Page 1 of 1

Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:28 pm
by kkrazlite
Did the Druid Spell: Flame Blade

Get nerfed?

I noticed one day when i logged in and used it, it not longer attacks multiple times depending on your number of attacks you can achieve in a round based off BAB. Instead it only swings once a round.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 12:46 pm
by Flasmix
I believe it was highly abusable as it attacked vs touch ac for multiple attacks.

It was probably changed to not make druids even more crazy.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 2:06 pm
by metaquad4
[Assuming this is a nerf, and not just a bug]

Well...its not a nerf to any strong archtype. Its actually a nerf to the weaker ones (none shifting druid, since you couldn't use flame blade whilst shifted to begin with) and to spirit shamans (who really don't need any nerfs).

And it deals 1d8+(A Max of 10) damage per strike. An average of 14.5 damage per strike. Pure fire damage at that, so, its fairly easy to resist (10 DR would reduce its damage to practically nothing, even 5 DR would cripple it to a fairly large extent).

(And, on top of that, it is (was? I hope!) bugged, so that even 1 SR resisted it 100% of the time.)

Hardly an OP ability, and definitely not worthy of a nerf. With one strike (assuming the damage is kept the same), it has turned a handy ability (one that allows druids to not need to build into shifting to be effective, and one that allows spirit shamans to have a little sustainability) into a downright useless one. It was a nerf that targeted already underpowered playstyles, as well as turning a useful ability into a useless one.

Switch that nerf back or make it do some significant damage with that one attack [1d8+1 per caster level, to a max of 10d8+10, maybe]. Either one would fix that issue.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 2:53 pm
by Flasmix
Actually...

It made multiple attacks at full attack bonus, non declining.

The issue came up twice in QC because it was used in a PvP tournament. Not everybody can themselves immune to fire.

Something was mentioned that a spirit shaman/monk could cast shapechange into nightwalker form and get 60+ ac and still use it.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:00 pm
by arakes99
It's a touch attack, so it bypasses AC and all of its attacks used to be made at your highest BAB.

That is most certainly a bug. There is no justification for any spell to ignore the game engine rules and allow five full bab melee touch attacks a round. Shapechange spell did allow it to still be used from what I have seen as well.

Reimplementing it as a standard weapon (not a touch attack) or something that uses proper attack rolls should be looked at. The former implementation does allow for greater abuse than most any other means of attack against non fire immune targets. I don't see it as a nerf, it should be redone in a way that is inline with the source material that adheres to the games standard rules.

I will look at the spell if I get time and see if I can figure a workable alternative out and run it by QC.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:09 pm
by Kagger911
Flasmix wrote:Actually...

It made multiple attacks at full attack bonus, non declining.

The issue came up twice in QC because it was used in a PvP tournament. Not everybody can themselves immune to fire.

Something was mentioned that a spirit shaman/monk could cast shapechange into nightwalker form and get 60+ ac and still use it.
I see nothing wrong here, seems some classes need buffs instead of nerfs.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:12 pm
by Kagger911
arakes99 wrote:It's a touch attack, so it bypasses AC and all of its attacks used to be made at your highest BAB.

That is most certainly a bug. There is no justification for any spell to ignore the game engine rules and allow five full bab melee touch attacks a round. Shapechange spell did allow it to still be used from what I have seen as well.

Reimplementing it as a standard weapon (not a touch attack) or something that uses proper attack rolls should be looked at. The former implementation does allow for greater abuse than most any other means of attack against non fire immune targets. I don't see it as a nerf, it should be redone in a way that is inline with the source material that adheres to the games standard rules.

I will look at the spell if I get time and see if I can figure a workable alternative out and run it by QC.
If you're looking at the touch attack bug, has the one that if a warlock has an item in it's hand and casts. Does it still get parried? When you pommel strike, did you notice it also creates an illusion that attacks side by side with you. Not only that, but if you cast a aoe on kill, like implosion; it dies and drops all it's loot.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:13 pm
by Rhifox
arakes99 wrote:It's a touch attack, so it bypasses AC and all of its attacks used to be made at your highest BAB.

That is most certainly a bug. There is no justification for any spell to ignore the game engine rules and allow five full bab melee touch attacks a round. Shapechange spell did allow it to still be used from what I have seen as well.

Reimplementing it as a standard weapon (not a touch attack) or something that uses proper attack rolls should be looked at. The former implementation does allow for greater abuse than most any other means of attack against non fire immune targets. I don't see it as a nerf, a roken feature was removed because it was broken. It should be redone in a way that is inline with the source material.
There's absolutely no point in it if you remove the touch attack functionality. That is its whole purpose and is in line with the source material. What it's supposed to have though is descending AB for each attack, just like normal attacks. According to Flasmix that is not how it is presently working.

I agree with the suggestion to make it a single attack per round, but increasing the damage of that single attack to accommodate.


And as a shaman, I don't agree with the "shamans are weak so it's okay to give them an OP ability". Shamans are not that weak and that is no excuse for leaving a broken ability broken (and every attack being made at full, non-declining BAB is broken).

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:14 pm
by arakes99
It was a custom spell implemented in a way that adheres to nothing in source material or existing NWN content. I'm not sure I understand how having it fixed is a nerf. The fact that it functioned as it did was an oversight more than likely.

If it should be a touch attack then that's fine. I didn't know. Making five attacks at full BAB is the issue only then. Like I said I will look at it and try to come up with a way to have it make multiple attacks at proper declining AB or maybe upping the damage to run by QC. My only concern is to see whats possible and get the spell working in the best possible way without being broken. I have no opinion on what route is taken.

As for other custom feats that are bugged. Please report them separately so they may be fixed. The Pommel Strike clone just needs to be made death immune, thanks for the tip.

The Warlock bug is an Obsidian bug and much harder to fix, but it still warrants being looked into.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 5:35 pm
by thids
Kagger911 wrote:
Flasmix wrote:Actually...

It made multiple attacks at full attack bonus, non declining.

The issue came up twice in QC because it was used in a PvP tournament. Not everybody can themselves immune to fire.

Something was mentioned that a spirit shaman/monk could cast shapechange into nightwalker form and get 60+ ac and still use it.
I see nothing wrong here, seems some classes need buffs instead of nerfs.
"You wield this bladelike beam as if it were a scimitar"

Nightwalker does not have weapon proficiencies required to wield a scimitar.

Re: Flame Blade Nerf?

Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2016 6:07 pm
by kkrazlite
Well i don't really mind anymore. Just another spell to take off my spirit shaman spell-list. Which i did.

Thank you.