|
how about giving Evokers the ability to bump the casting time of their spells to a full round action, and they get +2 damage per die of the spell (also burning hands, shocking grasp need to start with at LEAST 2 dice of damage at first level, something to make you possible take it instead of COLOR SPRAY)
If you want to go that route, make it work like the new Pathfinder Toughness Feat, applying both a static bonus (making it good at first level) *and* a scaling bonus (making it remain good at 10th level).
Have the bonus damage equal one extra point per die *and* the Wizards Int modifier as bonus damage if he is willing to cast the spell as a full-round action. At 1st level with a 16 Intelligence, he'd get +4 damage for that Burning Hands. At 5th level with the the same 16 Intelligence, It would be 5d4+8.
Since hit points are ramping upwards, damage spells should be keeping pace, *at least* for the Evokers, for whom they are bread and butter.
I don't think this would be unbalanced as an Evoker class ability even without the full-round business, for that matter, although it fits that wizardly feel that the Evoker can spend a little extra time waggling his fingers to push even more power into an evocation...
|
|
how about giving Evokers the ability to bump the casting time of their spells to a full round action, and they get +2 damage per die of the spell (also burning hands, shocking grasp need to start with at LEAST 2 dice of damage at first level, something to make you possible take it instead of COLOR SPRAY)If you want to go that route, make it work like the new Pathfinder Toughness Feat, applying both a static bonus (making it good at first level) *and* a scaling bonus (making it remain good at 10th level).
Have the bonus damage equal one extra point per die *and* the Wizards Int modifier as bonus damage if he is willing to cast the spell as a full-round action. At 1st level with a 16 Intelligence, he'd get +4 damage for that Burning Hands. At 5th level with the the same 16 Intelligence, It would be 5d4+8.
Since hit points are ramping upwards, damage spells should be keeping pace, *at least* for the Evokers, for whom they are bread and butter.
I don't think this would be unbalanced as an Evoker class ability even without the full-round business, for that matter, although it fits that wizardly feel that the Evoker can spend a little extra time waggling his fingers to push even more power into an evocation...
You know i think i'll implement this in my game.. it makes sense. HPs are bumped up, toughness scales, so why not make damage a tad bit better too? I like that..
The problem with wizard damage spells in general is that they just don't get better with level.
I mean, compare 3rd and 5th level spells. At 3rd level, you have fireballs and lightning bolts doing 1d6/level damage in an area. At 5th level, you have cone of cold doing... 1d6/level in an area. Heck, go up even further and you find polar ray doing 1d6/level to a single target (or horrid wilting doing 1d6/level to multiple targets, but that's Necromancy and not Evocation)!
Meanwhile, a typical CR 5 monster (appropriate when the wizard just got his new fireball) has maybe 40-90 hp, and a CR 9 has 70-150. Hit points just go up way faster than the linear scale that damage spells have.
One solution would be to go the 4e way and design monsters "backwards" (starting with CR and then figuring out what appropriate values are, instead of starting with a pile of abilities and figuring out what CR they add up to), but I think that would seriously break backwards compatibility.
I think the damage set up is fine. Monsters do more damage and have more hp at higher levels to make them more of a threat. Evokers deal out a lot of damage via their spells and can avoid damage via their spells. Evocations are still the best damage dealing spells even if there are a few in other schools (i.e. horrid wiltering). Compared to other classes, they still have the greatest damage potentials becuase they can strike more creatures at a time [a streamed-line fighter in his/her prefered combat click or a rogue getting sneak attack on every hit do a lot of damage but usually only to a few creatures at a time].
Considering that spells scale at an additional die per level (with an eventual max), I think that they scale fine. If your concern is that the spells get used up quickly but other classes, i.e. ftr & rogue, don't, then take the arcane item bond feature and keep a wand or staff ready to use.
I agree that most of the problem with 3.5 evokers is the spells. When I can't look at a spell (say cone of cold) and see any reason for it to be 5th level compared to the fireballs 3rd level I think the problem is rather evident.
I agree with the last two posts. Energy types should be more available to the evoker. Why not scale all the spells in a like manner?
A 3rd level cone of cold that caps at 10d6, 5th at 15d6, and a 7th at 20d6.
This gives spellcasters a variety of effects with a variety of shapes (burst, cone, line, orb or missile, etc.). These shapes and varied effects were hinted at in 3.0, but got all crazy with Spell Compendium and energy substitution. An acid ball? A sonic lightning bolt?
This gives the evoker choices as to energy type and spell shape, made useful considering his expectations. Creatures with high SR will hate acid spells, but they do less initial damage than fire, but it's ongoing (damage over time).
I like having different energy types having different shapes and effects. Works for flavor and "logic."
Let's see what we've got so far for suggestions (yes, I'm adding some of my own):
1) +1 damage per die
2) +1 damage per die, scaling by level
3) +1 damage per die, scaling by Int bonus
4) Energy substitution
5) Spell Penetration
6) Caster level scaling
7) Free Heighten Spell
8) Increased damage die
9) Choose what save is used when casting (Ref, Fort or Will)
10) +2 damage per die
11) Energy penetration (breaking through energy resistance)
12) Rerolling 1’s (and later 2’s)
13) Lowering level cost for metamagic feats on evocation spells
14) +5 damage per spell level
15) +1 plus Int bonus per die
16) Increased attack progression for touch and ranged touch spells
Have I missed any so far?
The evoker specialist does look weak, but this hate for the entire school. I've never seen a specialist decide evocation is one of his prohibitive schools. Save or die is nice once you get there but evo kept you alive til that point.
You've never seen someone play an illusionist, then.
Smart illusionists will forbid evocation and conjuration thanks to the extreme power/versatility of the Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration line of spells. About the only reason NOT to forbid Evocation is if you don't want to get into a rules debate over how a Shadowy Contingency works.
The evoker specialist does look weak, but this hate for the entire school. I've never seen a specialist decide evocation is one of his prohibitive schools. Save or die is nice once you get there but evo kept you alive til that point.You've never seen someone play an illusionist, then.
Smart illusionists will forbid evocation and conjuration thanks to the extreme power/versatility of the Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration line of spells. About the only reason NOT to forbid Evocation is if you don't want to get into a rules debate over how a Shadowy Contingency works.
Generally I'll keep conjuration and give up necromancy or enchantment instead. Shadow "whatever" can't do teleport or some other rather nice conjuration spells, and giving up necromancy or enchantment means that if golems or something come out I still have a solid school that doesn't rely on intelligent or living opponents.
Evocation has only two spells I ever miss: Resilient Sphere and wall of force.
The strength of the Evocation school is not damage-dealing (the strength of a wizard is rarely damage).
It is in spells like Wall of Force or Bigby's grasping hand or gust of wind that pull, block, push and in other ways control the battlefield.
If you want to strengthen evokers - make these spells harder to dispel when cast by and Evoker
Let's see what we've got so far for suggestions (yes, I'm adding some of my own):
6) Caster level scaling
Very nice of you to make a list, thanks Tom Cattery (btw, only just got the full pun of your name.)
I'm not particularly dissatisfied with Evokers first-level power as is. After all, Conjuration? Are you really going to wait until 10th level to have *mage armor*'s bonus? And never get Bracers of Armor +8? Transmutation is very nice, but useless as of about the mid-teen levels when even wizards will usually have all the physical stats boosted (except maybe strength).
That said, #6 here has some potential, that would also solve the "not really a problem but hey" issue that fireball = cone of cold at 9th and 10th level, as well as the actual problem of 1st caster level evocations.
Evokers could start with +1 Caster level on evocations at 1st, and every 5th (this is basically what the Varisian Tattoo feat was for of course). Gives them a meaningful burning hands/shocking grasp at first level, with +2.5 and +3.5 damage - a bit better than the current +1. That's matched at each 5th level after, overall giving close to a +1/caster level bonus.
The additional bonus to breaking spell resistance might be a bit strong in comparison to other schools. However my biggest concern with this idea is that it would make Evoker's lower level spells even more useless to them, which the scaling flat bonus they currently get actually solved to a degree.
So I'd rather see Evokers get a scaling flat bonus like the currently do, perhaps up to +10 at 20th level, but this would be a reasonable option as well. Note: +10 damage at 20th level is *not* a capstone - it's a first level ability. Bypassing Energy IMMUNITY is the capstone.
Have I missed any so far?Add stuff beyond damage to the spells. Like Cone of Cold could do 1d6/level and slow for 2 rounds (save halves damage and negates slow).
That's true. We could add something like that. Cold slows, fire lingers for damage over time, and things like that would be good additions.
|
|
Add stuff beyond damage to the spells. Like Cone of Cold could do 1d6/level and slow for 2 rounds (save halves damage and negates slow).That's true. We could add something like that. Cold slows, fire lingers for damage over time, and things like that would be good additions.
The Orbs of X (or the 1/2e Chromatic Orb spell) could be used as inspiration for those 'adds,' but I'm not sure that it makes as much sense for an Evoker to have add-ons to his damaging spells.
IMO, the whole point of an Evoker is that his spells should do hit point damage in some way to superior to the same spells cast by non-Evokers. The 'add-ons' sound neat, but not for the Evoker.
GURPS tends to use the energy 'types' as the defining factors. Individual fire spells don't necessarily do anything special, but all fire damage has the special effect of being able to set off secondary fires (and cause lingering damage) while all electrical damage has an increased chance to hit / ignore metal-based armor and all laser damage has a chance to cause permanant blindness on face shots, etc. Instead of saying that fireball and burning hands and scorching ray can cause extra damage the next round, or whatever, it's a generic 'Fire does X' rule that exists outside of the magic chapter (for all kinds of fire damage).
*If* such things were added to D&D, I think I'd rather see them added at that level, not at the individual spell description level, and various spells, like acid arrow, and items, like Alchemist's Fire, would need to be changed to suit the new 'acid damage does X' and 'fire damage does Y' paradigm.
D&D has never really scaled this fine, and isn't GURPS by any stretch of the imagination, with 'fire' spells and 'cold' spells having no mechanical difference other than requiring different resistances / immunities to counter. Both descriptors are basically 'fluff' with magically-inflicted hit point damage being their raison d'etre.
This feels like a 'false path' to me.
IMO, the 'problem' with Evocation isn't the need for flavorful additions to damaging spells, it's;
1) damaging spells have not increased in damage every edition, hit points have every edition, making damaging spells less and less relevant.
2) most damaging spells are easily avoided by resistances, immunities and / or Evasion.
These, IMO, are the two factors that need to be addressed for the Evoker to be viable.
IMO, the 'problem' with Evocation isn't the need for flavorful additions to damaging spells, it's;
1) damaging spells have not increased in damage every edition, hit points have every edition, making damaging spells less and less relevant.
2) most damaging spells are easily avoided by resistances, immunities and / or Evasion.
These, IMO, are the two factors that need to be addressed for the Evoker to be viable.
This. It kind of reminds me of going from Wizardry 1 to Wizardry 8. In Wizardry 1, TILTOWAIT is by far the best spell in the game; it basically obliterates everything but bosses through sheer damage. In Wizardry 8, Nuclear Blast (the same spell; they switched over to plain English spell names midway through the series) is almost useless because its damage just doesn't remotely approach the hit points that even basic enemies have by the time you're actually able to cast it. A maxxed-out cast of Nuclear Blast will deal maybe 1/4 of a random joe blow monster's health. In contrast, Paralyze All will usually paralyze 50% or more of any group of monsters (and there are some BIG groups of monsters towards the end) for several rounds.
It's the same thing in 3.0/3.5/Pathfinder. Damage spells are OK at the start, but once you start getting to the Save-or-Sucks (which start at level 2 with glitterdust and web...) they plummet down to "why would I ever want to memorize this unless my only goal is to see a dire rat survive the massive explosions I can cause?".
Being an evoker does have certain advantages in a world where ethics, morals and social stygma matter. Conjurers, Enchanters and Necromancers all suffer from social stygma at the least. Conjurers and Necromancer for assoicating with evil beings; demons, devils and undead. Enchanters will run up against the problem of people believing that he/she will steal your free will. The Evoker while being capable of destroying a small town single handedly is probably not thought of any worse than your great axe wielding barbarian. Not someone you want to provoke. Plus in my opinion, the evoker special ablity, Energy Ray, is thematically one of the best. For me, it bring a picture of Zeb from Legend of the Seeker using his wizard's fire.
Doug
Being an evoker does have certain advantages in a world where ethics, morals and social stygma matter. Conjurers, Enchanters and Necromancers all suffer from social stygma at the least. Conjurers and Necromancer for assoicating with evil beings; demons, devils and undead. Enchanters will run up against the problem of people believing that he/she will steal your free will. The Evoker while being capable of destroying a small town single handedly is probably not thought of any worse than your great axe wielding barbarian. Not someone you want to provoke. Plus in my opinion, the evoker special ablity, Energy Ray, is thematically one of the best. For me, it bring a picture of Zeb from Legend of the Seeker using his wizard's fire.
Doug
Only if you summon evil creatures. A good conjurer can stick to the "good guys" list and do fine. Necromancers... probably don't care, and everyone loves the enchanter! Something to remember is you don't walk around with a sign over your head saying "I'm a conjurer!" Heck there is a good chance depending on how your character dresses that people won't know you are a wizard until you are casting spells.
Evokers are just as "bad" as any of the others, after all one careless fireball and the whole city is burning. Those area of effect spells don't care which team you are on, or indeed if you are even involved.
Social stygma is purely a campaign/setting issue... after all in Dark Sun just being a wizard is an asking to be killed.
I agree that most of the problem with 3.5 evokers is the spells. When I can't look at a spell (say cone of cold) and see any reason for it to be 5th level compared to the fireballs 3rd level I think the problem is rather evident.
Agreed.
And 4th level has nothing for evokers. I would rather put a Blistering feat (PHB2) on a Fireball and prepare that in a 4th level slot - it adds 8 HP damage and has a little side effect, I think it makes anyone who misses their save suffer -2 on their d20 rolls for a round, or something like that.
Spell Compendium has some nice stuff for 4th level evokers.
But Abraham spalding's point is still true - 7d6 from a Fireball or a Cone of Cold is still just 7d6, so why is it 2 levels higher?
There has been a lot of discussion on this thread about boosting the top end damage of spells.
I see this as risky.
If we're not careful, Sudden Empower, Sudden Maximize, Rods of Empower/Maximize, combined with higher top end damage, can blow the roof off of the damage caps and wipe out entire encounters in one shot.
In addition, if we overblow the evoker's evocations, any other specialist/generalist will find his own evocations to be extremely weak by comparison.
I think a middle ground strategy is called for here.
Something like +1 HP/damage die and the ability to reroll 1s would be safer.
Fireball would go from 35 average, 60 maximum damage to 50 average damage 70 maximum damage at level 10.
Maybe make that scale, something like:
Level 1: +1 HP/damage die
Level 5: Reroll any 1s on the damage dice. Reroll until there are no 1s left.
Level 11: +2 HP/damage die (replaces the level 1 ability)
Level 15: Reroll any 1s or 2s on the damage dice.
This would mean a 15th level evoker would cast a 65 HP average, 80 HP maximum Fireball.
Then add in some stuff to prevent the enemies from making most of their saves.
Any of the following would help:
1. Evasion Killer
2. SR penetration
3. Heightened DCs
4. Changing energy types so you can Frostball a red dragon.
I especially like number 4. This lets the evoker do a little strategizing during a battle. He has to figure out what his enemy's resitances are and what it's weaknesses are and then decide on what energy type to use. It requires a little brain power, and maybe some use of knowledge skills, and seems more fun that just point-and-click damage.
The idea would be to keep evocation spells from being one-shot solutions to most encounters, but still make them powerful enough to be useful, without overpowering them so much that non-evokers feel ashamed to take them.
After all, conjurors get nice benefits, but when an evoker casts a conjuration spell, it has pretty much the same effects as it does when a conjuror casts it.
One of the Unearthed Arcana sidebars suggested that there be no spell resistance for simple blasting spells, thus making "weak" evocation spells more tempting to use.