Currently, they do too little damage. 10d6, Reflex save for half? Meh. Compared to save-or-dies, battlefield control, and the like, damage spells take a back seat for usefulness. I'd prefer something more like 10d8+10 damage. That sounds a bit better to me.
Thoughts?
Currently, they do too little damage. 10d6, Reflex save for half? Meh. Compared to save-or-dies, battlefield control, and the like, damage spells take a back seat for usefulness. I'd prefer something more like 10d8+10 damage. That sounds a bit better to me.
Thoughts?
You do realize higher level spells max out later right?
Cone of Cold for example can go up to 15d6.
Or do you believe 3rd level spells (as I'm presuming you're thinking of lightning bolt and fireball) should max out later?
Sorry for having no constructive comment yet, I would just like you to clarify your position a tad.
I disagree, they're fine how they are.
Though having them scale out later has potential.
But to increase the die damage and add an arbitrary additional amount of damage is just silly.
Though someone in my playtest group suggested that perhaps that casters should be able to add their key ability modifier to attack spells (aka Touch spell, ranged touch spells, and rays)
|
I disagree, they're fine how they are.
Though having them scale out later has potential.
But to increase the die damage and add an arbitrary additional amount of damage is just silly.
Though someone in my playtest group suggested that perhaps that casters should be able to add their key ability modifier to attack spells (aka Touch spell, ranged touch spells, and rays)
Warmage Edge. lets you add your Int modifier to damage.
That's where the idea stemmed from. I honestly don't think casters need the help, they're some of the more powerful classes on the board with their spells.
I think that all spells should do more damage, not necessarily "max out" later. As it stands, damage spells are the least efficient thing a poor wizard can do. Why cast fireball when he can haste the party or cast heroism? Why cast chain lightning when he can cast circle of death or flesh to stone or disintegrate? Oh, sure, fireball and the like hit multiple creatures, but they're also likely to hit your teammates. Add energy resistance and high Reflex saves on top of that and you've got a little bit of a problem for the poor nuking wizard.
Why on Earth would I waste a spell slot on cone of cold when I could cast baleful polymorph, cloudkill, enervation, charm monster, black tentacles, or the like? Simply put, there's no reason to cast damaging spells as they currently are.
Robot I would have to disagree with you, If you do things right for a third level spell you really cant beat a fire ball against a group a monsters
Spell damage as is works perfectly
Honestly its all about strategy when it comes to spell selection.
I mean if your busting in a rogue guild, you shouldn't carry around anything that resembles a reflex save.
Like wise if your going against anything bigger than you, or wrapped up in steel your probably better off to leave anything requiring fort saves behind.
What's that a dragon? Avoid anythign that requires a save, and try to avoid those damn SR spells.
Spells are fine the way they are. Last week's game revolved around rolling well when it came to damage, and ended up being fun as a result. I don't want to think about how the game would have turned out if damage equations looked more like 1d10+20 as opposed to 4d6.
Not to be rude, but just because you think that they're fine doesn't mean that they are. There's a reason that the Character Optimization Boards (WotC forums) hate evokers and classes like the warmage. I'm going to have to side with my own mathematical prowess and the nigh-autistic number-crunchers on the CO forums.
The fact is that damage spells are vastly underpowered compared to their alternatives. With energy resistances and immunities, they are pathetic in their capabilities compared to the spells I listed. Seriously, just page through the Monster Manual and look at how many things have "resistance to fire 10." Look at their CRs. Look at their Reflex saves.
It's really lame when the conjurer gets better nukes than the evoker--at least the orb spells ignore SR.
Bah, the answer is simple. Nerf other arcane spells.
Waaaaaaay too much work. It's far easier just to increase the damage on blaster spells.
Besides, in nerfing other arcane spells, you end up inadvertently nerfing other classes. (Haste isn't for the wizard, you know.)
|
It's really lame when the conjurer gets better nukes than the evoker--at least the orb spells ignore SR.
The orb spells are not OGL and thus are not really germane to the discussion of magic in PRPG. Personally, I solved this problem before PRPG solved it for us; I generally don't allow selection of non-PHB spells because they provide far, far too big a boost to an already powerful class.
Not to be rude, but just because you think that they're fine doesn't mean that they are. There's a reason that the Character Optimization Boards (WotC forums) hate evokers and classes like the warmage. I'm going to have to side with my own mathematical prowess and the nigh-autistic number-crunchers on the CO forums.
Meh. The reason the tweakers on the CO boards like the other types of wizards is that, when you optimize, there's always an easier way to kill stuff that just damage. That doesn't mean that damaging spells don't do enough damage, IMHO. It means that those other spells are somewhat broken when hyper-optimized.
There's no reason why you'd ever have to do just 10d6 damage if you're a damage-dealing character. By the time you can do 10d6 (10th level) essentially every arcane spellcasting class can cast an empowered version for 10d6 x 1.5.
Yes, things have energy resistance, spell resistance and Reflex saves. Things have DR, miss chances and ACs as well, and plenty of people still use weapons.
Damage spells are not always the quickest way for a wizard to kill things (but they sometimes are) and they're not always the best spells to take. That doesn't mean they're underpowered. It just means that wizards have a lot of spell choices.
Why on Earth would I waste a spell slot on cone of cold when I could cast baleful polymorph, cloudkill, enervation, charm monster, black tentacles, or the like? Simply put, there's no reason to cast damaging spells as they currently are.
Because no monsters are ever immune to any of those spells....never....and there are absolutely no spells to protect you from any of those spells. /sarcasm
Not to be rude, but just because you think that they're fine doesn't mean that they are. There's a reason that the Character Optimization Boards (WotC forums) hate evokers and classes like the warmage. I'm going to have to side with my own mathematical prowess and the nigh-autistic number-crunchers on the CO forums.
And not to be equally rude, but just because you think something is wrong doesn't mean that there is.
|
Also not to be rude but I have a guy in my group that is the fireball king. Arcane Thesis, empowered spellshard, bracers of entangling blast, a couple metamagics (there is one that makes fire spells overcome fire resistance totally and do half damage to creatures that are immune to it) and he drops HUGE damage with a fireball and could even burn a group of Fire Elementals. If you increased base damage he would go from 60-80 damage(which is already more than the front-liners usually do to one foe) to 100-120 damage overcoming any fire resistance, doing half damage to immune creatures, entangling the foes for a round.....etc, etc.
Wizards don't need a boost for damage. Anyone that wants to be good at direct damage has more than enough feats and items to help in that area.
The above wizo could also add Blistering Spell to the fireball for free due to Arcane Thesis and add +2/spell level damage and impose a -2 to attacks and other rolls of anyone hurt by the spell. Doh!
I think that the only damage spells that really need to go up are the 1st level spells. Magic missiles doing 2-5 points really isn't that great. Since it also looks like 1st level characters are going to have more hit points, it'd be nice for damaging spells to have a little more zip.
|
|
Magic missile is a force effect(which overcomes most DR and incorporeal stuff) that can't miss and as such the damage is fine. Their are other 1st level spells that do 1d6 like Kelgore's Firebolt, or that do 1d4 but to an area like Burning hands. So it all corresponds fairly well. If you move damage around for low level spells you will make the Arcanists too powerful.
I'll chime in that magic missle, while tepid on initial glance, is rather BROKEN at high level, and with splatbooks, it becomes GAME SHATTERING.
I played in an Age of Worms game with a magic missle specialist. While every member of the party had some degree of "brokenation" by the end (I was nearly unkillable, the paladin had +89 diplomacy, the spelltheif was undetectable) the magic missle mage was king of damage. Against Kyuss, the managed to drop over 2K damage in 2 rounds. Arcane thesis, spell matrix, empower, repeating, twinned, quickened, just crazy. Literally, on round 2, there were over 80 magic missles coming out of him, 12 per second, literal force effect machine gun.
Damaging spells don't need a boost. One thing the char OP boards never looks at is the way DC's "wobble" relative to stats. A jacked up caster stat boosts DCs, which means enemies make saves less. But the secondary defenses against damage spells (improved evasion, resistance, immunity) makes them less appealing when compared to the lack of secondary defenses against save or die effects (depending on the effect, their might not be a secondary consequence, but you know that when you cast it). When your DCs go up, you start looking at the "reliability" of save or dies.
But the real reliability is in damage. Even if they make the save and have resistance, you can still reliably do some damage. Its only immunity that truly locks out damage, and if your casting fireball at a red dragon, no offense, but your "doin' it wrong!". Evasion is bad, but thats why you have some fortitude or will effects on deck. Spell selection is key.
Magic missile is a force effect(which overcomes most DR and incorporeal stuff) that can't miss and as such the damage is fine. Their are other 1st level spells that do 1d6 like Kelgore's Firebolt, or that do 1d4 but to an area like Burning hands. So it all corresponds fairly well. If you move damage around for low level spells you will make the Arcanists too powerful.
I understand your point to a certain extent but I don't think you're understanding mine. For example, with most of the new hit point rules that are being tossed around a 1st level fighter is going to have around 20 hit points, give or take. A 1st level spell that does does 2-5 hit points just doesn't hold up. You can chunk 2 magic missles and you still won't bring a fighter down. Not even close. But I agree with the other poster that at high level the MM becomes too good and is broken. The spell has been broken since 1st edition and I hope in the Pathfinder RPG it gets a little work done on it.
Two things.
The wizards damage spells don't borderline on anything even close to broken. The wizard has other abilities that may be considered overpowered but direct damage is not among them...certainly not in core.
This doesn't mean that the wizards damage is poor however.
The wizard can't do the kind of damage output that the fighter can with a full round attack, but he can certainly get up there for a standard action. Not only that but the wizard has a wide variety of options to deal damage with. He can deal damage to one opponent or several with scorching ray as ranged touch, he can do it vs a fort save and ranged touch with Disintegrate, he can throw numerous AoE's which effect more than one person, he has a first level attack that averages 15 pts of damage that can never miss unless protective spells are cast. Not only that but he has the widest variance of damage types effecting all 3 saves and AC to boot.
He also has the best ability to do ability and level damage, which effect not only HP but defense and offense as well in the process. He has effects that both damage and do other nasty things like Black Tentacles, bigby's crushing hand, vampiric touch.
Let's also not forget the wizard can do exactly 100HP of damage with no chance of miss...power word kill.
What the wizard lacks in full round attack, he makes up for in standard attack versatility.
I WOULD however say that perhaps a few spells at the top need to be fixed **COUGH** 1d8HORRIDWILTINGWASRIGHTTOBEGINWITH **COUGH** but I will leave them unmentioned.
Fake Healer wrote:
Magic missile is a force effect(which overcomes most DR and incorporeal stuff) that can't miss and as such the damage is fine. Their are other 1st level spells that do 1d6 like Kelgore's Firebolt, or that do 1d4 but to an area like Burning hands. So it all corresponds fairly well. If you move damage around for low level spells you will make the Arcanists too powerful.
I understand your point to a certain extent but I don't think you're understanding mine. For example, with most of the new hit point rules that are being tossed around a 1st level fighter is going to have around 20 hit points, give or take. A 1st level spell that does does 2-5 hit points just doesn't hold up. You can chunk 2 magic missles and you still won't bring a fighter down. Not even close. But I agree with the other poster that at high level the MM becomes too good and is broken. The spell has been broken since 1st edition and I hope in the Pathfinder RPG it gets a little work done on it.
|
|
The people over at the CO boards are also out there to get their character to be so powerful that they don't need a party of adventurers to play. It could just be on person from their point of view. Damage spells are meant as a way to allow other classes to join. Even if the creature has loads of reflex and HP, that fireball is still taking a good chunk of his life away and helps the fighter's poor damage potential. Instead of uping damage, How about you bring down effects like Phantasmal Killer so that you don't have a 2 save or die effect at that level. Charm Monster is great but that creature is getting saving throws each round, not as effective as that little bit of damage when you look at it. Oh yeah and cloudkill, it hurts your party as much as it does the monsters. The game has plenty of balances so that damage or save/die effects are still viable, no matter the level.
1) The wizards damage attacks aren't broken...not in the department of direct damage anyway.
2) The wizard doesn't really need a boost either.
The wizards spells have such a wide variety of both damage types and points of attack. They can effect single and multiple opponents in ways unique to the sorc/wizard classes. The wizard can have 5 different types of damage memorized that effect all three saves and AC (touch) to boot. That's pretty badass in it's own right. Not only that but many damaging spells like black tentacles, Clinched fist, and vampiric touch have serious side effects.
The wizard can do 100 pts of damage directly with PW-kill with no real miss chance, and probably could make an intelligence check to determine the chances of such a blow killing a monster with success. He can also do ability and level damage, which also has side effects that make them often much more useful than direct damage.
Finally, the wizard doesn't really put himself in any danger to unleash his best attacks most of the time, and the same thing can't be said about the rogue and fighter. Some enemies are unlikely to even be hit by anything but a decked out fighter with full BaB. Take an adult dragon at 15th level... you better hope he didn't have the time to cast 2-1st and 1-2nd level spell before combat (mage armor, shield, and cats grace) because if he did, his AC is going to be a whopping 39. You might as well not even bother with the full attack at that point because you will have a hard enough time hitting him with your first.
If the wizard misses, he misses and runs around like a chicken hoping the dragon hasn't refreshed it's breath weapon yet. If the fighter misses,(after he's taken the AoO to even get close enough if he lacks tumble) he's going to get the full brunt of a full attack by an adult red dragon...then things will get ugly.
The wizard isn't broken, one direction or the other...the wizard as far as direct damage goes is like the porridge that goldielocks ate...it's just right.
Oh and I apologize for the recovered material... I thought the Paizo Post-monster ate my post.
To me "Character Optimization" is just another way to say power gaming without having to admit it to one's self. "I'm not powergaming, i'm optimizing my character."
Seen a wizard maul a squad of orcs with first levels spells. Comes down to if the character playing the wizard can think outside the box and use a chain of spells to do more damage together than they would individually. Wizards have Intelligence as favored attribute, people should play them like it. Most wizards are not stand and deliver sort of personalities, even most war wizards.
-Weylin Stormcrowe
Damage spells being weak in core is not the problem. As a few others have said, save or dies are too powerful and need to be toned down. Really, I'd like to see it take the concerted effort of all FOUR PCs to take down an enemy rather than one PC who can wipe out the opposition with a single snap of his fingers.
Adding in splatbooks just makes it worse for both sides of the coin, allowing spell damage or save or dies become unstoppable. That's a problem of the splatbooks, and unfortunately there's little that can be done about that - except maybe some generic guidelines to tone them down or just shying away from them.
I actually use a "pain" mechanic (fortitude save at 1/2 HP or take a flat -2 penalty on all rolls, again at 1/4 hp) which has had an interesting result regarding save or die effects.
The PCs hold off on them, but if the fight starts getting nasty, they use them once the enemy looks worn out (and is taking the pain penalties on his saves).
This has actually created teamwork around save or die effects, as the casters assist the non-casters in wearing down the monster, then unload a save or die. Its worked pretty well. Just wanted to mention it, who knows, someone might adopt it for themselves.
It is far easier to bolster the power of damage spells than it is to, say, nerf haste or finger of death into the ground and thus anger a number of players.
I don't think that anybody is really concerned with haste. Haste was one of the few things that was fixed correctly, being able to crank out 2 spells per round by 5th was a mess.
To be honest, the save or dies have gotten a bad rap as well. This isn't because of the effect either, it's because the over-design made it possible for characters to crank the save DC of their spells to 192+spell level by the time they hit 15th (yes I'm exaggerating).
While the options to boost DC are good, some inherent problems lie in the game that have nothing to do with the spell effect and everything to do with how high you can bump up your characters spell DC. Personally I think if you want to adjust these spells along with other aspects of gameplay you can do it by something like making ability adjusting items be a "clickie" or for those of you who don't know the term, make them function on a 3/day basis for 5 rounds or so. Also, the ability at high level to boost your INT an extra 3-5 with Wish spells along with having your +6 INT circlet, your + to INT via level advancement, your other item that adds to your DC of specific spells, your + to DC for specific spells due to PrC and feat abilities...etc etc.
Basically it's not one thing, but the combination that makes Save or dies annoying to some groups. This leaves about 1/2 the gamers out there scratching their heads wondering what all the commotion is about because they simply don't play that way and wonder why the hell somebody would. Making sure you consider the stacking ability of feats involving DC when you are making new PrC classes and feats with additional material is something that Paizo should consider for the future, but you can change a small amount of things in core without spell changes that will fix these problems. This has less to do with the core and more to do with optional material.
In the end, this system will have transparency, so I don't suspect to see a massive alteration to the spell lists...and I don't really want them.
Let's consider the plight of the 9th level Evoker vs. a Troll. I use this example because a 9th level character is supposed to be so much more powerful than a CR 5 encounter that he uses just 20% of his resources to solo it. And also because Evokers specialize in fire and Trolls are classically speaking supposed to be vulnerable to fire, so superficially it sounds a good match.
The problem is that a Troll has no less than 63 hit points, while a 9 die fireball averages 31.5. This means that if the Troll fails two saves running, he is more than 50% likely to be able to continue to fight after getting shelled with two fireballs. If he makes either save, he is virtually guaranteed to last through the first 2. It takes him 3 rounds and 3 spells to put down a Troll, and the troll is in no way incapacitated or prevented from ripping our friend the wizard in half while this is going on.
The 9th level Wizard only has 3 Fireballs before we look at the bonus spells. Aside from the fact that our measly CR 5 Troll can easily hand out 41 damage on a full attack (and thus our Wizard may not live to cast sufficient fire out to drop his opponent); it is basically a given that the character in question has shot more than 20% of his offensive wad simply killing the troll. All risk management aside, the Wizard has failed to live up to his CR expectations simply by virtue of the fact that he has used as many fireballs as he did.
---
While there are certainly situations in which fireball is your best bet, it is also sadly the case that evocations simply cost way more spell slots to accomplish anything meaningful than can plausibly be justified.
While Evocations could certainly stand to do more damage to bring them into line with the position that they used to occupy in AD&D (when they did the same damage and literally all opponents had substantially less hit points), perhaps it is better that we simply embrace the Evocation's true tactical purpose: clearing out large numbers of really weak opposition. How about we simply make Evocations exactly the same, but cost less spell slots?
Magic Missile, for example, is a pathetic joke at any level. Why not make it a Cantrip? I don't care if people can automagically inflict 17.5 points of damage at 9th level, a 9th level Rogue does 17.5 points of extra damage with every single attack. Fireball does damage scaled to be rather impotent at all levels, why not make it a first level spell? Would it really bother you if a 1st level character did 3 points of damage (save for half) to almost all of the enemies in an encounter? Without a lucky roll and a failed save, a fireball won't even drop an Orc warrior at 1st level.
I'm dead serious. Area Damage Spells are way too high level for their real effects on combat. Cone of cold is not substantially better than glitterdust, and scales much worse to higher level combats than does web. Single Target Damage Spells are mostly in an even worse boat. Seriously man, polar ray? Who thought that was a good idea? It's an 8th level spell and I've never even seen someone play a 10th level Rogue that didn't regularly outpace its frankly pathetic damage curve. Really, 56 damage? At level sixteen? That won't even drop a single Troll, who I remind you is considered so weak that you haven't been able to get XP for dispatching them for several levels.
Spells like polar ray could really do with being first level spells. And no, I'm not kidding.
-Frank
Umm, actually, I've taken out a troll with a 9th level evoker before. Two words. Long range. By the time he could hit me he was toast. Just saying.
I think that spell damage works fine the way it is. I've never had any problem with contributing to combat with damage spells, and magic missile is a very useful favorite for those times when even nickel and diming a foe is better than missing it entirely. Plus, as has already been mentioned it can be so easily enhanced.
The 9th level Wizard only has 3 Fireballs before we look at the bonus spells. Aside from the fact that our measly CR 5 Troll can easily hand out 41 damage on a full attack (and thus our Wizard may not live to cast sufficient fire out to drop his opponent); it is basically a given that the character in question has shot more than 20% of his offensive wad simply killing the troll. All risk management aside, the Wizard has failed to live up to his CR expectations simply by virtue of the fact that he has used as many fireballs as he did.
Frank, you're skewing your numbers a little in your example. First you decide to ignore bonus spells and then say the wizard is using too high of a percentage of his offensive spells? Bonus spells constitute a substantial number of a wizard's available spell slots.
If the Wizard is an Evoker, as you stated earlier, he has at least 4 fireballs, and not 3. Also, for point of making this comparison useful, let's assume (conservatively) that the wizard has a 19 Intelligence score. (Started with 15, +2 from levels, +2 from items.) That means that the wizard has 5 fireballs, 6 higher-level spells, and 12 lower-level evocation spells available, discounting cantrips. Under those circumstances, using 3 fireballs seems fairly close to 20% of the wizard's available resources.
Considering that in most cases, 2 fireballs and a magic missile will kill the Troll, it looks like the Evoker's doing fine.
Umm, actually, I've taken out a troll with a 9th level evoker before. Two words. Long range. By the time he could hit me he was toast. Just saying.
I think that spell damage works fine the way it is. I've never had any problem with contributing to combat with damage spells, and magic missile is a very useful favorite for those times when even nickel and diming a foe is better than missing it entirely. Plus, as has already been mentioned it can be so easily enhanced.
Given enough range and mobility, a 1st level commoner with flaming arrows can take out a troll. That really isn't the point (and it also assumes you're encountering a troll in a large open space, rather than a cave or dungeon). Its more that you're using actual resources, and more importantly, multiple combat actions, to take down something that was a relevant encounter 4 levels ago. Thats pretty pathetic, especially when you consider that other spells schools have a decent chance of ending the troll's threat with a single spell of 2nd level... when they are 3rd level wizards.
Seriously, when the cohort of your cohort's cohort has an equal or better chance of winning the combat, something is seriously wrong.
Let's consider the plight of the 9th level Evoker vs. a Troll. I use this example because a 9th level character is supposed to be so much more powerful than a CR 5 encounter that he uses just 20% of his resources to solo it. And also because Evokers specialize in fire and Trolls are classically speaking supposed to be vulnerable to fire, so superficially it sounds a good match.
The problem is that a Troll has no less than 63 hit points, while a 9 die fireball averages 31.5. This means that if the Troll fails two saves running, he is more than 50% likely to be able to continue to fight after getting shelled with two fireballs. If he makes either save, he is virtually guaranteed to last through the first 2. It takes him 3 rounds and 3 spells to put down a Troll, and the troll is in no way incapacitated or prevented from ripping our friend the wizard in half while this is going on.
The 9th level Wizard only has 3 Fireballs before we look at the bonus spells. Aside from the fact that our measly CR 5 Troll can easily hand out 41 damage on a full attack (and thus our Wizard may not live to cast sufficient fire out to drop his opponent); it is basically a given that the character in question has shot more than 20% of his offensive wad simply killing the troll. All risk management aside, the Wizard has failed to live up to his CR expectations simply by virtue of the fact that he has used as many fireballs as he did.
---
While there are certainly situations in which fireball is your best bet, it is also sadly the case that evocations simply cost way more spell slots to accomplish anything meaningful than can plausibly be justified.
While Evocations could certainly stand to do more damage to bring them into line with the position that they used to occupy in AD&D (when they did the same damage and literally all opponents had substantially less hit points), perhaps it is better that we simply embrace the Evocation's true...
Now Frank, I only respond to this because of the synopsis you wrote on the fighter earlier and used the wizard in comparison. As you well know the wizard has options, and at 9th level he has plenty.
First off, there is the question of why the wizard didn't use fly, mirror image, web(even though the troll could make it through but still), stoneskin, glitterdust, or even fire shield that would make the troll eat an extra 1d6+9 points of damage a round every round he landed. Even with prohibited schools, there is more than enough option there.
If he knew the encounter was comming, he could do something silly like cast expeditious retreat, fire resistance, and then erect his wall of fire 8th level ability when the battle started; then run back and forth through it like a fireproof chicken causing the troll to either run into it and take damage or run around and let the wizard blast him with annoying low levels, wands, and new SLA's, given the battle isn't in a narrow corridor or something.
I do see your point on evokers not being successful with evocation alone, but none have to be. Sure it could use a small boost but it's not ineffective without it. Given other spells, my guess is you could bump the troll up to 9th level via fighter or barbarian and still take it out.
Not that I think it's needed the classes match level with CR...but that's a different thread which this one shouldn't turn into.
Considering that in most cases, 2 fireballs and a magic missile will kill the Troll, it looks like the Evoker's doing fine.
Actually, The scorching ray and 2 magic missile abilities of the evoker's new SLA's, the average damage will be 62 given the rays hit...which is pretty likely given touch AC for a troll is 11 and a wizard usually has a decent DEX and/or point blank to get precise or weapon focus (ray) in the case of evokers.
The troll has 63 Hp... you could risk that one point of damage I suppose and use absolutely nothing from your memorized spell list. If that's too much of a gambit you could just use the scorching ray + MM ability, a second level sorching ray spell or 3rd level fireball.
|
|
Err, why is the 9th level mage wasting AOE spells like fireball against a single target when it's balanced for it's ability to hit multiple targets?
Seems like Scorching Ray is going to be a better tool for Troll killing. Your evoker's got plenty of 2nd level slots available, and assuming that the Troll gets a Full Attack action each round is ridiculous. If the mage moves and then fires each round, the troll gets a single claw, plus a possible claw AOO if the mage doesn't have a good way to avoid those. Mage'll have an AC of 18-19 at 9th level (at least) so the Troll hits 50% of the time, with 2 attacks a round, for an average 9.5 damage per round, and no chance of Rend.
Methinks the Evoker wins that fight.
At that level, scorching ray has a range of 45 feet. Trolls have a base speed of 30 feet. Trolls have reach. A 5' step isn't going to save the wizard.
If the Wizard is using up buff spells and combat manipulations, then his resource load is even higher. Magic Missiles don't do lethal damage to trolls at all.
But the bottom line is that it's only a CR 5 encounter. The 9th level Wizard is supposed to win it so hard that he can do it 117 times in a row without losing. In fact, for the campaign to have gotten to the point where there's a 9th level Wizard in it, that is supposed to have already happened.
He is supposed to use up 20% (or less) of his disposable resources beating that troll. And it sincerely does not look like this is happening.
-Frank
|
|
Levitate, scorching ray, magic missile (or Kelgore's firebolt), and a fireball if you want or another scorching ray(or 2) and save the fireballs. A 9th level caster would own a troll even using only 2nd level spells. Didn't even bring up Glitterdust, a wand of magic missiles or scrolls that the PC should have.
But yeah, if you play your Mage as a dude with 7 intelligence he may be stupid enough to play tag with a troll instead of dropping fiery death from above.
I don't understand why his material resources are being ignored. A mage should have a wand, scorching ray would be a good one to have at ninth level, possibly at a higher caster level, and a ton of scrolls should be at his disposal, not to mention the possibility of other magic items. 20% of his resources doesn't always mean just his spells.
Why do people keep bringing up magic missile against Trolls? It does neither Fire nor Acid damage, and Trolls regenerate all that damage. In fact, a wand of magic missiles does 2-5 points of damage to a Troll per round. A Troll Regenerates 5 such damage every turn. It's a complete non-issue.
-Frank
|
|
Why do people keep bringing up magic missile against Trolls? It does neither Fire nor Acid damage, and Trolls regenerate all that damage. In fact, a wand of magic missiles does 2-5 points of damage to a Troll per round. A Troll Regenerates 5 such damage every turn. It's a complete non-issue.
-Frank
Because you knock it into the negatives with it and coup de grace with a torch or other fiery item. I would use burning hands from above instead or Kelgore's Firebolt. Also 20% of a wand of scorching ray is 10 charges, 40d6 if you get the lowest caster level possible....just saying.
Not entirely a non-issue, Frank.
Magic Missile still causes nonlethal damage, which means if its nonlethal damage equals its current hit points, it gets staggered, and if they exceed that limit, it goes unconscious. Even regenerating 5hp per round, it loses a move action in getting back up (and thus can't full attack/rend for a round).
Even better, all you have to do it keep it unconscious and you can whale on it infinitely. There is no limit to nonlethal damage, so once the troll is down and nonresponsive, you can all just make attack rolls at its very low 'unattended object' AC (I wouldn't allow a coup de grace unless you have fire or acid available) and stack that nonlethal damage into the thousands or billions, if you like. In fact, if you had a dedicated tag-team going for shift work, you can theoretically starve the troll to death after... I'm guessing about a week?
I don't understand why his material resources are being ignored. A mage should have a wand, scorching ray would be a good one to have at ninth level, possibly at a higher caster level, and a ton of scrolls should be at his disposal, not to mention the possibility of other magic items. 20% of his resources doesn't always mean just his spells.
The problem with this line of argument is that anyone with a UMD score can do it. You aren't proving that the evoker is perfectly capable, you're actually suggesting that the best option for an evoker is to do something other than cast evocation spells.
And yes, an 9th evoker can kill a troll with 2nd level spells. On the other hand, a 3rd level wizard with spell focus and greater SF: Enchantment has a 50/50 chance of taking the troll out of the fight with Tasha's hideous laughter. Even with the +4 bonus for different types. At ninth level, his odds are even better. The evoker really is functioning with a 7 intelligence, because he bought into the concept of *playing tag at all*, even (or especially, in some ways) if he's expending even more resources to be safe, when the another wizard can toss a single low level spell and just not care anymore.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Just my two cents here...
9th level Evoker vs. troll? Okay.
fly (or levitate), wand of scorching ray
Rinse, repeat. Unless the troll brought a ranged weapon, it's a cake walk. If he DID bring a ranged weapon, wind wall. If you don't feel like burning up wand charges, then use extended flaming sphere and just chase the bastard around with it while safely floating 60' up.
Next case.
|
|
You aren't proving that the evoker is perfectly capable, you're actually suggesting that the best option for an evoker is to do something other than cast evocation spells.
Eh, screw the wand. The evoker's got a 1/day Scorching Ray, plus he's probably got it memorized a few times. No problem blowing the troll to hell without touching costly consumables. If he rolls hot on the first Scorching Ray, he can knock it unconscious with an SLA Magic Missile, then take coup de grace attacks with Energy Ray until it quits wriggling. Otherwise, he shrugs and throws a prepared Scorching Ray, possibly killing it outright, or setting up the above plan. He can blow a fly or levitate if he wants to avoid taking any damage, or just eat a couple attacks and save those spells for more critical fights. Honestly, boots of levitation are a great investment for this character, and within the budget of a 9th level character. Then he's got no worries unless he's indoors.
On the other hand, a 3rd level wizard with spell focus and greater SF: Enchantment has a 50/50 chance of taking the troll out of the fight with Tasha's hideous laughter. Even with the +4 bonus for different types. At ninth level, his odds are even better.
Absolutely, the troll can be taken out of the fight for a few rounds. The 3rd level guy has a 50/50 chance at being torn in half after the troll saves, so that's not a really fair comparison. Plus, he's only got 3 rounds to run.
The 9th level guy will have a good shot at taking him out for 9 rounds, and will probably survive for a second try if the first one fails. But how does that Enchanter *kill* the troll while it's down? In some encounters, taking out the troll for 9 rounds will let you run past to safety...other times you actually need something in the room, or don't want to leave the troll alive behind you.
The laughing troll isn't helpless, so you can't CDG even if you've got a fire source. So, it smells like the Enchanter's going to have to blow some other resources to turn a temporary removal into a permanent one. So in this encounter, anyway, the Enchanter is good at providing a non-lethal temporary solution while the Evoker's good at providing a more lethal solution. Sounds pretty appropriate to me.
The enchanter could just cast deep slumber.
Not entirely a non-issue, Frank.
Magic Missile
Even better, all you have to do it keep it unconscious and you can whale on it infinitely. There is no limit to nonlethal damage, so once the troll is down and nonresponsive, you can all just make attack rolls at its very low 'unattended object' AC (I wouldn't allow a coup de grace unless you have fire or acid available)
The evoker always does... at will in fact.
But just to be precise, lets say Scorching ray + MM SLA + a memorized scorching ray in the order of SC, SC, MM...then beat it to death once it's down with your at-will fire ray...he will have zero chance of recovering because your fire ray does a minimum of 5 damage so the regen is a non-issue.
Lets say our wizard has 16 INT (at 9th that means he started off with 14 O_o) 3 expendable abilites used and one at-will that doesn't count because it never runs out (and not a single 3rd or 4th level spell used). 3(int)+14(spells)+7(SLA's)= 24 spells per day.
That's 12.5% is it not? Even if he had to use another ability like fly that's still just above 16%.
|
|
The enchanter could just cast deep slumber.
An excellent choice, again for bypassing the threat rather than killing it. If our hero would like to eliminate the threat forever, he'll still need access to some fire damage. Flaming weapon's no good...CDG with that will be an average of 7 fire damage, and a fort 17 to live, against the troll's +11 fort. 75% chance it stands back up and eats your enchanter.
Your enchanter could be carrying a wand of scorching ray...but then again, the evoker could be carrying around a wand of deep slumber...