Talk:Rhino's Rush

ALSO: For balance, I'm keeping this as a standard rather than swift action. I think a great number of the Spell Compendium spells are entirely out of balance with their PHB peers. (Let's see, level one spell.. 10 points of healing, a +2 to AC, or maybe 60 damage. One of these things is not like the other.) In my mind, the PitA and Risk Cost of casting Rhino's Rush is the only balancing factor. High Risk, High Reward is the only way I can justify a level one spell putting out that much ouch. By a way of further compare, the's a spell from Swords and Sorcery (White Wolfs d20 family) that gives a weapon +1 threat range, and that's level 2 spell. I'd argue this is at least as good as that one, though its a strange comparison.

Well, again, Rhino's Rush cast + charge next round ends up being functionally exactly the same as a charge + attack, except that the former is easier to get away from undamaged. If it's still standard action casting time and 1 round duration, there is absolutely never a reason to use the spell. Ever. I agree that making it a swift action is stupid, though, but that's why I favor giving it a longer duration with a discharge effect (i.e., lasts up to 1rd/level (max 5), or until the first charge attempted by the character, whichever comes first) -Slitherrr

The reason to cast it is so that the Pally stays with the group for the first round of combat, rather than rushing in to the fray and going out of range of the first round buffs. Then, he can rush in on the second round after being blessed, hastened, good hoped, etc. and the rest of the party is ready to go in with you. *Mathematically* it's identical, but I think sometimes situation can transcend the calculus. -gm

Oh, in that case, the spell's about perfect, then. -Slitherrr

As I've said before, I'm not against spell compendium spells - especially utility spells, buffs, and specialty spells - but I'm generally of the mind that they got damage dealing spells right the first time around and think that most of the ones they added in SC are often wildly out of flavor and balance.

Rules wise, we are on the same page, and were even moreso than we thought. The rules for this, as per SRD norm, are spread out over three different entries. But, basically, when I was talking about smite damage, I was thinking his bonus +2d6 Good damage from Improved Smite or whatever feat he got. The Smite Damage, since it is an unnamed flat modifier, would double for this and a crit.

Does My Damage Double?

• Is it weapon dice damage? YES
• Is it weapon damage, from any source? YES
• Is it non-weapon, diced damage, such as GOOD, FIRE, SNEAK ATTACK, or NEGATIVE? NO

- Look about right? This should not be errata but clarification of the rules as they are in the book. Pathfinder, also as usual, has kept the same mechanics but mostly clarified it and brought it into the same place.-gm

Swift Action?

See screenshot to the right. I just stumbled upon this spell in the Spell Compendium and maybe it was copied wrong? (Or was errata'd?) Do we want to change our version so Mose will suddenly have a new spell he likes? :) -Mattie

Maybe so. Do you know where I originally sourced it? -gm

Maybe Dragon 323? http://www.imarvintpa.com/dndlive/Index_Source.php?Sources=Dragon+323 -Mattie

Yeah, looks like a big errata because the one on the wiki looks quite like this one: http://screencast.com/t/wm7VOahOyOQe -Mattie

Indeed. I'm not opposed to it being moved to swift, but I want to make it explicit here and now -> I'm ruling this is essentially like scoring an automatic critical hit. That means weapon damage (ONLY) is doubled, just like a critical. So, good bonuses, lawful bonuses, smite bonuses, flame bonuses, other named or diced bonuses will NOT double. (This is also true of criticals, but sad for all the monsters of the world ALL of Quin's damage is weapon damage.) Power Attack WILL double, because that precedent is set and, frankly, you're giving up something to gain the bonus, and because it is unnamed. Sneak Attacks ARE diced damage, and don't double on criticals so would not double, should that hypothetical ever arise. How's that sound? -gm

I'm 100% happy with your ruling, but if it's important for your decision I want to note that it's different than SRD for multiplying damage. I'm cool either way:

Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results. Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage.

Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied.

I don't understand? Under the section entitled "multiplying damage," there is the quote "Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage are never multiplied." You've quoted it, too, actually. It says that under critical hits and multiplying damage both. I'm not so mathy sometimes, can you better explain how this is not the same as what I said above? Extra Damage Dice would be things like Flaming, Good, Lawful, etc. -gm

IE - I think the proper reading of that, when you consider the exception, is "A critical hit means that you roll your (ed: weapon) damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses (Bonuses != Dice), and add the rolls together. Unless otherwise specified, the threat range for a critical hit on an attack roll is 20, and the multiplier is ×2. Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage is not multiplied when you score a critical hit." -gm

Again, I'm fine however it works. The main distinction it sounded like your view and the SRD differed on was for non-diced modifiers. Your initial quote was that all bonuses (e.g. smite and power attack) shouldn't be included. According to the SRD as I read it "all modifiers" are fine unless they are diced. So special diced damage is excluded like sneak attack, flaming weapon +1d6, extra smiting +1d6 damage from my bracers/feats that are diced, etc. Those are all excluded. But undiced modifiers like raw smite damage itself (i.e. the inherent +1 damage per level) would be included, weapon specialization, power attack, Good Hope damage bonus, Favored enemy, etc. All those modifiers that aren't diced damage and, from the SRD reading, would be included. So if Mose was Rhino Rushing with a smite, Power Attack 2:

• 1st layer: 1d8 slashing +2 (enhancement) +11 (smite) +2 (PowerA) +2 (stat) +1d6 fire +1d4 law +2d6 good (bracers&feat)
• 2nd layer: 1d8 slashing +2 (enhancement) +11 (smite) +2 (PowerA) +2 (stat)

We would total up both layers there as the "doubled" damage. Does that match what you think the SRD is saying? -Mattie

It's only the dice they intend as not doubling, but bonuses they recommend as being included. And, as we talked about before, the other caveat is that multiple multipliers just add to the overall multiplier, and don't keep doubling. So Rhino's Rush + Crit is just x3 and not x4. But honestly, I'm 100% fine with ignoring this, because multipliers is an easy way for things to get out of control and I don't want to be on the receiving end of a big multiplier as much as I'd like to deliver them. ;) In general I'm finally getting comfortable with the SRD's description. But it may very well still be too powerful overall. -Mattie

See also this discussion[1]\

You are absolutely correct about linear doubling and I'm fine with that, although 3.5 in most cases has removed that as a possibility be changing the stacking rules for things like Keen and Improved Critical, so really Rhino's Rush is the only way I can think off off the top of my head to get stacking multiples.

Sneak Attack damage is specifically excluded from criticals " Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied." -gm

I was thinking also lance, Spirited Charge, and the like all give you more chance at multiples, so they'd just linear add more layers if you Rhino Rush'd and/or crit'd. We're on the same page there, yeah. -Mattie

c.f. more analysis below re: Spirited Charge + Lance -Slitherrr

Some need

OhgodGilneedsthisYESTERDAY -Slitherrr

Target: Self. -gm

Level 1 spell? Stick it in an item, wipe hands on pants. -Slitherrr

Quality

So in everyday scenarios am I right that this isn't so great? For major smites/single-shot setups/etc it could be good, though? In everyday cases, wouldn't it be:

• Rd1:
  • Cast Rhino's Rush
  • Move into position for a charge next round
• Rd2:
  • Hope the angle didn't change or nothing got in the way
  • Charge, if you hit, get double-damage.

It doesn't seem wildly better than without the spell:

• Rd1:
  • Charge now, hit for single damage
• Rd2:
  • Get full attack up close

Ayup, it's as you describe. -gm

Of course if you put a lot of oomph behind that one attack, it could be better overall? Any other strategy here I'm missing? Potions? -Mattie

Lances

I assume this is 3x damage charging with lances? -Mattie

And then 4x with Spirited Charge. The alternative would be 4x and 6x respectively, which would be stupid beyond belief. -Slitherrr

Well, maybe not that stupid. Here are numbers: Level 2 Human Fighter/Sorcerer, Feats: Mounted Combat (Level 1), Ride-by-Attack (Human bonus), Spirited Charge (Fighter Bonus), 18 ST for +4, gives 5-12 damage on a successful hit, meaning a 6x would be 30-72 damage on a single charge (after a round of casting) from a level 2 Fighter/Sorc, which compares against 3x(5-12) + 1x(5-12) = 20-48 from a non-cast charge-then-attack. If it's x4, the damage is completely even with or without casting, which means it's better to never cast the spell EXCEPT in the edge case where you've got a ton of targets who don't necessarily know what spell you just cast, meaning you'll get a single comparatively devastating attack. -Slitherrr

I changed thought process mid-stream, so to clarify here, I think the takeaway is that the spell can be maybe marginally useful in some circumstances, but it's a level 1 spell, so that makes sense. Also, 30-72 is a ton of damage from a level 2 character on a single attack, and that would only get worse, so x4 is within the realm of reason, rather than being crazy, but unfortunately a 4x doesn't actually give any numeric benefit to the attack, since you can do the same amount of damage by not casting, then attacking. Here is my proposal:

• Duration becomes 1 rd/level, but it disperses after the first charge (allowing more time to get the charge opportunity as levels go up)
• Damage stacks the feat way, i.e., spirited charge lance with this spell is x4, not x6.

-Slitherrr

Just wanted to mention, while the numbers are up there: A crit at the 6x interpretation would be 90-216 damage at level 2. GGUGUGHH -Slitherrr

stuff

Stacking multipliers in 3.5 simply adds to the final multiplyer. So, 3x damage with a lance, 4x with spirited charge. Also: sorcs can't even cast this. Additionally, anything that effects criticals simply does not stack. -gm

Alright, I'll take this one at a time:

Re: Sorc can't cast this

Splashed fighter/cleric, whatever--gets the same thing, also at level 2, but that wasn't the point anyway. The point was that, thanks to the numbers around that, 4x is the only way that makes sense, which is what I said. The problem is that the unfortunate side effect of going the sensible route is that it makes the spell basically worthless, since you get the same damage by making a regular charge, then attacking the next round (or more damage when full attacks are an issue), taking the opportunity cost of a spell/potion to do it, with the added problem that if any of the bad guys know what's coming (having seen it before, or with Spellcraft), they take cover and the spell is wasted, without high-level feats/items to change the situation. Adding the 1 rd/level thing I proposed above may help out, because it'll give the charger some time to chase after any running bitches. Besides, how many 1st-level spells are there that don't scale at all with level, even if it is just range or duration? Also, consider that Rangers and Paladins, being in the best position to take advantage of this spell (thanks to animal companion/special mount), don't get it until level 6, EXACTLY at the time when their extra attacks kick in to hurt the tactical effectiveness of this spell just a little bit more. -Slitherrr

*shrug* not my spell, and it doesn't hurt the universe to have an underpowered spell out there, but FWiW, it might be worth considering from the single classed point of view rather than the Fully Optimized to Take Advantage Of One Spell point of view. I've played a cleric or two, but they don't get to attack very often no matter what their level, but still have great AC, good base attack, and access to a decent weapon or two. For a first level spell, it's no less useless than True Strike (which *does* have a duration and helps with touch attacks) when you reach a point in your casting career that cure light wounds and bless no longer have functional use. I don't think adding some sort of duration - like 1 minute, flat rate - is a terrible idea. -gm

Also, they're fighting like 49 clerics next game, we'll give it a field test. >:] -gm

Haha, nice. One minute is probably a little much, honestly--one round a level means it's still cast within the scope of battle, but gives you at least a couple of rounds to maneuver as the levels go on (probably to a cap). And see, the thing about the optimizer really applies to anything, I honestly shouldn't have even used it as an example, since it was distracting--anybody, even without a lance or spirited charge, will have the same issue, where a regular charge + attack will do exactly the same damage (or more with full attacks) as a rhino charge + attack, without the cost of a spell/potion, BUT if he's not forced to do it the turn directly before the charge, it can be used to, say, prep for a charging last-hit takedown, or keep a guy from running away. -Slitherrr

Re: crits

The SRD is less clear on this, because this has to do with multipliers, so this could bear with some fleshing out. For the record, I only said the 90-216 number up there to enunciate how stupid it would be (hence, "GGUGUGHH"), so please don't think that I was advocating for it. For a critical, all dice are rerolled the number of times indicated for the weapon, then added together to make the final result. "Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage is [sic] not multiplied when you score a critical hit", however, the spirited charge/lance multipliers are not extra dice, just straight multipliers, so a strict rules-lawyer interpretation could argue that the 4x damage (for example) thus all qualifies--i.e., the dice are rolled three times, then each set multiplied by 4x, to get a total multiplier of (average) 12x. That, however, is really silly, so what makes more sense is that, on a crit with a spirited charge lance, the dice are rolled three times, the FIRST set is multiplied by four (regular spirited rhino lance charge damage), and the other two are straight added. This is probably what you were saying above, but by spelling it out I hope to make sure of that.-Slitherrr