Is WRAITHSTRIKE overpowered?
This is another topic that has popped up in the D&D boards. Some people say the second level spell "Wraithstrike" (Complete Adventurer page 158) is overpowered. I was initially skeptical, but after reading the spell, I kind of agree.
This second level spell is a swift action personal spell that allows melee attacks to be resolved as touch attacks for 1 round. Thus it ignores any armor, shield, & natural armor bonuses.
The spell has an affect very similar to the "brilliant energy" weapon enhancement (Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5, page 244), except it affects undead & it ignores natural armor.
I think this spell is overpowered mainly because it allows a character to replicate an effect close to (if not BETTER THAN) that of a +5 equivalent weapon AS EARLY AS 3RD CHARACTER LEVEL. If its not banned outright in a D&D campaign, the spell level of Wraithstrike should at least be increased to 4th or 5th, IMHO.
This second level spell is a swift action personal spell that allows melee attacks to be resolved as touch attacks for 1 round. Thus it ignores any armor, shield, & natural armor bonuses.
The spell has an affect very similar to the "brilliant energy" weapon enhancement (Dungeon Master's Guide 3.5, page 244), except it affects undead & it ignores natural armor.
I think this spell is overpowered mainly because it allows a character to replicate an effect close to (if not BETTER THAN) that of a +5 equivalent weapon AS EARLY AS 3RD CHARACTER LEVEL. If its not banned outright in a D&D campaign, the spell level of Wraithstrike should at least be increased to 4th or 5th, IMHO.
posted by Anonymous at
10:32 PM
10 Comments:
I don't think its over powered. So you ignore Armor, Shield and Natural Armor Bonus... True strike Gives you a +20 to attack, effective negating all AC from 1st to around 7th level... this includes dodge, deflection, luck, insight, morale, AND it takes away concealment miss chance... and True Strike is a 1st level spell
So +20 to next attack and negating concealment is worth less than negating Natural and Armor Bonus?
I just read the spell, and then compared it to deep impact from the XPH. How many times can you cast it compared to using a psionic focus AND lets not forget some kind of Clerical Turning ability that would grant the same thing, compared to a psychic warrior or cleric the mage (wizards/sorcerer) has less HP, less BAB, Less Fort save vs Poison/Death. Maybe an Eldritch Knight or Spellsword would benefit, but already they have alot less BAB (Meaning less attacks per round), the Ekn, will have crap hp, and AC, the Spellsword would only get to cast it a few times, in a long fight against a high level monster it'll only make a small dent, as I see it.
I was reading the WotC Message boards, and I found an interesting point. If Wraith Strike, makes your attacks touch attacks AND touch attacks benefit from Weapon Finesse AND are considered a light weapon... By the rule, you wouldn't gain two-handed bonus damage when it is cast... but by this same rule Deep Impact and Fell Shot start to suck as well
I would look for touch attacks in the either combat or Magic Sections of the PHB, I would also look up incorpreal touch attacks... probably in the back of the DMG or MM1.
Although if you think about it touch attacks means being unconcerned with armor/scales/sheilds. And the object that you are using to touch with determines power attack and weapon finesse.
In the description it does state that the weapon becomes ghostly. To me that implies Incorporeal... that is why it ignores armor. But you are right about the difference between the touch attack and Incorporeal touch since mage armor protects against the latter only.
So does this mean that the spell negates even mage armor and bracers of armor? "Hmmm the spell gets more broken"
Incorporeal creatures don't use their strength scores since they can affect physical objects.
Incorporealty won't give proficiency to a character, and just because a weapon is light doesn't mean they can use it. An assassin can't use a hand axe which is a light weapon.
I think they didn't say it incorporeal on purpose, because an attacker would gain no benefit from the spell at all. Loosing attack and damage bonuses for a touch attack would suck.
After reading the spell, it kinda reads like deep impact from the XPH. The attack is normal (with all normal bonuses), but I would rule that it only affects ONE attack.
I was thinking of an assassin getting 2 or 3 sneak attacks against touch attack, would make a fighter/mage seem like nothing.
Get this... Assassin wins Initiative (Enemy flat footed: 1 or more Sneak Attack(s)), Round 2 ( move to flanking Swift action Wraith Strike: 2 or 3 sneak attacks), Round 3 Fient (attacker now flat footed) Wraith strike (no more armor/nat/shield), full round attack...
All this with at least 5d6 sneak attack is crazy
Not necessarily, if you took Invisible Blade PrC from the complete warrior you could possibly do it. I read the XPH swift action and it says that it is "like a free action" so it can be construed that a free action and swift action are two different actions. Since now quicken spell is a swift action (hence you only get 1 per round).
Under that premiss, a rogue/assassin/invisible blade could feint (free action), wraith strike (swift), full-round sneak attacks.
Even without that... he could fient on the previous round, then swift action (wraith strike), and full-round attack on his next turn since he's flat-footed until the end of the attackers turn.
I need to find a more updated description of swift and immediate actions. And about the fient...
Also do you have any ideas about a daggerspell/Arcane trickster combo? I might be joining another online game and I'm running a daggerspell mage.
A blinked rogue (ring of blink) who cast wraith strike deal sneak atack to each target that could not see invisible.
I think swift actions are good, but, in my opnion, a lot of players handbook spells should be a swift, including true strike.
If you return to the spell compendium and read the description again, the first paragraph ends with, "your weapon becomes translucent almost to the point you cannot see it, ALTHOUGH IT STILL WEIGHS HEAVILY IN YOUR HAND." Judgement on whether or not a weapon is light, one-handed, or two-handed is based on relative weight for the items size, and the item's apparent weight seems unchanged as far as the character is concerned. On that basis I would rule that an item retains it's category under light, one-handed or two-handed.
A quickened true strike is still 5th level, and 99% of the time it grants less hits than a wraithstrike which applies to multiple attacks. I mean a hit's a hit whether you beat the AC by 5 or by 15. So wraithstrike should be at least 5th level, probably higher.
Unless you're gonna start BSing me saying that quickened true strike is underpowered. That seems kind of silly and not something I see mentioned anywhere but here.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home