Buff Divine Strike?

[ZenBear]

I feel stupid that I'm only noticing this now, but why does Divine Strike start at level 8 and cap at 2d8 when Sacred Flame boosts to 2d10 at 5th and cap at 4d10? I can understand Clerics doing less damage than other classes, but why are Potent Cantrip domains so much deadlier than DSers? If your WIS is higher or equal to your STR/DEX, is it even worth swinging a weapon? SF is range 30, no attack roll so no disadvantage in melee, and I would guess more monsters have high AC than a high DEX save.

[Oscredwin]

Divine Strike is 2d6+5+2d8 (21) with maxed STR and no magic weapons
Sacred Flame is 4d10 + 5 (27) with Max WIS

BUT

Divine strike can get a magic weapon for more bonus damage (such as a flametongue for +7 to damage) and it can get buff spells like haste or feats like GWM. Basically weapon attacks start out weaker because there are so many ways to improve them.

[Person_Man]

Clerics don't get the Extra Attack class feature and Divine Strike provides a limited bonus to damage because of the existence of Spiritual Weapon, Bless, and other buffs and effects they can get from spells. Like all full casters, they have more limited at-will options, but have dramatically superior daily resources.

[Myzz]

Technically... Divine Strike can work with Spiritual Weapon... So you make melee spell attacks with it (using your best mod most likely) do 1d8 + spell ability modifier dmg, AND are done as a bonus action...

SOoooo

You can still cast that Cantrip you want - AND THEN - as a bonus action smack something within 20ft of your spiritual weapon and have Divine Strike go off... = 1d8 + 5 (spritual weapon) + 2d8 (divine Strike) + 3d8 (sacred Flame) :@ L14 when you get 2d8 divine strike!

ALSO note you could have cast a level 7 spell then smacked something for 3d8+5 dmg...

[calebrus]

Technically... Divine Strike can work with Spiritual Weapon... So you make melee spell attacks with it (using your best mod most likely) do 1d8 + spell ability modifier dmg, AND are done as a bonus action...


No, it can't.
Spiritual Weapon is a spell attack.
Divine Strike requires a weapon attack. This is a melee or ranged weapon attack. Not a spell attack.
The only reason that a spell attack differentiates between ranged and melee spell attacks is because there may be adv/disav issues depending on circumstances.

There are spell attacks and weapon attacks. There are melee and ranged variations of both. But spell attacks and weapon attacks are mutually exclusive. You cannot have an attack be both a spell attack and a weapon attack. An attack is either one or the other.
Spiritual Weapon is a spell attack.
Divine Strike applies to weapon attacks.
If you use Str or Dex for the attack, Divine Strike applies. If you use your casting stat, it does not apply.

[Myzz]

No, it can't.
Spiritual Weapon is a spell attack.
Divine Strike requires a weapon attack. This is a melee or ranged weapon attack. Not a spell attack.
The only reason that a spell attack differentiates between ranged and melee spell attacks is because there may be adv/disav issues depending on circumstances.
Divine Strike does not apply to spell attacks. If you use Str or Dex for the attack, Divine Strike applies. If you use your casting stat, it does not apply.

It specifically says weapon strikes NOT weapon attacks...

"...you create a spectral floating weapon... the weapon can take whatever form you choose..."

Its definitely a weapon, that does not function using weapon attacks... As the ability Divine Strikes do NOT require Weapon Attacks, it works perfectly fine!

[calebrus]

Divine Strike
At 8th level, you gain the ability to infuse your weapon strikes with divine energy. (that was the fluff text)
Once on each of your turns when you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can cause the attack to deal an extra 1d8 <insert type here> damage to the target. (that was the crunch text)

You can't rules lawyer your way out of this one.
Divine Strike only applies to weapon attacks, and Spiritual Weapon is not a weapon attack, it is a spell attack.

[Myzz]

Divine Strike
At 8th level, you gain the ability to infuse your weapon strikes with divine energy. (that was the fluff text)
Once on each of your turns when you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can cause the attack to deal an extra 1d8 <insert type here> damage to the target. (that was the crunch text)

You can't rules lawyer your way out of this one.
Divine Strike only applies to weapon attacks, and Spiritual Weapon is not a weapon attack, it is a spell attack.

oops... kept reading Weapon Strike... did it again even after reading your other post... (stupid speed reading)

[ZenBear]

Divine Strike is 2d6+5+2d8 (21) with maxed STR and no magic weapons
Sacred Flame is 4d10 + 5 (27) with Max WIS

BUT

Divine strike can get a magic weapon for more bonus damage (such as a flametongue for +7 to damage) and it can get buff spells like haste or feats like GWM. Basically weapon attacks start out weaker because there are so many ways to improve them.

That's with a two-handed weapon, which means not only less damage but also no shield, and you still have to be in melee with the target. Also, what about magic implements? Do they ever have an effect on spell attacks? I would assume so, but I'm current AFB so I can't check.


Clerics don't get the Extra Attack class feature and Divine Strike provides a limited bonus to damage because of the existence of Spiritual Weapon, Bless, and other buffs and effects they can get from spells. Like all full casters, they have more limited at-will options, but have dramatically superior daily resources.

Potent Spellcasting Domains also get those daily resources, and a competitive at-will attack to boot.

***

Considering that the only two Domains that get PS are Knowledge, which has little damage potential in its domain benefits, and Light, which is all about blasting, I guess I can accept the disparity. It just irks me that even War and Death Domains are so sub-par in at-will damage. Would it really break the class to get just one more d8 per turn?

[MeeposFire]

Also note that it does not have to be a melee attack. People often forget this.

[Giant2005]

That's with a two-handed weapon, which means not only less damage but also no shield, and you still have to be in melee with the target. Also, what about magic implements? Do they ever have an effect on spell attacks? I would assume so, but I'm current AFB so I can't check.
You could use a Staff with Polearm Mastery and keep your shield to do 1D6+1D4+2D8+10 (25) which is only 2 points lower than Sacred Flame - by dipping a single level of Fighter you could take the Dueling fighting Style for an extra 4 points of damage to surpass Sacred Flame and that is before considering magic weapons. The argument of weapon attacks starting lower because they can improve to be better does hold up.
As for Magic Implements, none of them increase damage in any way. The Arcane version increases to-hit and the Warlock version increases both to-hit and DC. I'm not sure if a Divine version even exists.

[HoarsHalberd]

You could use a Staff with Polearm Mastery and keep your shield to do 1D6+1D4+2D8+10 (25) which is only 2 points lower than Sacred Flame - by dipping a single level of Fighter you could take the Dueling fighting Style for an extra 4 points of damage to surpass Sacred Flame and that is before considering magic weapons. The argument of weapon attacks starting lower because they can improve to be better does hold up.
As for Magic Implements, none of them increase damage in any way. The Arcane version increases to-hit and the Warlock version increases both to-hit and DC. I'm not sure if a Divine version even exists.

Please note the above build is heavily based in the murky waters of RAW. The build in question grants higher DPR than a dual weapon fighting build with two 1d8 weapons whilst having an additional AC and trading the drawing of two weapons simultaneously with a free OA whenever a melee enemy moves to engage you. Not to mention breaking verisimilitude by having the damage of a one handed, momentum conquering butt attack be a) capable of doing damage and b) equal to the damage brought about by a two handed polearm. Thus many DMs will common sense this build away.


On topic, definitely not an additional d8. The lower melee damage is to be expected of a full caster with melee bonuses. But perhaps a change to d10s between the levels could be justified.

[Strill]

Please note the above build is heavily based in the murky waters of RAW. The build in question grants higher DPR than a dual weapon fighting build with two 1d8 weapons whilst having an additional AC and trading the drawing of two weapons simultaneously with a free OA whenever a melee enemy moves to engage you. Not to mention breaking verisimilitude by having the damage of a one handed, momentum conquering butt attack be a) capable of doing damage and b) equal to the damage brought about by a two handed polearm. Thus many DMs will common sense this build away.
Right, and monks defy common sense as well. The idea of an unarmed guy knocking multiple armored knights 15 feet away in a single blow? Ridiculous. Let's remove monks from the game too.

[HoarsHalberd]

Right, and monks defy common sense as well. The idea of an unarmed guy knocking multiple armored knights 15 feet away in a single blow? Ridiculous. Let's remove monks from the game too.

Monks use ki, a magical energy to empower their attacks. Monks also do not completely invalidate both all sword and board builds and all dual weapon builds. If bot realism and game balance means nothing, why doesn't a hand crossbow do as much damage as a heavy crossbow. Why do versatile weapons wielded in one hand do less damage at all. Surely if the butt of a versatile polearm can do the same damage regardless of how many hands are used on it, then all weapons must be able to do the same.

[Giant2005]

Please note the above build is heavily based in the murky waters of RAW. The build in question grants higher DPR than a dual weapon fighting build with two 1d8 weapons whilst having an additional AC and trading the drawing of two weapons simultaneously with a free OA whenever a melee enemy moves to engage you. Not to mention breaking verisimilitude by having the damage of a one handed, momentum conquering butt attack be a) capable of doing damage and b) equal to the damage brought about by a two handed polearm. Thus many DMs will common sense this build away.
There might be some DMs that feel the way you do but I sure wouldn't consider it "many".
What you are describing is house-ruling away the one and only feat that increases the damage of one-handed combatants. You might consider it broken and considering Polearm Master is the strongest feat in the game by a significant margin, you would be right. However removing the only feat that increases single-weapon damage while keeping the feats that enhance the damage of every other fighting style is more broken than the default.
you are better off nerfing Polearm Master than removing the Staff user's access to it entirely.

[ZenBear]

There might be some DMs that feel the way you do but I sure wouldn't consider it "many".
What you are describing is house-ruling away the one and only feat that increases the damage of one-handed combatants. You might consider it broken and considering Polearm Master is the strongest feat in the game by a significant margin, you would be right. However removing the only feat that increases single-weapon damage while keeping the feats that enhance the damage of every other fighting style is more broken than the default.
you are better off nerfing Polearm Master than removing the Staff user's access to it entirely.

I don't find this to be a valid argument at all. If the only feat in the game that increases single-weapon damage requires a very specific single-weapon i.e. a quarterstaff and cannot be utilized by any other single-weapon e.g. a longsword, the bog standard single-weapon, then that is clearly not the purpose of the feat. The benefit of using a single weapon is it frees up the other hand for a shield/spellcasting focus. If you want to improve your damage then take Shield Master or Spell Sniper, both of which make the character more deadly based on their choice of off-hand tool.

The quarterstaff was obviously not intended to benefit from Polearm Master. The description of the feat says: You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. Quarterstaff in not a reach weapon. RAW it is a Polearm. RAI it should not benefit from Polearm Master. IMO.

[Giant2005]

The quarterstaff was obviously not intended to benefit from Polearm Master. The description of the feat says: You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. Quarterstaff in not a reach weapon. RAW it is a Polearm. RAI it should not benefit from Polearm Master. IMO.
The feat literally mentions the Quarterstaff as benefiting from both aspects of the ability - that part isn't ambiguous at all. The point of contention is that some want the Quarterstaff to only gain the benefit when used two-handed. I can understand why some might want to make that ruling although the book itself makes no such limitation and it would require house-ruling.

[ZenBear]

The feat literally mentions the Quarterstaff as benefiting from both aspects of the ability - that part isn't ambiguous at all. The point of contention is that some want the Quarterstaff to only gain the benefit when used two-handed. I can understand why some might want to make that ruling although the book itself makes no such limitation and it would require house-ruling.

Ah balls, you're right. Well I side with those saying it requires 2 hands. You ever use a quarterstaff irl? I do quite regularly in my MMA class. Can't hardly do squat with a bo staff in one hand.

On that point, I forgot I had this discussion with a friend, it makes sense to me that a quarterstaff can use the butt end to attack at equal range of the front end since its a symmetrical stick. A halberd, though, is a different story. I've never used one, but it doesn't look balanced enough that a user could swing the butt end at the same range as the axe head with any kind of efficacy. I wouldn't houserule out the d4 attack, it just seemed silly to me that it still attacks with reach.

[Mandragola]

I don't like polearm master. Nobody would swing a halberd backwards and bash people with the blunt end. If they had time to do that they'd hit the person with the sharp end a second time. Swinging the sharp end back towards you would also tend to result in cutting off bits of yourself. Halberds are also really heavy and just not intended for twirling around. It's stupid.

With a quarterstaff in two hands then sure. Hitting with both ends makes sense - if you're using two hands to control the thing.

On topic, divine strike doesnt really matter. By the time you fall behind the potent cantrip casters (level 16 or so?) you are long past caring what a full caster's at-will abilities do. Instead of half-heartedly bashing things with a mace or using sacred flame you'll be casting high-level spells when you're theeatened. When you're not really in danger it doesn't matter if one version of cleric is marginally better than another..