PDA

View Full Version : Bull Str or Stone Fist



Cowboy_ninja
2007-03-19, 03:08 PM
which is better stone fist or bull's strength

Edit: im sorry i meant fist of stone (complete arcane) i just cant figure out how to change the poll options. this is my first poll......i thought it'd be fun


situation?

a melee warrior/transmuter wizard loosely following the advice form the complete mage

Edit2: actually i got the poll option right..... just forget about the title.....

Quietus
2007-03-19, 03:28 PM
I dunno, what's stone fist?

Jack Mann
2007-03-19, 03:30 PM
Who's using it? What build? What level? What situation? There are too many variables. Your question is meaningless.

EDIT: As well, I think you mean Fist of Stone, not Stone Fist.

Ranis
2007-03-19, 03:30 PM
Dude, complete thoughts=win. Try again. Clean it up.

Zincorium
2007-03-19, 03:36 PM
Bull's strength is usable with weapons and can be cast on other members of the party, so it gets my vote. 2d6 damage for a medium creature is good, but since you aren't a monk, you'll need an amulet of mighty fists (expensive!) or a druid with magic fang handy to enchant it.

Also, it doesn't scale well, whereas a cleric will almost always want to have bull's strength around because the large strength bonus item (belt) takes up the same slot as a monk's belt, which is usually a better bet for a cleric.

Edit: Stone fist, Races of Stone page 163. And this really doesn't need to be a poll.

Ikkitosen
2007-03-19, 03:41 PM
Also, it doesn't scale well, whereas a cleric will almost always want to have bull's strength around because the large strength bonus item (belt) takes up the same slot as a monk's belt, which is usually a better bet for a cleric.

Your clerics go unarmoured?

Thrawn183
2007-03-19, 08:25 PM
I definitely had a cleric that switched to "unarmored." The monk's belt gives you wisdom to AC, and guess what a cleric's gonna have? Just combine it with luminous armor or greater luminous armor from complete divine and you can get your AC at least close to what it would be armored (if not better) and your touch AC is sooooo much better. And you don't have to worry about all those things like, heat metal, armor check penalties, movement reductions, encumbrance, etc...

Draz74
2007-03-19, 11:31 PM
I definitely had a cleric that switched to "unarmored." The monk's belt gives you wisdom to AC, and guess what a cleric's gonna have? Just combine it with luminous armor or greater luminous armor from complete divine and you can get your AC at least close to what it would be armored (if not better) and your touch AC is sooooo much better. And you don't have to worry about all those things like, heat metal, armor check penalties, movement reductions, encumbrance, etc...

I don't know what luminous armor is like, but yeah, Clerics going unarmored isn't a horrible idea. Bracers of armor, anyone? Or Magic Vestment cast on your normal clothing?

But this is partly because the Cleric generally wouldn't bother with a Belt of Giant Strength anyway. Why? Because it's redundant with that broken, broken spell that's a Cleric's best friend, Divine Power, which gives you +6 enhancement to Strength anyway.

Not that a high-level character couldn't afford a Monk's Belt of Giant Strength (combined) anyway. It's a great custom item for, say, monks.

Ikkitosen
2007-03-20, 03:25 AM
I definitely had a cleric that switched to "unarmored." The monk's belt gives you wisdom to AC, and guess what a cleric's gonna have? Just combine it with luminous armor or greater luminous armor from complete divine and you can get your AC at least close to what it would be armored (if not better) and your touch AC is sooooo much better. And you don't have to worry about all those things like, heat metal, armor check penalties, movement reductions, encumbrance, etc...

...Greater Fortification...

And I think the Luminous Armour spells are from BoED, since I've never read them ;) Do you have to be an Exalted character to get them?

marjan
2007-03-20, 03:40 AM
And I think the Luminous Armour spells are from BoED, since I've never read them ;) Do you have to be an Exalted character to get them?
Yes it is but you only need to be good if memories serve me well.

Jack Mann
2007-03-20, 04:00 AM
Okay, now that you've given us some specifics, we can begin to analyze this properly.

It's a bit of a toss-up, really. Fist of Stone gives a higher bonus, but the bonus won't help you with your weapon's damage, except by letting you sink more of your BAB into power attack. However, it gives a nice secondary attack, which does get extra damage from the strength increase. 1d6+strength+power attack isn't that bad, when it's only costing you a first level spell slot.

On the other hand, Bull's Strength applies to both attack and damage, though it's a slightly lower bonus. Still, it's only three damage with a two-handed weapon. Not bad, but nothing to write home about. Still, if you factor in power attack, it becomes seven potential damage, compared with fist of stone's six. Bull's Strength lasts longer, but as I said, most fights don't last more than ten rounds anyway.

That fist of stone is first level while bull's strength is second, I think, puts fist of stone ahead.

storybookknight
2007-03-20, 06:08 PM
Also, did you mean strength of stone? The picture has a stone fist in it, but it's actually a swift action for a +8 strength. And yeah, it depends a lot on who's using it.

Jack Mann
2007-03-20, 06:23 PM
No, he meant Fist of Stone, in Complete Arcane and the Spell Compendium. Strength of Stone is a Paladin spell, so it wouldn't be useful to his warrior/wizard build.

Zincorium
2007-03-20, 09:48 PM
Also, did you mean strength of stone? The picture has a stone fist in it, but it's actually a swift action for a +8 strength. And yeah, it depends a lot on who's using it.

To add to the confusion further, there IS a spell called just Stone Fist, from Races of Stone. That's what I assumed he was talking about, since the name matches exactly and the spells are of equal level.

Cowboy_ninja
2007-03-20, 10:47 PM
lol for crying out loud.

fist of stone
transmutaion [earth]
level: sorc/wiz warmage 1
duration 1 min.

+6 str bonus for attacks ( i would assume including attacks with weapons) grapples, breaking crushing, in addtion to gaining a 1d6 slam attack that can be made as a primary slam or as a secondary natural attack at -5. your hands retain their flexibility. etc etc etc

Jack Mann
2007-03-20, 10:53 PM
It was updated in Spell Compendium. It works for your weapon attack rolls, but it doesn't increase your damage.

Cowboy_ninja
2007-03-20, 11:01 PM
It was updated in Spell Compendium. It works for your weapon attack rolls, but it doesn't increase your damage.

MEGA lame!

is spell compendium official. ..... i mean...... is it another "net book of feats " type of thing? a whole bunch of spells that are totally out of balance with the rest of the books? ( at least thats what i hear about most NBOF.... that they are unbalanced.... especially since there are so many of them)

Jack Mann
2007-03-20, 11:04 PM
It's official. It overrides the Complete Arcane version.

TheOOB
2007-03-20, 11:55 PM
I don't think either spell is better, they both are good in different situations. Bull's Strength is capable of lasting through several battles in close proximity to eachother and can help you in situations where you need strength for something other then a melee attack.

Fists of Stone is much better in melee, giving you a huge bonus for a 1st level spell, but it's duration is extreamly short. True most combat doesn't last more then 10 rounds, but if you rely on this spell I think you'll find yourself recasting it over and over again.

So pick which ever one you need, a quick boost of greater power, or a lesser sustained boost.

Jack Mann
2007-03-21, 12:02 AM
Bull's strength also has the advantage of being touch instead of personal, making it useful for wizards who don't want to venture into melee. Y'know, most of them.

TheOOB
2007-03-21, 01:39 AM
Bull's strength also has the advantage of being touch instead of personal, making it useful for wizards who don't want to venture into melee. Y'know, most of them.

Yes, thats true, fists of stone reads very gish to me. Duskblades could do wonderful things with that spell.

JellyPooga
2007-03-21, 09:21 AM
Personally, I prefer Fist of Stone, but that is primarily because I am currently playing a character who uses it.

He's a Half-Ogre Monk who is currently undergoing a transformation into a half-dragon (via Dragon Devotee, then Dragon Disciple). His first Sorcerer spell? Fist of Stone (for a fairly impressive strength of 29 at ECL: 9 with no other buffs). I just liked the imagery of this 9ft dude bending down to pick up a pebble and engulfing it in his fist whilst muttering some arcane words before his fist slowly takes on a stony Thing-from-the-Fantastic-Four appearance.

It's a bum that Spell Compendium took away damage from the spell though. Surely it should take away any attack bonus, rather than damage though? I mean, the other uses are all about breaking stuff (aka: damaging stuff), so why does it make you better at hitting things, but not at hurting them? I think I'll just stick with the Comp. Arc. version myself (mainly 'cos I don't have Spell Compendium though...) - makes more sense to me.