Average Damage maximum at level 1

[Fruchtkracher]

So since it kinda popped up in this http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=307310
thread:

What is the maximum average damage you can deal at level one

1. respecting normal WBL and
2. a maximum +4 level adjustment (but featuring combinations that are playable further on)?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Infinite.

Pick a race that doesn't die of old age, such as an Elan or a Killoren. Make sure its venerable-age Con score is at least 17. Give it the disease Festering Anger from BoVD, and the feat Mind Over Body (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#mindOverBody). Festering Anger deals 1d3 Con damage each day, you're guaranteed to heal at least 3 per day. Festering Anger also adds a cumulative +2 Enhancement bonus to Strength each day. Since the character never dies of old age, you could have had that disease for millions of years, gaining a bonus to strength in the millions.

[Ortesk]

Infinite.

Pick a race that doesn't die of old age, such as an Elan or a Killoren. Make sure its venerable-age Con score is at least 17. Give it the disease Festering Anger from BoVD, and the feat Mind Over Body (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#mindOverBody). Festering Anger deals 1d3 Con damage each day, you're guaranteed to heal at least 3 per day. Festering Anger also adds a cumulative +2 Enhancement bonus to Strength each day. Since the character never dies of old age, you could have had that disease for millions of years, gaining a bonus to strength in the millions.

this.......is the most evil thing i have ever seen. im in love

[Taveena]

You could also heal the ability damage by binding Naberius and healing 1 damage per round.

[Fruchtkracher]

Infinite.

Pick a race that doesn't die of old age, such as an Elan or a Killoren. Make sure its venerable-age Con score is at least 17. Give it the disease Festering Anger from BoVD, and the feat Mind Over Body (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#mindOverBody). Festering Anger deals 1d3 Con damage each day, you're guaranteed to heal at least 3 per day. Festering Anger also adds a cumulative +2 Enhancement bonus to Strength each day. Since the character never dies of old age, you could have had that disease for millions of years, gaining a bonus to strength in the millions.

Jep, "Wow" sums it at about up.

But let's try that again without stuff that makes your DM throw books at you:smallsmile:

[Chronos]

That won't work, because you can't make your venerable-age Con score at level 1 a 17 (it'd be 12 at most, with a race without a Con bonus). You could be a Warforged, who never age further than Old and have a Con bonus, but that still doesn't work, since Warforged are immune to disease. I think the best you could do would be to find the race with the oldest Young Adult age limit and no Con penalty that you can, and just settle for hundreds of years of festering, instead of a million.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

That won't work, because you can't make your venerable-age Con score at level 1 a 17 (it'd be 12 at most, with a race without a Con bonus). You could be a Warforged, who never age further than Old and have a Con bonus, but that still doesn't work, since Warforged are immune to disease. I think the best you could do would be to find the race with the oldest Young Adult age limit and no Con penalty that you can, and just settle for hundreds of years of festering, instead of a million.

He said up to +4 LA, so just a Lolth-Touched Elan at +1 LA can put 18 Con, it goes to 24 from the template, and -6 from age makes it 18.

[Lans]

You could be obese for +2 to con, and dragonborn for another +2

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

You could be obese for +2 to con, and dragonborn for another +2

An Obese Arctic Dragonborn Elan or Killoren can do it with no level adjustment at all!

[Fruchtkracher]

An Obese Arctic Dragonborn Elan or Killoren can do it with no level adjustment at all!

And would make for quite a horrific image.
But why do you need 17 Con in the first place? Shouldn't 14 be enough to qualify for the the feat and the 3 regeneration?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

And would make for quite a horrific image.
But why do you need 17 Con in the first place? Shouldn't 14 be enough to qualify for the the feat and the 3 regeneration?

You take 1d3 Con damage per day, so you need 17 base Con so after taking up to 3 Con damage you're still at 14 and heal three points.

[Ghost Nappa]

Infinite.

Pick a race that doesn't die of old age, such as an Elan or a Killoren. Make sure its venerable-age Con score is at least 17. Give it the disease Festering Anger from BoVD, and the feat Mind Over Body (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#mindOverBody). Festering Anger deals 1d3 Con damage each day, you're guaranteed to heal at least 3 per day. Festering Anger also adds a cumulative +2 Enhancement bonus to Strength each day. Since the character never dies of old age, you could have had that disease for millions of years, gaining a bonus to strength in the millions.

You can then dump STR, because you're going to have it at infinity by cheese anyway.

(Also by breaking the question's parameters, I think we undermined the intent, but thanks for the RAW abuse!)

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

What is the maximum average damage you can deal at level one

1. respecting normal WBL and
2. a maximum +4 level adjustment (but featuring combinations that are playable further on)?

Water Orc (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/races/elementalRacialVariants.htm#racesOfWater), Half-Goristro (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060630x&page=1), Barbarian 1 with Lion Spirit (CC) and Whirling Frenzy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/classFeatureVariants.htm#rageVariantWhirlingFrenzy ). Two ranks in Knowledge: Local (Taer) to qualify for Taer regional feats per FRCS. Two flaws for two extra feats, Moderate Taint (HoH) for one additional feat. Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Battle Jump (UE), and Cleave.

Str 42 +16 (18 base, +4 Orc, +8 Half-Fiend, +8 size increase, +4 Whirling Frenzy)
Dex 16 +3 (18 base, -2 size increase)
You have two slam attacks, each of which is treated as a two-handed weapon.
Five or more adjacent opponents. Charge one by jumping down per Battle Jump, full attacking per Pounce and making an additional attack per Whirling Frenzy. You hit your primary target three times, killing him and Cleaving into an adjacent opponent. Four remaining opponents flee for their lives and you AoO all four, still adding your charging bonuses.

Each Slam deals 2d6 base damage (scaled down to Large) plus 1.5 Str, Power Attacking for -1 and +2 damage, doubled for Battle Jump, for 4d6+52 or 66 average per hit. You get three attacks on a full attack, plus one for Cleave, plus four AoOs, or eight attacks total. That's 528 average damage in a single round.

But wait, there's more! You jumped down at least 10 ft. onto multiple opponents. Let's say they're Kobolds and there are four in each square due to their Slight Build (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060420a), so you landed on 16 opponents. (Let's say they were making a defensive pike hedge, but you got the drop on them and they can't AoO when flat-footed). Per the Falling Object Rules as long as you and your gear weighs at least 4,000 pounds (a large creature is eight times heavier than a medium version of the same creature), you deal 20d6 damage to each of them per the falling object rules in the DMG. Per Heroes of Battle they each get a Reflex save to avoid you, but let's say they all failed. That's an extra 70 average damage to 16 opponents, or 1120 more damage in that first round.

That means 1648 average damage in a single round fighting small size opponents in a scenario that actually makes sense.

[Gemini476]

An Obese Arctic Dragonborn Elan or Killoren can do it with no level adjustment at all!

Nope, Willing Deformity(Obese) is [Vile] and therefore incompatible with Dragonborn.
Also Dragonborn takes away you immortality, and if you became an Elan after it just resets your entire build to a level 1 template-less Elan.

So yeah.

[Tim Proctor]

I once had a battle of lvl 2 NPCs from opposing armies and wanted to make it as bloody as possible a horde of charging orcs against a phalanx unit.

The Phalanx guys had Halberd (set against a charge 2d10), Spear of Doom ( Dragonlance Campaign Setting, p. 87) making it 4d10, Pike Hedge ( Dragon Compendium) tripling that 12d10 so an average of 66. I had these guys at level 2 but with some templating within the LA you could easily get to be much much higher.

Either way the battle was these guys charging in and whoever got hit splattered horribly in blood and gore (they had like 15-20 hp so they were going to like -47 and such).

[Gemini476]

I once had a battle of lvl 2 NPCs from opposing armies and wanted to make it as bloody as possible a horde of charging orcs against a phalanx unit.

The Phalanx guys had Halberd (set against a charge 2d10), Spear of Doom ( Dragonlance Campaign Setting, p. 87) making it 4d10, Pike Hedge ( Dragon Compendium) tripling that 12d10 so an average of 66. I had these guys at level 2 but with some templating within the LA you could easily get to be much much higher.

Either way the battle was these guys charging in and whoever got hit splattered horribly in blood and gore (they had like 15-20 hp so they were going to like -47 and such).

D&D math is weird. x2(set against charge) x2(Spear o' Doom) x3(Pike henge) is not x12, as normal math would dictate. No, x2 actually just means +100%, and the same goes for the rest. So rather than x12 damage it's x4, or 4d10. That's still 22+6*STR damage, but it's not quite as ridiculous as it would be otherwise. (It's not 66+18*STR, in other words.)

[Urpriest]

You have two slam attacks, each of which is treated as a two-handed weapon.


Where are you getting this from? Natural weapons by default have 1:1 Power Attack.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Where are you getting this from? Natural weapons by default have 1:1 Power Attack.

The Goristro's description itself states that their slam attacks are treated as two-handed weapons. The example Half-Goristro (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060630x&page=1) also shows "Slam 3d6+1-1/2 Str" indicating it gets the same damage bonuses as a two-handed weapon.

[Spuddles]

Use the domain wizard trick to get 9ths, then use the spell component pouch to produce an artifact for the material component for a casting of apocalypse from the sky. That's like 10d6 damage to everything in a mile radius.

[Greenish]

What is the maximum average damage you can deal at level one?

But let's try that again without stuff that makes your DM throw books at you:smallsmile:The highest amount of damage you can deal at the 1st level without pissing off your DM is not a function of any theoretical build, but the tolerance of the DM.

There is no universal answer.

[Emperor Tippy]

Use the domain wizard trick to get 9ths, then use the spell component pouch to produce an artifact for the material component for a casting of apocalypse from the sky. That's like 10d6 damage to everything in a mile radius.

That trick doesn't actually work. It doesn't give you the CL of 17 that you need to cast a 9th level spell.

[Urpriest]

The Goristro's description itself states that their slam attacks are treated as two-handed weapons. The example Half-Goristro (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060630x&page=1) also shows "Slam 3d6+1-1/2 Str" indicating it gets the same damage bonuses as a two-handed weapon.

That's an Ex ability of the Goristro specifically, that the base creature by default doesn't get. While the Str to damage specification is retained due to it being in the template summary, the Ex ability to apply it to Power Attack isn't present.


That trick doesn't actually work. It doesn't give you the CL of 17 that you need to cast a 9th level spell.

This is a myth. While the passage establishing this is fairly clear from a RAI view, it does not establish any such fact RAW. Further, the people who wrote it would have needed only basic reading comprehension and facility with rules to determine this, so we can assume they were trolling us anyway.

[r2d2go]

I would argue for the half-Goristo that level adjustment would likely be more than CR adjustment. But if you are allowed to use that at LA +3.... I can do better. This is, of course, using the same assumptions you have made.

Class: Lion Spirit Totem Whirling Frenzy Barbarian.
Race: Half Goristo/Half Minotaur/Human (yes, that is two halves on a base race, but by RAW it's technically allowed!)

Strength: 18+16(size gain)+4(Half Minotaur)+8(Half Goristo)+4(Whirling Frenzy) = 46, +18

Ride something and get a lance. On your charge (that is of course, straight down, activating Battle Jump), you do triple damage (making your one extra attack with a lance, of course), then double damage twice. At Huge size, you're dealing 21d6+244 damage, or 317.5 damage. Now, using the same number of AoO's as you, there's another 24d6+232 or 326 damage, for a total of 643.5 damage, just for the attack. That leaves me about 100 ahead of you there. If we maximized number of people within threat range, I'm getting 68 AoO's compared to your 32, and since I do 13 more damage per hit anyway, this is a little absurd.

Now, dropping down as before, crush something Fine instead, letting you hit 2304 enemies in a single drop. This brings you to completely absurd damage - 161280 damage. Even against small creatures like you had, I still get 2520 damage by virtue of being Huge.

But that's besides the point, because this is a whole ton of absurd scenarios with questionable rule choices, so I'm just going to say maximum damage is "A whole lot".

[Grod_The_Giant]

Infinite.

Pick a race that doesn't die of old age, such as an Elan or a Killoren. Make sure its venerable-age Con score is at least 17. Give it the disease Festering Anger from BoVD, and the feat Mind Over Body (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#mindOverBody). Festering Anger deals 1d3 Con damage each day, you're guaranteed to heal at least 3 per day. Festering Anger also adds a cumulative +2 Enhancement bonus to Strength each day. Since the character never dies of old age, you could have had that disease for millions of years, gaining a bonus to strength in the millions.
Holy crapsacks that beats normal Cancer Mage cheese to hell and gone.

[Gemini476]

This is a myth. While the passage establishing this is fairly clear from a RAI view, it does not establish any such fact RAW. Further, the people who wrote it would have needed only basic reading comprehension and facility with rules to determine this, so we can assume they were trolling us anyway.

On a related note re:CL requirements for spells, you would figure that they'd clarify that when they print stuff like Wild Mage. I mean, they put in a whole "Wizards can cast spells of whatever alignment they want" thing in Malconvoker, so why not put in "By the way, Wild Magic might mean that you can't cast your spells at all due to -2CL."

"Minimum Caster Level" is a throwaway line that never really seems to be reference again nor clarified in any way. Which is actually really annoying.

[Emperor Tippy]

This is a myth. While the passage establishing this is fairly clear from a RAI view, it does not establish any such fact RAW. Further, the people who wrote it would have needed only basic reading comprehension and facility with rules to determine this, so we can assume they were trolling us anyway.

Except its not.

"You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question,"

In the SRD and in the Rules Compendium.


You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the
caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell
in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the
same caster level. For example, at 10th level, Mialee can cast a fireball
to a range of 800 feet for 10d6 points of damage. If she wishes, she
can cast a fireballthat deals less damage by casting the spell at a lower
caster level, but she must reduce the range according to the selected
caster level, and she can’t cast fireballwith a caster level lower than
5th (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast fireball).
Complete with example.

---
RAW you can not cast a spell unless you caster level is equal to (Spell level x2)-1 if you are a wizard.

[Urpriest]

Except its not.

"You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question,"

In the SRD and in the Rules Compendium.


Complete with example.

---
RAW you can not cast a spell unless you caster level is equal to (Spell level x2)-1 if you are a wizard.

Examples don't change what the actual rules do. In particular, the sentence "You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question," isn't just tautological, it's obviously tautological. Parsed logically, it means that you can lower your caster level up until the point where you can't cast the spell, where the point at which you can't cast the spell is defined only in terms of your caster level being too low. Anyone actually interested in writing rules for a game would have added a clause like "according to your class table", or anything else referencing an actual external limit. As-is, they assumed it worked that way for their example, but they decided not to actually put it into the rules, despite the fact that anyone writing the rule intending for it to actually be used would have put something like that in.

Edit: To clarify, that example does establish that a Wizard needs to be CL 5 to cast Fireball. However, it doesn't say whether that is because any caster needs to be at least 2*spell level+1 CL, or because the CL needs to line up with the entry for that particular class's class table, or because Fireball itself has some special rule that was never elucidated.

[TuggyNE]

RAW you can not cast a spell unless you caster level is equal to (Spell level x2)-1 if you are a wizard.

This particular rule, while obviously inferrable, is nowhere stated as such.

[Emperor Tippy]

This particular rule, while obviously inferrable, is nowhere stated as such.

Page 171 of the PHB. You can not cast a spell at below minimum caster level, which is 5th in the case of third level wizard spells and 17th in the case of ninth level wizard spells.

To manage to read that differently isn't just a slight reinterpretation of RAW, it's totally ignoring what words mean.

It's one thing to abuse the rules for all that they are worth, hell I'm kinda known for doing just that. It's another to ignore (or at least blatantly reinterpret the language of) those rules when trying to abuse them.

You want to cast 9th level spells at level 1 as a wizard, then get a CL of 17. Otherwise your "trick" is not rules legal.

[TuggyNE]

Page 171 of the PHB. You can not cast a spell at below minimum caster level

Yep yep yep.


which is 5th in the case of third level wizard spells and 17th in the case of ninth level wizard spells.

Aaand stop. Where is this stated, formulated, or otherwise defined?

[Urpriest]

Page 171 of the PHB. You can not cast a spell at below minimum caster level, which is 5th in the case of third level wizard spells and 17th in the case of ninth level wizard spells.

Tippy, this is the problem. There are lots of quite plausible ways the system could work. For example, it could work like Initiator Level or like Manifester Level, where it defaults to level*2-1 for all classes. Instead, it could always reference the class table. Those are both plausible, and would have both occurred to the designers. RAW, neither is the case, the wording is simply tautological. Basically, can you argue, based on the text, that level*2-1 is not the rule for all classes? If not, then why do you assume the rule is to reference the class table?

[Captnq]

PHB 171


In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other
special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level, that
adjustment applies not only to effects based on caster level (such as
range, duration, and damage dealt) but also to your caster level
check to overcome your target’s spell resistance (see Spell Resistance,
page 177) and to the caster level used in dispel checks (both
the dispel check and the DC of the check).


This passage is why you can cast weak fireballs as a Artificer, and Weak spells as a wild mage. Why initially you have to cast spells at a minimum level available to cast them, anything that modifies them superceeds that requirement.

Example: I have a naked 5th level mage with no powers, feats, PrCs, nothing. He can cast a CL5 3rd level spell, a CL3 2nd, and a CL1 1st, but cannot cast a CL2 3rd level spell.

I use some strange set of rules and powers to give myself a 9th level spell. I can cast it at CL 1, because "In the event that a class feature, domain granted power, or other special ability provides an adjustment to your caster level"

My caster level is modified by the process, therefore, I can cast it at below normal Caster level.

[Captnq]

Oh, and while the disease trick would work in theory, isn't the DM secretly rolling your fortitude every day to see if you get over the disease? I don't see how it's statistically possible to fail every fortitude check for a million years.

[Spuddles]

Oh, and while the disease trick would work in theory, isn't the DM secretly rolling your fortitude every day to see if you get over the disease? I don't see how it's statistically possible to fail every fortitude check for a million years.

You can choose to fail a save :smallsmile: