(4.5+8+1+2)*8*.95 = 123.69 before DR and Save
123.69*.45 + 123.69*.55/2 = 89.68 after save DC
(89.68 / 8 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (89.68 / 8 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (0 due to DR) * 0.0131086142 + 89.68 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 47.7478089941 after everything
Can we all agree the original ability was broken and too powerful? So we can direct the discussion away from any more people saying "keep it as it was" or giving suggestions that put DPR in this range (25 or more) without using much more than 1 round of a performance? Everyone agree?
I do think your ability is the way to go. But I would drop the 1 round per missile and maybe add a static damage bonus of +1 per 4 bard levels, to each missile. My biggest concern is that Sound Striker would be the go-to combat bard. An archer/Sound Striker bard would be a terrifying foe, full attacking and blasting people all in the same round.
This seems rather contradictory - you're worried about making the Sound Striker the go-to combat bard, yet you're also suggesting making the ability much more powerful than I was thinking. I do like the idea of adding a small scaling bonus, but don't want to make it too strong. I admit I haven't tried comparing it at high levels - just the 9th level I originally posted about. I'll figure out what it looks like after scaling and see if there's room for tweaking it.
Swift action results in this ability scaling too well into the late game. Comparing it to quickened magic missiles is not very fair, since quickening a magic missile gives up using a spell of FOUR levels higher to do so. Making this a swift action? It still only costs 1 round of bardic performance - That's too much benefit for the cost and I'm firmly against that idea.
Please re-read my idea before you reject it. I specifically made it one round per missile so that it was comparable to a quickened magic missile in resource usage.
This is just my opinion, but it seems very clear that this is the archetype that is designed to allow the bard to deal damage with magic. Not specifically spells, but magic powers in general. To that effect, I'm personally okay with allowing the bard to smack one creature with a bunch of words for a chunk of damage, although I agree that the wording is weird and having to make a saving throw against each d8 is a bit much. I would probably use something like this instead.
Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can use his bardic performance to lash out at nearby foes with weird sounds as a standard action by spending 1 round of bardic performance. When making this performance, the sound striker makes one ranged attack roll against the touch AC of a number of creatures within 30 feet equal to his bard level (maximum 10). The sound striker may designate the same creature multiple times with this performance. If the attack succeeds, the target suffers 1d8 damage plus the bard's Charisma modifier. The bard chooses whether each word deals bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage. A creature may attempt a Fortitude save to reduce all damage dealt to it by this performance by half until the end of the turn. This ability replaces suggestion.
I've redone my final original SS ability adding in Lingering Song Inspire Courage.Sound Srtiker
** spoiler omitted **Can we all agree the original ability was broken and too powerful? So we can direct the discussion away from any more people saying "keep it as it was" or giving suggestions that put DPR in this range (25 or more) without using much more than 1 round of a performance? Everyone agree?
No we can not all agree that the original power was over powered. Because people still don't agree on how it worked.
By Lingering song I am guessing you mean Lingering Performance. It does not work the way you think it does. Please read the entire ability, it will not add damage to weird words unless you have virtuoso performance or shadow bard running.
Feat text
Lingering Performance
The effects of your bardic performance carry on, even after you have stopped performing.
Prerequisite: Bardic performance class feature.
Benefit: The bonuses and penalties from your bardic performance continue for 2 rounds after you cease performing. Any other requirement, such as range or specific conditions, must still be met for the effect to continue. If you begin a new bardic performance during this time, the effects of the previous performance immediately cease.
I think the it is entirely appropriate that Damage is similar to Scorching Ray or Fiery Shuriken. But those abilities have no save and no DR. So that will need to factor into the new ability if Weird Words is effected by a save and DR. I think I already posted make it work like Sonic version Fiery Shuriken. That seems really simple adaption except they must all be fired at once in stead of left floating around the head of the person. Both abilities scale with level and neither of them are game breaking.
I think that this ability was inspired by Dune, particularly the original movie version.
"I remember your gom jabbar, now you'll remember mine. I can kill with a word." - Paul
It was an extremely lethal ability that I think inspired this archetype. So I would prefer that the ability be worthwhile, since I happen to be a big fan of that old movie.
Golo
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Weird Words (Su):
You doubled the power, by shifting the DR to after totaling the damage. You also kept the "player mis-reading" which ignored that the ability was written to limit 1 word per target.
Your ability is the best version and nearly double the power of the original.
CHA 26 DEX 18 (+4 CHA item 16,000 and +2 DEX item 4,000 = 20,000 gp spent
Attack = +6 BAB +6 DEX +2 Inspire Courage +1 Point Blank Shot = +15
Damage = 8d8 + 8*8 + 1*8 Point Blank Shot +2*8 IC = 8d8+67 = 124
.95*(4.5+8+1+2)*8+.05*(4.5+8+1+2)*8*.95 = 123.69 before DR and Save
123.69*.45 + 123.69*.55/2 = 89.68 after save DC
(89.68 - 5) * 0.0992509363 + (89.68 - 10) * 0.3670411985 + (89.68 - 15) * 0.0131086142 + 89.68 * .5205992510 (no DR) = 85.3167041202 after everything
Hint: If PDT considers the original interpreted as multiple words hitting the same target is too much, they definitely are not going to double the original's power.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
No we can not all agree that the original power was over powered. Because people still don't agree on how it worked.
virtuoso performance or shadow bard running.
similar to Scorching Ray or Fiery Shuriken.
We don't need to agree how the original worked, we just need to agree that more than 1 word per target is not going to happen and that the original had too many dice to roll. Plus it probably used too little bardic performance rounds.
Good Hope would be better then at a lower level spell. Good point, so I'll stop using IC in the calcs.
Scorching Ray
(.95*4*3.5+0.05*4*3.5*2)*2
29.400
Fiery Shuriken
(.95*4.5*4+.05*4.5*2*4)
18.900
34.83146067 have SR, and the average of CR 8 to CR 12 is SR 21.2903225806
Applying SR
Scorching Ray
29.4 * .40 (Need a 13 on 1d20) = 11.76
Fiery Shuriken
18.9 * .40 = 7.56
Fire Resist/Immunity:
14 Have Fire Immunity
2 have Fire 5, 9 have Fire 10, 4 have Fire 20, 1 has Fire 30
Applying Fire Resist
Scorching Ray
11.76*0 * (14+9+4+1)/534 + (11.76/2-5) * 2/534 + 11.76 * (504/534) = 11.1026217225
Fiery Shuriken
7.56*0 * (14+2+9+4+1)/534 + 7.56 * (504/534) = 7.1352808987
What is the take away? Despite DR, it is better than Scorching Ray or Fiery Shuriken which is a daily 2nd level resource for a Wizard.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
appropriate that Damage is similar to Scorching Ray
I had a thought, so I
Scorching Ray does 11.10 damage, so model an ability that can do the same using DR
(15.47-5)*.0992509363+(15.47-10)*.3670411985+15.47*.5205992510 = 11.1005430716
So 15.47 damage is 3.44 d8 dice. Not a good fit.
So let's use CHA 26, which is 8 damage:
15.47-8 = 7.47
3d4 is 7.5 damage, so let us model it that way:
3d4 + CHA at level 8
Let us calculate /day uses.
Sorcerers get 6 2nd level spells a day.
Bardic Music is 26 / day with CHA 26 at 8th level.
So 4 rounds would do it. So how about a round per d4.
Weird Words (Su): At 6th level, a sound striker can start a performance as a standard action, lashing out with up to 1d4 per two levels plus the bard’s Charisma bonus (maximum 5d4) This damage may be divided evenly between any number of targets within 30 feet. These are ranged touch attacks. The attack deals bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. Each 1d4 used expends 1 round of your performance.
This is an example of an ability that models Scorching Ray (Fire Resist, SR, and spell slots) with Weird Words (Rounds and DR.)
From what I understand Weird Words does apply against DR as it says in the FAQs. Whether or not Weird Words must be applied against one or many creatures, I've heard that the ranged touch attacks can be applied against multiple creatures and can be done on the same creature more than once (but don't quote me on this). One thing I don't think has ever been answered properly is how Weird Words works with Conductive ranged weapons. Does the application of the weapon hitting resolve all the ranged touch attacks from Weird Words or does it only count as one of the ranged touch attacks hitting?