WM level 5 or WM level 7 … ?

[tl]

Building a character that includes WM, always gives me a headace. Should I “spend” 5 og 7 levels.

5. Increase multiplier + add 1 to attack.
7. Ki Critical + ad 2 to threat range.

What would you suggest in a human “Battlecleric-build" (F6 WM 5 CL 29) or (F6 WM 7 CL 27) ?

Torben

[setekhi]

Go for the gusto. You're already taking 5 levels, you may as well take another 2. It doesn't seem like the sort of build that would particularly lose much by it, so you may as well maximize the benefits of the class (within reason, obv). You're not making spell pen checks or anything, I think it'd mostly be duration and such that would be sacrificed, so I'd go for it.

[fragment]

The +2 to threat range is rather important. I add WM levels to builds specifically for that feat, and of course 7 of them. The general idea is to overcome damage reduction with critical hits.

Theoretical example: make a normal hit with a normal weapon (15-20/3x with WM feats and keen) for 30 physical, 20 elemental, for a total of 50 damage. Let the damage reduction on the enemy be 20/20, so you hit for 10 damage. Not a great start if you want to reduce a thousand hitpoints.

Now make a critical hit, so the damages are tripled: you do 90 physical, 60 elemental, reduced to 70/40, for a total of 110. Much better. That's 11 times more damage, making it pretty clear how important crits are to someone who wants to do melee damage, right?

The improved threat range means more critical hits. Given the difference between the damage output of a nomal hit vs. a critical hit, it is clear how a doubling of the threat range (twice the amount of crits) will dramatically increase (much more than double) the overall damage output of a meleer.

If you do WM levels, take 7. Or leave them out altogether, and make a pure tank.

My 2 eurocents,
regards!

[thedomicron]

i agree with the above comments, however i think that if you're using an 18-20 weapon like raps or kuks, you can get away with it in special occasions like a bard/wm/rdd where you want to quality for full rdd benefits but do not have the salamander subrace.

of course, in this situation you'd be at a disadvantage settling for either fewer criticals (but very strong) with a large weapon or weaker criticals more often with a scimitar. of course depending on the weapon, more criticals might be better

just an example though, and a rare occasion. go for 7 if at all possible

[chainlink]

The +1 to critcal multiplier at 5 is handy for all weapons the +2 to threat range is very beneficial for weapons with a poor critical range.
Weapon/Non-WM/WM5/WM7
Scythe/x4 crits, 18-20/x5 crits, 18-20/x5 crits, 16-20
Scimitar/x2 crits, 12-20/x3 crits, 12-20/x3 crits, 10-20
With a scythe you go from a 10% (1 in 10) critical chance to a 20% (1 in 5).
With a scimitar you go from 45% (9 in 20) to 55% (11 in 20).
Assuming improved critcal feat and keen in all these cases.

[starlandra]

as the dom stated it... it really depends on your weap. When I make em with rapiers or kukris I only use 5, but anything else you really need the whole 7.

[dodrudon]

Just a quick note that critical hits are not "roll within crit range and you crit" but rather "roll within crit range and roll to hit them again and you crit." So basically, if your d20 attack falls within crit range, you reroll a d20 and add that to your AB. If that second roll hits (and the always-hit-on-20 rule doesn't apply), you scored a crit, but if it's a miss, it ends up doing normal damage.

Which means even if you get a scim/rapier/kukri down to a 10-20 crit range, if you can't hit them rolling a 15 on your d20, then your crit range is effectively 16-20. Also, if you can only hit the mob on a 20, then you can NEVER crit them.