Sudden bolt (lvl 2):
You call down a small bolt of lightning on the target, dealing 4d12 electricity damage.
Basic reflex
https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=639
I am running a low level campain where my players just hit level 3. I told them they can use all the official books feats, spells, etc. Most of them use pathbuilder 2e.
This spell seems way better than the other spells of the same level and it has the uncommon trait.
Do you think I should allow that or is it OP?
Thanks a lot!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a 2nd level spell that has a range of 60ft and does 4d12 damage (average 26) to one creature. It allows a basic reflex save to halve the damage.
Let's compare this to the first spell in all the 2nd level spells available (alphabetically) Acid Arrow.
Acid arrow deals 3d8 on hit and 1d6 persistent damage.
That's 13.5 average damage on hit and 3.5 persistent damage per turn, but requires an attack roll.
Honestly, if the person makes the save against Sudden Bolt you're already dealing less damage than sudden bolt.
So no, I don't see a problem with this spell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Acid arrow also has double the range.
So I also do not see an issue.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd consider Sudden Bolt to be the "baseline" for a no frills, single target reflex save damage spell.
I plan on considering it to be Common for any game I run.
Anyway, remember that it gives you power ( it's a reflex roll hidden by the DM screen, so you could deal with it if you want them to experience a more exciting fight, or similar ).
So are you saying that DMs can/do fudge saving throws behind the DM screen?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I like the idea of awarding uncommon spells so they're not automatically accessible to everyone.
Normally yes, but I personally view Sudden Bolt as something of a "patch" for magical blasting.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest I'm not sure why that spell is uncommon.
Nothing about the spell encourages me to take it as especially good.
I'm not saying it's a bad spell either, just seems like the definition of what a single target 2nd level no attack roll spell should do.
Maybe the range is a little short, that's about it.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest I'm not sure why that spell is uncommon.
It came out in an AP. IMO, that's pretty much the ONLY reason that I can see.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest I'm not sure why that spell is uncommon.It came out in an AP. IMO, that's pretty much the ONLY reason that I can see.
Yep its [Uncommon(rare)] not [Uncommon(powerful)] which again is why I find that such an odd way of doing it instead of actually just creating a catagory for the second.
Yep its [Uncommon(rare)] not [Uncommon(powerful)] which again is why I find that such an odd way of doing it instead of actually just creating a catagory for the second.To be honest I'm not sure why that spell is uncommon.It came out in an AP. IMO, that's pretty much the ONLY reason that I can see.
Couldn't agree more. ;)
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's a 2nd level spell that has a range of 60ft and does 4d12 damage (average 26) to one creature. It allows a basic reflex save to halve the damage.
Let's compare this to the first spell in all the 2nd level spells available (alphabetically) Acid Arrow.
Acid arrow deals 3d8 on hit and 1d6 persistent damage.
That's 13.5 average damage on hit and 3.5 persistent damage per turn, but requires an attack roll.
Honestly, if the person makes the save against Sudden Bolt you're already dealing less damage than sudden bolt.
So no, I don't see a problem with this spell.
This doesn't make sense to me. (Especially the second to last sentence..)
Acid Arrow does more damage if it hits, than Sudden Bolt if the enemy saves. Sure. But that's not a fair comparison; a fair comparison would be the odds of Acid Arrow hitting times the damage if it does, compared to the odds of critical success, regular success, failure and critical failure against Sudden Bolt, all multiplied by the amount of damage that you do on such a save result.
Let's assume for the sake of simplicity that the target has a 45% chance of saving, 45% of failing, and 5% each of critical failure and critical success. And let's also assume that you have 45% chance to hit and 5% chance to crit with an Acid Arrow.
Then Sudden Bolt would do:
0.05 * 0 * 4d12
0.45 * 0.5 * 4d12
0.45 * 1 * 4d12
0.05 * 2 * 4d12
for a total of 20.15 expected damage
Acid Arrow has an expected damage of:
0.05 * 0 * 3d8
0.45 * 0 * 3d8
0.45 * 1 * 3d8 (and 1d6 persistent)
0.05 * 2 * 3d8 (and 1d6 persistent)
for a total of 7.425 expected damage and (1d6)/2 persistent
Now, these numbers are of course a gross simplification because some enemies have better Reflex than AC, some have worse, and there are some boosts to to-hit that you can't get against saves. But on the whole, save for half is better than attack roll if the damage is equal, because you still get half damage on a regular success on the save but nothing on a regular miss on an attack roll. And that's if the damage was equal, but it's not; it's a difference between 4d12 and 3d8, that's not nothing at all.
I think Sudden Bolt's heightening is quite reasonable and it's not so powerful after a few levels, but at level 3 when you first get it, it's a lot more powerful than other spells.
Acid Arrow is hardly worth a spell slot. Sudden Bolt is a bit too good, but not great. If you think it's too strong, you can just remove a d12. But honestly, Arcane/Primal casters are not crazy good at level 3-4, so it won't imbalance the game to allow Sudden Bolt. Before level 5, damage dealing through spells is subpar.
As a side note, at level 4 martials get their Striking Rune. Sudden Bolt will look way less powerful once it will be the case.
If you think it's too strong, you can just remove a d12.
That's a bad idea. Would make the spell absolutely inferior to lightning bolt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you think it's too strong, you can just remove a d12.That's a bad idea. Would make the spell absolutely inferior to lightning bolt.
There are tons of low level spells which are completely invalidated by higher level spells.
And preparing Sudden Bolt above level 2 is not very useful anyway. Lightning Bolt is already crazy better.
It does the same damage as lightning bolt, but to only one target. It's range is good, but not great. It does one more dice than 2nd level shocking grasp, but without the bonus to hit or the persistent damage against a target with metal.
Is it a bit on the high end for a 2nd level spell? Yeah, but it's not GREAT and it doesn't do anything else. Also you will probably never heighten it as lightning bolt is objectively better (4d12 vs several compared to 5d12 vs one).
Don't let your PCs take it, as it is uncommon and you don't want your Players to get in the habit of always having access to uncommon items. But I think it is 100% cool for a scroll of it to be in a loot drop.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stuff
Yeah, I wasn't doing all the math and I'm aware it's not a direct (perhaps some might call it unfair) comparison.
But I'm just saying, if you land Acid Arrow and the target of Sudden Bolt were to save Sudden Bolt is outright worse.
Acid Arrow takes 4 rounds to deal as much damage as sudden bolt, but also potentially has the enemy take action to try to rid themselves of persistent damage, which is actually pretty high value in terms of robbing enemy actions.
Also, your assumptions of 45% chance of succes/failure and 5% chance of crit success/failure also skew the results quite a bit. We'd have to look at a specific monster and that's where trying to make very general statements start to fall apart because the spells function in ways that are fundamental different enough that it's hard to do an apples to apples comparison.
A closer comparison would be sound burst which is a save spell vs attack roll spell. It deals 2d10 (11 average) damage which is roughly half that of sudden bolt. But potentially does it to multiple creatures in a 10ft burst around your target. So with 2 creatures you deal roughly equal damage, and with 3 or more you deal more.
Spells in this edition are really about targeting the weak aspect of an enemy, not trying to make make your favorite spell work regardless of situation.
You should use a spell that the enemy has a weakness to, like targeting their bad save or if they have low AC use an attack spell.
There isn't one spell that's an end all be all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest I'm not sure why that spell is uncommon.It came out in an AP. IMO, that's pretty much the ONLY reason that I can see.
The scars of Blood Money burden us still...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sudden bolt is one of a very small group of pure damage spells and a smaller group of single target pure damage spells. It is fine imo.
Putting it into perspective, it is a two action offense only spell that on average does 13 more damage a cast than lightning bolt if cast heightened to the same level and only against a single target.
This won't make or break battles given how fast HP scales. Look at the Building a Creature HP table for confirmation of this, remembering that there will be two levels of creature per level of spell and that it is harder to adjust reflex save numbers to the casters advantage than it is to adjust attack numbers up and AC down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me, "uncommon" isn't about being good/better. In my experience it just feels special to get something with the uncommon label because you know most people don't have it.To be honest I'm not sure why that spell is uncommon.
Nothing about the spell encourages me to take it as especially good.
I'm not saying it's a bad spell either, just seems like the definition of what a single target 2nd level no attack roll spell should do.
Maybe the range is a little short, that's about it.
Throwing knives are an example if uncommon being more powerful vs hard to find. A dagger balanced for throwing hardly seems like an oddity but because it has more traits than a normal dagger it gets uncommon. A Bladed Diabolo I can see having to search for but a throwing knife? The only other explanation is the curse of being in an AP... :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From what I've seen, Uncommon is the default trait for options from non-Core books. That makes it easier for GMs to trim options, gives a cushion for plot-specific or campaign-specific options that may not gel well with standard play, and may just be a recognition that much of the power creep in PF1 came from such books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like that the AP spells are Uncommon. It takes the burden off the GM of needing to know every single thing in every supplement that ever comes out. At least the player has to show up and draw the GMs attention to it and they can decide to either give it out, or write it into the story in an interesting way, or not if it is going to be a problem in their campaign.
|
Sudden bolt is one of a very small group of pure damage spells and a smaller group of single target pure damage spells. It is fine imo.
Putting it into perspective, it is a two action offense only spell that on average does 13 more damage a cast than lightning bolt if cast heightened to the same level and only against a single target.
This won't make or break battles given how fast HP scales. Look at the Building a Creature HP table for confirmation of this, remembering that there will be two levels of creature per level of spell and that it is harder to adjust reflex save numbers to the casters advantage than it is to adjust attack numbers up and AC down.
It's only 6.5 more damage, Sudden bolt is only a single d12 ahead of lightning bolt, so it's basically only worth preparing at 2nd relatively.
It is op compared to other single target damage spells, which generally aren't good. I think it is over powered compared to other 2nd level spells, but casters are relatively weaker at levels 3 and 4, so it might be okay to have. To me it seems to be stepping on martial toes a bit too much.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
StuffYeah, I wasn't doing all the math and I'm aware it's not a direct (perhaps some might call it unfair) comparison.
But I'm just saying, if you land Acid Arrow and the target of Sudden Bolt were to save Sudden Bolt is outright worse.
I don't think that's a reasonable comparison, because you're comparing a successful attack with an enemy succeeding at a save, when you should be comparing the successful attack with the enemy failing at the save.
Compare a hit with an attack with an enemy failing the save.
Compare a miss with an attack with an enemy succeeding the save.
Compare a critical hit with an attack with an enemy critically failing the save.
Compare a critical miss with an attack with an enemy critically succeeding the save.
If the chance of saving is similar to the chance of hitting/missing, then basic save spells are better than attack spells because a failed attack does no damage but a successful save still takes half damage. So to equalize that, either the damage for an attack spell needs to be higher than the damage for a basic save spell, or the saving throw should often be stronger than AC.
Now clearly, the damage for sudden bolt is higher than for acid arrow, so they'd only be balanced if enemy saves are a lot better than enemy AC, because you have to compensate twice; once for basic save spells starting with the advantage, and another time for sudden bolt having the higher base damage.
If you look at monster design guidelines in the GMG then the advice is that monsters typically have high AC, and high, moderate and low save. At low levels, the moderate save and high AC numbers track each other pretty well (at really high levels, the saves get weaker compared to the AC). So for all monsters whose Reflex save isn't their main save, there is no compensation going on here.
|
|
It is op compared to other single target damage spells, which generally aren't good. I think it is over powered compared to other 2nd level spells, but casters are relatively weaker at levels 3 and 4, so it might be okay to have. To me it seems to be stepping on martial toes a bit too much.
I agree with your analysis - it's better than other level 2 spells, so it can only be acceptable if you already believe the existing level 2 spells were too weak.
|
|
I think the "it's only single target" aspect of Sudden Bolt was overvalued in the design. From playing a character with Lightning Bolt, I'm not all that impressed with how often I can even get two enemies nicely lined up, and three enemies almost never happens. I'd say on average you can get 1.5 enemy in a lightning bolt.
I think at low level Sudden Bolt does a bit too much damage, but it doesn't scale up impressively. At first it's better than a lightning bolt because you can basically focus fire on the enemy that matters most; later on you can still do that but the relative value shifts as that 1d12 more on Sudden Bolt vs. Lightning Bolt becomes a smaller difference compared to the extra damage you can get with a Lightning Bolt when you get a second enemy in it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mathematically, Sudden Bolt outclasses Acid Arrow because it does half damage on a miss, giving it a pretty meaningful advantage.
But if you look at other options, you can see that's actually a fairly consistent pattern for Paizo to not value half damage on a miss very highly. Contrast say, Electric Arc and attack based damage cantrips, or Chilling Spray vs Snowball.
So while it's true to say Sudden Bolt is generally better than Acid Arrow, I think it's less so to argue that it's significantly out of whack as a player option, because you can draw parallels to it from other options just in the CRB.
It's only 6.5 more damage, Sudden bolt is only a single d12 ahead of lightning bolt, so it's basically only worth preparing at 2nd relatively.
I misremembered, thought it was 2d12 heightened. But this just further makes my point.
It is fine. I would slot it in as a signature for a spontaneous caster if I had the opportunity.
As for "can't line up spells" that is usually more a player issue imo. My group decided it was no longer worth avoiding hitting the barbarian and now happily catch her in AoE. And both the barbarian and rogue have resistance rings so the bomber alchemist doesn't have to lose out on 8-12 or more damage per bomb thrown.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As for "can't line up spells" that is usually more a player issue imo. My group decided it was no longer worth avoiding hitting the barbarian and now happily catch her in AoE. And both the barbarian and rogue have resistance rings so the bomber alchemist doesn't have to lose out on 8-12 or more damage per bomb thrown.
I'm going to chime in and disagree.
My experience with line attacks of any sort is that I can rarely get more than 1 enemy in them. It's very hard to get three people in a line (you as the caster, and 2 enemies).
If line spells originated not from your square but had their length reduced by half and could originate at a distance away from you that would exponentially increase their usability.
Personally I would never take lightning bolt over fireball. It's easy to get 2 or 3 enemies in the radius, especially at the start of combat while I've rarely had 2 enemies in a line with me.
This just me personal experience, but it just rarely works out and the damage for fireball is just slightly less than that of lightning bolt but it's so much easier to use.
My experience with line attacks of any sort is that I can rarely get more than 1 enemy in them. It's very hard to get three people in a line (you as the caster, and 2 enemies).
More than 2, yeah can be quite hard. But unless terrain blocks you two shouldn't be too much of a challenge, it will generally require communication with party members or moving into position though. Haste is a caster's best friend, and movement buffs are amazing in pf2e.
Nothing wrong with delaying either. A single lightning bolt is unlikely to win a combat in one round.
I absolutely agree that fire is a better AoE for catching more foes, just gotta make sure the party is happy with you catching them in it past the opening round :)
|
|
It's only 6.5 more damage, Sudden bolt is only a single d12 ahead of lightning bolt, so it's basically only worth preparing at 2nd relatively.
Ok, so here's a hypothetical: Would you also be fine with a 2nd level single target Fire Bolt spell that does 6d6 damage, Ref save for half damage? It's identical to Lightning Bolt/Sudden Bolt's "3rd level spell, same damage, but single target only" build. Which is true, by the way, both Sudden Bolt and Lightning bolt do 4d12.
Ok, so here's a hypothetical: Would you also be fine with a 2nd level single target Fire Bolt spell that does 6d6 damage, Ref save for half damage? It's identical to Lightning Bolt/Sudden Bolt's "3rd level spell, same damage, but single target only" build. Which is true, by the way, both Sudden Bolt and Lightning bolt do 4d12.
It's only 6.5 more damage, Sudden bolt is only a single d12 ahead of lightning bolt, so it's basically only worth preparing at 2nd relatively.
That's basically word-for-word what Scorching Ray is (though such doesn't exist in PF2).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't understand how lining up two creatures is supposed to be hard. It's a line, putting two points on a line is pretty much the most possible thing of all time. If there's only two enemies and your allies are muddling you up and/or the angle they create is awkward to get to from your position, sure. But as long as there's at least 3 foes I don't see how it's an issue. The drawback vs Fireball is that you actually need to move to line it up, whereas a Fireball doesn't care where you stand in relation to the enemy.
Maybe I am misreading it but I am pretty sure that you can use the Reach Spell meta magic feat to start any touch or line spell 30ft away from you, which is a great way to make grim tendrils and lightning bolt able to line up with at least two targets.
Also getting the party to pull back into a hallway is a great way to get unsuspecting enemies to line up for spell devastation.
So sudden bolt is a nice 2nd level single target damage spell, which can be important for later feat shenanigans like combine spell, but it is not particularly broke in regards to what nasty tricks casters can make happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I am misreading it but I am pretty sure that you can use the Reach Spell meta magic feat to start any touch or line spell 30ft away from you, which is a great way to make grim tendrils and lightning bolt able to line up with at least two targets.
Also getting the party to pull back into a hallway is a great way to get unsuspecting enemies to line up for spell devastation.
So sudden bolt is a nice 2nd level single target damage spell, which can be important for later feat shenanigans like combine spell, but it is not particularly broke in regards to what nasty tricks casters can make happen.
The Reach Spell doesn't "start" a touch spell 30' away. It extends the range to 30'; it "ends" the touch spell 30' away. The spell still passes through the intervening space.
Lightning doesn't have a range entry to extend. It has an area (120' line) that extends from you, but the metamagic doesn't extend an area nor change its placement.As for placing a Lightning Bolt, it should be simple to line up two enemies. The trouble is a Fireball usually doesn't require lining up, can often hit more enemies (if they exist), and lining up enemies often requires either a gap in the martials or going around the end of the martials. That's not wise placement against enemies worth using this spell against. The lack of 5' steps also makes it harder to coordinate an opening w/ the martials (assuming they make effective use of their actions already).
Of course, that's in the simplest terms of non-flying caster vs. medium enemies. With flight and facing larger enemies, placement can be done easier and won't require dangerous front line gaps, plus the spell may not be as costly.
And then there are corridors, perhaps w/ a Ranger prepping some Snares, and the whole ambush routine. Have to factor in "best use" when considering spells since that's what skilled players will aim for.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so here's a hypothetical: Would you also be fine with a 2nd level single target Fire Bolt spell that does 6d6 damage, Ref save for half damage? It's identical to Lightning Bolt/Sudden Bolt's "3rd level spell, same damage, but single target only" build. Which is true, by the way, both Sudden Bolt and Lightning bolt do 4d12.
It's only 6.5 more damage, Sudden bolt is only a single d12 ahead of lightning bolt, so it's basically only worth preparing at 2nd relatively.
Flaming Sphere does 3d6 every round for up to 10 rounds, and you can change targets.
Is sudden bolt on the stronger side? Yes. Is is OP. No.
Maybe I am misreading it but I am pretty sure that you can use the Reach Spell meta magic feat to start any touch or line spell 30ft away from you, which is a great way to make grim tendrils and lightning bolt able to line up with at least two targets.
Also getting the party to pull back into a hallway is a great way to get unsuspecting enemies to line up for spell devastation.
So sudden bolt is a nice 2nd level single target damage spell, which can be important for later feat shenanigans like combine spell, but it is not particularly broke in regards to what nasty tricks casters can make happen.
The Reach Spell doesn't "start" a touch spell 30' away. It extends the range to 30'; it "ends" the touch spell 30' away. The spell still passes through the intervening space.
Lightning doesn't have a range entry to extend. It has an area (120' line) that extends from you, but the metamagic doesn't extend an area nor change its placement.As for placing a Lightning Bolt, it should be simple to line up two enemies. The trouble is a Fireball usually doesn't require lining up, can often hit more enemies (if they exist), and lining up enemies often requires either a gap in the martials or going around the end of the martials. That's not wise placement against enemies worth using this spell against. The lack of 5' steps also makes it harder to coordinate an opening w/ the martials (assuming they make effective use of their actions already).
Of course, that's in the simplest terms of non-flying caster vs. medium enemies. With flight and facing larger enemies, placement can be done easier and won't require dangerous front line gaps, plus the spell may not be as costly.
And then there are corridors, perhaps w/ a Ranger prepping some Snares, and the whole ambush routine. Have to factor in "best use" when considering spells since that's what skilled players will aim for.
I see, it is explained most clearly in the "Area" section of spells. The wording on the feat itself feels a little more open ended, but reach spell only works on spells that have an entry for range.
People are vastly overeating sudden bolt in my opinion, and massively understating acid arrow. Acid arrows range is no joke and the persistent damage can seriously change an encounter.
Sudden bolt does 4-36 damage on a failure and 2-18 on a success. Reflex is a very common highest save as well.
Acid arrow can also be used with true strike, but sudden bolt cannot.
Imo sudden bolt is actually the perfect example of a balanced single target damage spell in pf2.
|
|
There's a big difference between 30ft and 60ft range, but after that it's a lot less vital. A significant portion of all combats takes place on maps that make really long range unimportant. If Sudden Bolt had been 30ft range it would have been considerably weaker. If it had 120ft range it wouldn't be much stronger.
People are vastly overeating sudden bolt in my opinion, and massively understating acid arrow.
Overeating a sudden bolt? That doesn't sound healthy...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a big difference between 30ft and 60ft range, but after that it's a lot less vital. A significant portion of all combats takes place on maps that make really long range unimportant. If Sudden Bolt had been 30ft range it would have been considerably weaker. If it had 120ft range it wouldn't be much stronger.
Maybe in AP's, sure-i wouldn't know. I've mostly been playing in home-brew campaigns and I've had lots of moments where enemies try to run away / we get a good distance on them and I've been able to snipe them with acid arrow.
I guess it depends on the game you're playing sure, but in my opinion the range matters a lot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe in AP's, sure-i wouldn't know. I've mostly been playing in home-brew campaigns and I've had lots of moments where enemies try to run away / we get a good distance on them and I've been able to snipe them with acid arrow.I guess it depends on the game you're playing sure, but in my opinion the range matters a lot.
Nah even in APs there is frequently more room than that. People often ignore it because GMs don't like running rounds of "the enemy full moves" but in reality this is easy to do and not screwing around with run speeds and penalties makes it even easier.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally think Sudden Bolt is overrated. I much prefer magic missile.
Both spells are used against single-target enemies. When I'm fighting a single target enemy, I'm worried if it's a single enemy that's vastly higher level than our party, because such enemies generally have strong saves overall and most spells and attacks and anything that can be resisted WILL be resisted.Here's a case study with a level 5 wizard versus three different level 8 monsters:
Wizard spell DC 21 = 10[base] 5[level] 4[stat] 2[proficiency]
level 3 sudden bolt 5d12 = 32.5 base
level 3 3-action magic missile 6d4+6 = 21 base** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
As you can see, across most examples except for the worst of reflex saves, magic missile wins out. Furthermore, even against weak-reflex monsters, the damage is comparable. Considering magic missile is force damage and thus likely unresisted (but no weakness proc either), I personally prefer preparing magic missile on high level slots for single-target boss monster damage.Edit: an argument can be made that the comparison is unfair because magic missile is 3-action as opposed...
It's kind of strange to compare them at third level