| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just looking for some clarification on this spell for the 2 action version. Assuming I am using a (H) third level version of the spell would the damage on the first round be 8D4 and then on the second round be 12D4?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are 2,3 and 6 action versions of this spell.
At spell level 2 it does: 4d4, 4d4, and 8d4
At spell level 3 it does: 8d4, 8d4, and 16d4
At spell level 4 it does: 12d4, 12d4, and 24d4
In my opinion it is scaling about twice as fast as it should. I believe it is marked for errata. For now I wouldn't let it be heightened very far as a GM.
Solid, so a 6 action (H) 3rd level spell, first round it would do 8D4 then second round do 16D4? Or are you saying it would do 16D4 on both rounds? I think your saying it'll do 16D4 on both rounds.
All the effect occurs at the end. There is only 1 lot of damage. Which means you are really telegraphing your action to your opponents.
In my opinion it is scaling about twice as fast as it should. I believe it is marked for errata. For now I wouldn't let it be heightened very far as a GM.
Doing approximation math, this is what I am seeing.
◆◆Inner Radiance Torrent
2nd: 4d4 => 10
3rd: 8d4 => 20
4th: 12d4 => 30
7th: 24d4 => 60
9th: 32d4 => 80
◆◆Lightning Bolt
3rd: 4d12 => 26
4th: 5d12 => 32.5
7th: 8d12 => 52
9th: 10d12 => 65
The damage is going to trend to these average values very strongly. It is possible to get extreme values, but at such a low frequency that it isn't worth balancing over. Your spellcaster is more likely to crit with a weapon than get an absurdly high damage roll with 32d4 damage or a very low roll with 10d12.
A difference of 15 points of damage at 9th level is noticeable, but I am not sure how big of a balance problem that actually is.
Some other differences:
2-action Inner Radiance Torrent is only 60 feet long. Both the 3-action version and 2-action Lightning Bolt is 120 feet long. I don't think this is all that relevant. 60 feet is usually long enough.
Inner Radiance Torrent is dealing Force damage instead of Electricity damage and Electricity damage has creatures that are weak, resistant, or immune to it. Force damage less so.
Just looking for some clarification on this spell for the 2 action version. Assuming I am using a (H) third level version of the spell would the damage on the first round be 8D4 and then on the second round be 12D4?
Also, as Gortle pointed out, the spell only does damage once no matter which action cost version you use.
Yeah, I would probably never cast the 6 action version of Inner Radiance Torrent. Too much opportunity for enemies to notice and try to wreck your face.
There is also the Horizon Thunder Sphere spell from the same book that have the same structure but exclude the extra damage from the main target.
Feels like one of them needs to be erratad to the same wording as the other.
Two Rounds If you spend 3 actions Casting the Spell, you can avoid finishing the spell and spend another 3 actions on your next turn to empower the spell even further. If you do, after attacking the target, whether you hit or miss, the ball of lightning explodes, dealing 2d6 electricity damage to all creatures in a 10-foot emanation around the target
All the effect occurs at the end. There is only 1 lot of damage. Which means you are really telegraphing your action to your opponents.
Oh God I didn't know that, that's very dangerous. I don't think I'll be preparing this spell. Do I have to tell the GM on the first round where I plan to target my line too or can I decide that on the second round just before the spell is cast?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All the effect occurs at the end. There is only 1 lot of damage. Which means you are really telegraphing your action to your opponents.Oh God I didn't know that, that's very dangerous. I don't think I'll be preparing this spell. Do I have to tell the GM on the first round where I plan to target my line too or can I decide that on the second round just before the spell is cast?
If the question is, do you have to decide where you're targeting and is it obvious to the enemy, no I don't think so.
You get to decide at the end of casting the spell, but the enemy will see you and be aware you are casting a spell, a particularly long one, and will most likely take actions in response to that, even if they can't identify what you are casting.
We'll hopefully the spell does some major damage because standing still for that long could be life threatening.
All the effect occurs at the end. There is only 1 lot of damage. Which means you are really telegraphing your action to your opponents.Oh God I didn't know that, that's very dangerous. I don't think I'll be preparing this spell. Do I have to tell the GM on the first round where I plan to target my line too or can I decide that on the second round just before the spell is cast?If the question is, do you have to decide where you're targeting and is it obvious to the enemy, no I don't think so.
You get to decide at the end of casting the spell, but the enemy will see you and be aware you are casting a spell, a particularly long one, and will most likely take actions in response to that, even if they can't identify what you are casting.
The original Final Fantasy Tactics game did work that way - casting a spell took quite a while and there was a visible set of tiles on the ground where the spell effect would happen. It was somewhat amusing. But the entire game was designed with that in mind.
With most spells being cast in one character's turn, PF2 isn't designed like that.
The spell casting rules don't say when targeting the spell happens though. So there is an argument that you would have to specify the target of the spell when you start casting it. But that only results in the rule being ambiguous.
I'll leave it up to each table to decide which side of the Ambiguous Rules rule this falls into.
The original Final Fantasy Tactics game did work that way - casting a spell took quite a while and there was a visible set of tiles on the ground where the spell effect would happen. It was somewhat amusing. But the entire game was designed with that in mind.
With most spells being cast in one character's turn, PF2 isn't designed like that.
The spell casting rules don't say when targeting the spell happens though. So there is an argument that you would have to specify the target of the spell when you start casting it. But that only results in the rule being ambiguous.
I'll leave it up to each table to decide which side of the Ambiguous Rules rule this falls into.
IIRC it was only some spells, not all, that had a really long casting time but you could see which squares would be affected. But it was an ability that took more than 1 round to use. I remember the dragoons leap ability did the same thing, marking one square where you would land.
*For reference the dragoons primarily ability was to jump up high in the air, and land on a square dealing damage to anyone in it. It dealt a lot of damage if you landed on someone IIRC, but it was really hard to use because you couldn't just target where the enemy was standing in a lot of cases because they would move. I'm not convinced the AI was smart enough to avoid the attacks, but they would just move to do other things. And your jump ability targeted a square, not a character. So yeah...it was pretty lame.
Here is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.
All the effect occurs at the end. There is only 1 lot of damage. Which means you are really telegraphing your action to your opponents.Oh God I didn't know that, that's very dangerous. I don't think I'll be preparing this spell. Do I have to tell the GM on the first round where I plan to target my line too or can I decide that on the second round just before the spell is cast?If the question is, do you have to decide where you're targeting and is it obvious to the enemy, no I don't think so.
You get to decide at the end of casting the spell, but the enemy will see you and be aware you are casting a spell, a particularly long one, and will most likely take actions in response to that, even if they can't identify what you are casting.
The enemy commander calls out "Kill him before he completes his magic" and all the warriors surround you and attack.
Which at very least will screw up the line of enemies you were going to target.It is hard to use the 6 action versions without another way to move eg Haste, a mature mount, Goblin scuttle.
|
I remember seeing that it's marked for errata because it heightens so fast, it runs the risk of making higher level spells look bad in comparison. And as a general design principle, higher level spells should be at least as good or usually a slightly better way to use your spell slots.
That said, I don't believe the two-round version is all that good, since it's so hard to set up.
Here is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.
Feels like he have forgoten about that errata, since they have released several other Erratas since then
erratas for Secrets of Magic? I was under the impression they don't release erratas until they release a new printing for a bookFeels like he have forgoten about that errata, since they have released several other Erratas since thenHere is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.
Fairly sure they have broken that rule already.
But you might be right.
erratas for Secrets of Magic? I was under the impression they don't release erratas until they release a new printing for a bookFeels like he have forgoten about that errata, since they have released several other Erratas since thenHere is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.
They released a blog a few weeks ago saying that they changed the errata proccess. They're gonna do them twice a year now, once in spring and once in fall.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.
Used it with this scaling, dumped the spell for not being useful. Remove this scaling and it gets even worse. Bard doesn't have much reflex options, even so this doesn't work.
No need to errata.
Here is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.Used it with this scaling, dumped the spell for not being useful. Remove this scaling and it gets even worse. Bard doesn't have much reflex options, even so this doesn't work.
No need to errata.
Agreed
AgreedHere is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.Used it with this scaling, dumped the spell for not being useful. Remove this scaling and it gets even worse. Bard doesn't have much reflex options, even so this doesn't work.
No need to errata.
Its scaling is bonkers tho, without a change its far superior to other spells at higher levels.
For example in a level 5 slot it do 16d4+16d4(average 80)
compare that to casting 2 level 5 Lightning Bolt also a line spell,
6d12(39) + 6d12(39).
an then its with only 1 spell slot and Force damage.
Sure it delays all the damage to round 2, but unless you use it stupidly its hard for any target to avoid it, especially if you have haste buff.
i do agree that Marks Nerf is abit on the Heavy-side and would leave the spell in the dust after level 2, but it defenetly need a scaling nerf or complete redesign.
Other spells to compare to are Enervation, Grim Tendrils, Hydraulic Torrent, and Radiant Beam.
Enervation is a strange comparison since it deals persistent damage.
Grim Tendrils is a very good comparison since both spells deal d4 damage. In fact at level 2 they both would be dealing 4d4 damage for 2 actions. But Inner Radiance Torrent does indeed scale twice as fast past there; increasing by 4d4 each level where Grim Tendrils increases by 2d4. No, I don't think a trivial amount of persistent bleed damage makes up the difference. Or the change in saving throw targeted.
Hydraulic Torrent scales by 2d6. Again quite a bit slower than the 4d4 per level of IRT.
Radiant Beam is rather comparable to Lightning Bolt. But it uses the slightly smaller d10 die size instead of the d12 that Lightning Bolt does. Which means that the 4d4 of IRT is even better on comparison.
Here is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.Used it with this scaling, dumped the spell for not being useful. Remove this scaling and it gets even worse. Bard doesn't have much reflex options, even so this doesn't work.
No need to errata.
I think what you need to realise is that an area of effect damage spell is out of place on the Divine and Occult lists. This type of spell is more for the Primal or Arcane caster. I really don't think it should be as good as lightning bolt in pure damage, perhaps a 10% under is the right spot for it. Force makes it odd as well.
28d4 @8th lvl or 56d4 when using 6 actions. You'd be lucky to capture 3 creatures in the 6 actions versions as they can see what is coming, most higher level creatures are intelligent enough. Plus you need a way to reposition between rounds (haste). So difficult to setup. 6 actions is a lot.
If it's about damage, I'd prefer to go with true target - biting words heightened. And use (true strike or synesthesia) biting words for the second and third instance on the rounds after and direct the damage where I need it. Which can target reflex using the signet.
Or just use a spell like spirit song, which as a cone is easier to use (use = get more enemies, so more damage).
I only have a high level bard, and she's setup to be very flexible. Can do both support and damage, whichever is needed. Cantrips, one for all, spells, skills. So actions are always at a premium, spending 6 actions to get the most out of inner radiance torrent is just not working for me. Hard to imagine other casters to do have that (6 action) time actually.
|
|
I think what you need to realise is that an area of effect damage spell is out of place on the Divine and Occult lists. This type of spell is more for the Primal or Arcane caster. I really don't think it should be as good as lightning bolt in pure damage, perhaps a 10% under is the right spot for it. Force makes it odd as well.Here is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.Used it with this scaling, dumped the spell for not being useful. Remove this scaling and it gets even worse. Bard doesn't have much reflex options, even so this doesn't work.
No need to errata.
Mostly it's out of place that early on. The divine list gets a lot of AoE spells from spell level 4 onward, like divine wrath, vampiric exsanguination, divine armageddon, sunburst, holy cascade and so on. (I don't have the occult list as well memorized yet.)
@Falco271: Most of us aren't even looking at the 6-action version of the spell. We are looking at the 2-action version. That is the one that we are looking at and think that its damage scales too fast and becomes best in class - better even than higher level spells.
|
Force Damage never scales as high as this spell does. Stop comparing it to things like Lightning Bolt and start comparing it to other Force spells.
Using the 2 action version as a baseline, here's what we get for total dice and average damage:
Inner Radiance Torrent (60ft line, basic reflex)
2: 4d4 - 10
3: 8d4 - 20
4: 12d4 - 30
5: 16d4 - 40
6: 20d4 - 50
7: 24d4 - 60
8: 28d4 - 70
9: 32d4 - 80
10: 36d4 - 90
Now compare this to other force spells, starting with Magic Missile's 2 action version
Magic Missile (2 actions, no rolls just damage)
1: 2d4+2 - 7
3: 4d4+4 - 14
5: 6d4+6 - 21
7: 8d4+8 - 28
9: 10d4+10 - 35
Spiritual Weapon (one target, can strike multiple times per cast)
2: 1d8 - 4.5
4: 2d8 - 9
6: 3d8 - 13.5
8: 4d8 - 18
10: 5d8 - 22.5
Spirit Blast (one target, basic fort)
6: 16d6 - 56
7: 18d6 - 63
8: 20d6 - 70
9: 22d6 - 77
10: 24d6 - 84
Spirit Song (60ft Cone, basic fort)
8: 18d6 - 63
9: 20d6 - 70
10: 22d6 - 77
How can you say Inner Radiance Torrent is balanced, when it out damages even the strongest single target Force spells with the same number of actions? If I had to pick a level 6 one target spell, over a level 6 60ft line, and one does a little bit less average damage, I would pick the line every time.
How can you say Inner Radiance Torrent is balanced, when it out damages even the strongest single target Force spells with the same number of actions? If I had to pick a level 6 one target spell, over a level 6 60ft line, and one does a little bit less average damage, I would pick the line every time.
I don't think anyone here said it was balanced. Even if you half the scaling it is still good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How can you say Inner Radiance Torrent is balanced, when it out damages even the strongest single target Force spells with the same number of actions? If I had to pick a level 6 one target spell, over a level 6 60ft line, and one does a little bit less average damage, I would pick the line every time.I don't think anyone here said it was balanced. Even if you half the scaling it is still good.
Some people actual implied it, saying it should not be errata.
implying its good and balance as it is.AgreedHere is the comment from Mark about it
Basically scale it at half the rate.Used it with this scaling, dumped the spell for not being useful. Remove this scaling and it gets even worse. Bard doesn't have much reflex options, even so this doesn't work.
No need to errata.