This transcend ability is a bit confusing. I am not sure how the designer's intended it to work. I think there are a few possible interpretations:
1. The new spirit damage bonus applies to all weapon damage dice including the new dice added at levels 1, 10, and 18.
For example:
At level 1, the extra spirit damage would be 4 x 2 weapon dice (added power attack die and the bonus went up from 2 to 4)
At level 4, the extra spirit damage would be 4 x 3 weapon dice (striking rune)
At level 10, the extra spirit damage would be 6 x 4 weapon dice (another die from the power attack and the damage went from 4 to 6)
2. The new spirit damage bonus only applies to the original weapon damage dice (i.e. from striking runes)
At level 1, the extra spirit damage would be 4 x 1 weapon dice
At level 4, the extra spirit damage would be 4 x 2 weapon dice (striking rune)
At level 10, the extra spirit damage would be 6 x 2 weapon dice (the damage went from 4 to 6)
3. The spirit damage bonus going from 2 to 4 to 6, etc. was meant to account for the additional weapon die added by the power attack
At level 1, the extra spirit damage would be 2 x 2 weapon dice (added power attack die)
At level 4, the extra spirit damage would be 2 x 3 weapon dice (striking rune)
At level 10, the extra spirit damage would be 2 x 4 weapon dice (another die from the power attack)
I think 1 or 3 are the more likely intents. What do people think?
Assuming your weapon deals XdY damage, I believe it works out to a final damage of:
XdY (normal weapon damage) + 1dY+4X (spirit damage).
At level 10 the spirit damage goes up to 2dY+6X, and it hits 3dY+8X at 18.
The other way to read is I think you end up with 1dY+2X+4 initially, going up to 2dY+2X+6 and then 3dY+2X+8, but that doesn't really account for "increase"
I feel like the intention was to be #3, but the weird way they worded it actually does #1, which seems like a super-buffed version of Power Attack (which I'm not necessarilly opposed to).
I could be wrong, though, and they actually meant to do #1... but if that's the case they should definitely clean up the wording. For example:
"If this Strike hits, it deals an extra die of weapon damage, and the bonus spirit damage is increased to +4 per weapon damage die. If you’re at least 10th level, increase this to two extra dice and +6 damage per weapon die, and if you’re at least 18th level, increase it to three extra dice and +8 damage per weapon die."
Definitely feels to me like #2 is what they mean. Extra weapon dice from abilities and such are never counted for +X damage per weapon damage die effects, only the single base die + dice from striking runes apply for those.
The ability saying that the spirit damage increases makes me think that the flat number listed (4/6/8) is supposed to slot in the place of the 2 in the immanence description, so it would be 4/6/8 damage per weapon damage die.
It's a much stronger version of power attack, but the class doesn't get any other inherent damage boosts, and having to juggle your spark means that this ability ends up with an action economy most similar to a spellstrike.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
extra die from abilities never count toward things that are based on your weapon die.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Thanks, yes i found this link that clarifies the rule on damage dice.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=226
Another, highly unlikely, way of reading the is that it goes from +2 damage per weapon die to +4+1dy per weapon die, basically doubling the damage dice, or even more at later levels. This obviously seems unlikely to be the intent, but is technically a way to read the ability and definitely needs clarification on just how the feature works.
Also speaking of Titan's Breaker in general does spirit damage from other sources, such as Spirit Strike, also ignore Hardness and Construct/Object immunity to spirit damage. What happens when you change the damage type of your Spirit damage to something like Electricity or Bludgeoning from one of the Dominion Ephithets.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
After being really, really blind for a few days, I think the current wording and intent (for the playtest at least) are the same.
It goes from an initial 1dX+4 to 3dX+8 at level 18, always fully replacing the immanence effect. That is what the ability states RAW. Basically, starting at level 4, this is Power Attack plus your normal damage from immanence. The likely reason it is phrased so oddly is to define what additional damage you get in total in one place and to link everything to Fracture Mountain's last sentence.
Why do I think this is also currently intended? Exactly because it is basically Power Attack in a trench coat. It is the stereotypical "big swing" that has already inspired several abilities (One-Inch-Punch or Megaton Strike come to mind). This is the one that gauges the reaction to the "conservative" option.
-
I think the chance of people misreading it for numerous reasons is way too high. Not just new players, but also veterans. Maybe especially veterans, as you sometimes stop reading abilities as carefully after a while. My entire group and I are certainly very guilty of this. So I would very much appreciate a different phrasing.
The other thing I really don't like is the balance.
a) I appreciate the bonus that the additional damage ignores construct and object hardness, but how useful is that really? Because the only instance where this matters is if your entire weapon damage is eaten by the hardness. For objects, that isn't too unlikely for quite a while. But for constructs, a Strike from a two-handed STR weapon user (which will be a very common choice) will more likely than not smash right through regardless. So the benefits here are very limited.
b) It deals the least damage of the three "normal" melee options and with the worst progression to boot. Given that that is its only job, that doesn't feel fair.
c) Fracture Mountains is by its very nature situational. It isn't quite as severe as on the Fighter, but the Power Attack vs just 2 regular Strikes problem applies here as well. I don't think that is a good place for your main offensive ability to be in. Especially given the cost of using it on successive turns, if you even can.
d) It is not different enough from any other Exemplar just using Power Attack. While PA lacks the ikon-juggling ability and the minor anti-hardness benefit, I still think this is too close to others just being able to get your "cool thing".
Karmagator wrote: It goes from an initial 1dX+4 to 3dX+8 at level 18, always fully replacing the immanence effect. That is what the ability states RAW. Basically, starting at level 4, this is Power Attack plus your normal damage from immanence. The likely reason it is phrased so oddly is to define what additional damage you get in total in one place and to link everything to Fracture Mountain's last sentence. I'm still not sure what the designer's intended. My arguments against this interpretation is mainly out of hope:
1) If it as you say, then it mostly would just follow the standard Immanence bonus due to increased striking, but slightly different. I don't see why they would "clarify" here.
2) If all it was meant to do was mimic Power Attack, that seems lazy. One can just get PA with an archetype. Gleaming Blade's is like Double Slice, but it is different in that you can put a much bigger damage die on the weapon. If Titan's Breaker was just PA, then I would expect Gleaming Blade's to be just Double Slice reskinned.
3) I assume the designer's did some math and could see that this would be much weaker than anything else.
I have a slightly different potential interpretation. I wonder if the designer's meant to essentially give the +2 additional damage for the dice added by the PA, which would not normally get the +2 spirit damage. But, they forgot about the +2 normally also adding for the striking rune... So it would be like PA'ing with all the dice rolling with the +2 damage... At Level 1 its 4 spirit damage because its 2 dice total... At 10 it would be 3 dice total (not accounting for striking), 18 - 4 dice (not accounting for striking).
Here's my damage analysis again equal level opponent (it is slightly wrong because I did not adjust weapon specialization to level 5 instead of 7): https://imgur.com/sYtFOMr
This includes damaging property runes at 8, 10, 16
I only think that the RAW version is the intent for the playtest. I sincerely hope that it will improve as well.
Spidermonkeya wrote: 1) If it as you say, then it mostly would just follow the standard Immanence bonus due to increased striking, but slightly different. I don't see why they would "clarify" here. Basically so that you can see your entire bonus damage at a glance. Which makes sense, as in the heat of combat, people often forget things like this or make mistakes. And to make it clear that all of it is included in the anti-hardness part.
Spidermonkeya wrote: 2) If all it was meant to do was mimic Power Attack, that seems lazy. One can just get PA with an archetype. Gleaming Blade's is like Double Slice, but it is different in that you can put a much bigger damage die on the weapon. If Titan's Breaker was just PA, then I would expect Gleaming Blade's to be just Double Slice reskinned. Abilities mimicking other abilities but with a slightly different spin on it is pretty common. Spellstrike really is just a modified Eldritch Shot at the end of the day. Both of those are awesome, so it is hardly problematic by default. It's when the spin isn't interesting or good enough in new context - such as here - that we get problems. A reskin, as you have put it, rather than a true variant.
Spidermonkeya wrote: 3) I assume the designer's did some math and could see that this would be much weaker than anything else. I'd assume so, yes. You often can't catch all interactions, but something this obvious is bound to have been noticed. But playtests are way less about pure numbers than about everything else. That's why there are often weirdly weak options like this. I presume these allow the devs to gauge the boundaries of what people find acceptable.
Spidermonkeya wrote: I have a slightly different potential interpretation. I wonder if the designer's meant to essentially give the +2 additional damage for the dice added by the PA, which would not normally get the +2 spirit damage. But, they forgot about the +2 normally also adding for the striking rune... So it would be like PA'ing with all the dice rolling with the +2 damage... At Level 1 its 4 spirit damage because its 2 dice total... At 10 it would be 3 dice total (not accounting for striking), 18 - 4 dice (not accounting for striking). I really doubt it. Abilities that add damage based on weapon damage dice are quite common and I can't remember them ever making a mistake with them before. Sure, different people work on different abilities, but I'd still be a strange error.
I really can't see them adding the flat 4/6/8 damage text with the intent of it not scaling with number of damage dice. Writing it the way they have way doesn't really make it easier to remember at a glance, because writing "you get x damage per weapon damage die" and then immediately going "ok now you don't get that bonus at all, but instead you get a flat damage bonus that doesn't interact with weapon damage dice, plus a die of damage" is way more confusing to a reader than letting the two damage bonuses remain listed separately.
Not to mention the entire ikon would be basically a strict downgrade from noble branch, as noble branch's transcend would do more total damage than titan breaker's and doesn't require a 2 action commitment.
Unless there was some heavy miscommunication going on as to the general power level of weapon transcendence actions, I think its much more likely to be a wording issue than a balancing one and that it should read 4/6/8 additional damage per weapon damage die.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
If the goal is to replace 2/die with a flat 4+1dX then it should probably say 'replaces' or 'instead deals' rather than 'increases', because increases definitely reads like you're going from 2/die to 4/die.
Or they could just remove the mention of a flat number entirely because at the majority of levels there's no distinction between the two anyways (i.e. from 4-9 2/die is 4 and from 12-17 2/die is 6), which would mean for 70% of a campaign all that extra language is doing nothing but misdirecting players.
... Basically if the goal was to simply replace the default number with a new number they picked the worst possible way to word it, because that's not really what the ability says.
I'll probably run and test it as RAW unless Paizo wants to chime in and clarify otherwise. It would be pretty handy if everyone was playtesting the same ability instead of having split feedback on it being over or underpowered based on divergent interpretations, since there's a really huge gap between the strongest and weakest versions of this ability.
Its unquestionably poorly worded the most balanced interpretation is that it doesn't interact with the immense ability at all.
1d+4, 2d+6 and ,3d+8 are enough to make better than power attack and to make it just about on par with gleaming blades version.
If they just wanted 1d, 2d and 3d they could have simple said the ability adds dice and it would have been much easier to understand.
I think 3d+32 (replacing emanace) with 4 weapon dice is almost certainly too good to be true.
siegfriedliner wrote: 1d+4, 2d+6 and ,3d+8 are enough to make better than power attack and to make it just about on par with gleaming blades version. The thing is it really isn't on par. Even in a scenario where you need a 15+ to hit on your first strike, a situation that should favor titan breaker's 0 attack penalty, gleaming blade does significantly more damage. Assuming a d12 weapon, at level 4 its 12.25 avg for gleaming blade and 9.3 avg for titan breaker. Level 11 its 20.25 for gleaming, 16.05 for titan. A 20% deficit in dpr when taking the titan's ideal situation is not good. Things tilt more in the favor of gleaming blade against targets that require less than a 15+ on the die to hit.
If we instead assume titan breaker's effect is 4/6/8 damage per die, its average damage at level 4 becomes 10.5, and 19.65 at level 11. Even with the stronger interpretation it lags a little bit behind gleaming blade. But at least with this interpretation I can see titan breaker's ability to hit constructs with their spirit damage making up the gap between them.
I think they just wanted to stack the written bonus on top of the immanence bonus.
Keeping in mind that bonus dices from stuff like power attack do NOT factor in "per weapon dice" abilities (like the immanence effect) they wanted to give the ability the extra boost that is basically mirroring that immanence damage boost on the extra dices of the transcend ability.
Recent threads in Exemplar Class Discussion
|
