| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if this should be posted under evokers, spells, feats or items. But, as the current system works, there are some major problems with people who want to play “nuking” spellcasters. Summoning spells work, enchanting spells work, even a shapeshifter is still pretty much doable under the current system. But the old fashioned fireball wizard is somewhat laughable.
The problem, as I see it, is a matter of damage formula. The current formulas are basically static for “nuke” spells, while being somewhat fluid for melees and archers. Fireball, for example, is 1d6/level (max 10d6). That's pretty much all. This causes the following problems:
--It isn't boosted by stats, unlike melee attacks. In the lower levels, with 14-16 Strength, this may not matter, but once the melees get in the 25-30 range, and use some of the nifty new feats, it'll start to hurt. That’s an extra 15 damage per attack for the melees. The evoker is stuck at the flat “10d6.”
--Damage can be boosted by metamagic feats, but these aren't really fixing the problem. For example, that fireball could be empowered, but an empowered fireball, by say a 20 Intelligence, 11th level wizard (DC 18 save, 53 damage) isn't much better than a cone of cold (DC 20 save, 39 damage). A maximized (DC 18 save, 60 damage) is somewhat better than a chain lightning (DC 21 save, 39 damage primary, 19 secondary targets). However, given the much higher save, greater tactical efficiency of chain lightning, and much higher dice cap, I think I'd prefer chain lightning.
--Magic items that enhance damage (metamagic rods) are few and far in between, ungodly expensive, and lumped into a feat that is a relatively poor choice for anyone. A barbarian can get a +5 weapon (greatly enhancing his ability to hit with his uber-rage attacks and moderately ehnhancing his ability to do damage) all day for the same price that a wizard can get a maximize rod, which lets him do one kinda-cool thing once. Otherwise, the only items a nuking-specialist can get are items that grant more subpar nukes. (More of the same junk isn’t fixing anything.)
Anyway, given that long-winded discussion, here's what I propose:
Rather than a drastic redesign of the system, which might include changing spell damage formulas, let's treat base spell damage the same way we treat base weapon damage, streamlining the two a bit. That way, it increases in high-power games, and is kept under control in lower power games, the same way a weapon might be:
First, we need damage-enhancing feats. Fighters have Power Attack and Overhand Chop, and rangers get all kinds of things. At the least, why not add in a feat that makes spell damage benefit from casting score? A wizard adding Intelligence to his fireball/scorching ray isn't going to break the game, and such a feat is enough of an investment that I can't see everyone taking it.
Example feat:
Spellwrath: You add your Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma modifier (whichever is highest) to any damaging spell that you cast. (This would have to be elaborated upon, obviously, but that’s the basic idea.)
Second, we need damage-enhancing items. As much as I loathe 4e, one concept they seem to have gotten right were the spell implements. I'm not suggesting anything so drastic as lifting the magic weapon table—I’m just suggesting adding in a few things. For example, the warlock has several magical items in 3.5 that can add an extra d6 here or there to eldritch blast. This could be an easy addition to the Rod category of magic items (which are already ill-defined, not that great, and not frequently taken in games I've seen).
Example item:
Lightning Rod: When wielding this item, you add 1 (lesser-about the cost of a +2 sword), 2 (normal-about the cost of a +5), or 3 (greater-about the cost of a +10) damage per die to spells that deal electricity damage. (Again, specifics would have to be worked out, but that’s the gist.)
Yes, this might SEEM like a lot of damage, but it's still not factoring in SR, energy resistance, energy immunity, successful saving throws, and, of course, the exorbitant number of hit points higher level monsters have.
What I'd like to point out about the above solutions is that, rather than altering the existing system, and hurting backwards compatibility, they are adding something to the system. Also, they can be controlled to scale with the melees. Huge Intelligence isn't likely in a game without huge Strength, and a greater lightning rod might well be as expensive as a +10 sword. However, they do go a long way towards fixing the disparities that are appearing between nukers, melees, and other casters.
A much simpler, straightforward, and accurate means of fixing it is to reduce the casting time of all blasting spells by one step so that the majority that are Standard actions are now Swift actions, and the odd 1 round spell is a Standard action. Also, all blasting spells are SR: No.
SR still blocks real spells and blasting still has saves and energy resistance to deal with, but blasting is now worth the action cost because Swift actions are held to lower standards. Simple and elegant.
|
A much simpler, straightforward, and accurate means of fixing it is to reduce the casting time of all blasting spells by one step so that the majority that are Standard actions are now Swift actions, and the odd 1 round spell is a Standard action. Also, all blasting spells are SR: No.
SR still blocks real spells and blasting still has saves and energy resistance to deal with, but blasting is now worth the action cost because Swift actions are held to lower standards. Simple and elegant.
I'm not in love with the swift action idea, but having direct damage spells be SR: No makes all sorts of sense (with the conjuration acid spells being a fine bit of precedent, since magically created acid shouldn't be any less 'magical' than magically created fire or lightning or ice).
Between saving throws and Energy Resistance, blasting spells already get double-tapped anyway (triple if you consider Evasion), as compared to spells like Hold Monster or Charm Monster or Power Word Curl Up and Rock in the Corner.
Spell Resistance only applying to spells that affect a person directly, and not spells that indirectly cause harm (by creating a ginormous ball of fire, which may or may not burn people to death), makes sense.
Evasion just builds off of Reflex saves. It also reduces the number of checks you need to make. Blasting gets resistance and saves, other spells get saves and SR, rays get attack and SR (and are often weaker, since touch attacks are easy).
I really hate the idea of the swift spell. I'd rather see nuke spells get a formula that would actually make them relevant than become an afterthought if the wizard has a swift action left. Also, with that fix, A lot of casters are just going to end up nuking every round, which cheapens the effects of what should be interesting/powerful spells.
As for SR, I agree with you. Not just because I hate SR, but because having 3 lines of defense against already-crappy spells is ridiculous.
I'm thinking that turning the spells into swift actions is pushing the game even farther into the "rocket tag" direction, which is something that is not good.
I'm in favor of Velderan's suggestions.
|
|
I'd rather see nuke spells get a formula that would actually make them relevant than become an afterthought if the wizard has a swift action left. Also, with that fix, A lot of casters are just going to end up nuking every round, which cheapens the effects of what should be interesting/powerful spells.
GURPS has the notion of certain 'missile spells' building up power over time. The spells in that game tend to go from 1 to 3 dice (at least, as of 3rd edition, things have changed in 4th edition, I understand), and a spellcaster might spend a single turn building up each die of damage before throwing it in a fourth turn.
It might be neat to have a form of metamagic or an evoker class ability that would allow a caster to 'build up' a spell over several rounds before unleashing all (un)holy devastation on the foes. (Making it a different sort of approach to the 4E concept of the 'encounter' power, since a spellcaster would generally only be able to unleash such firepower after a couple of rounds of building up.)
I really hate the idea of the swift spell. I'd rather see nuke spells get a formula that would actually make them relevant than become an afterthought if the wizard has a swift action left. Also, with that fix, A lot of casters are just going to end up nuking every round, which cheapens the effects of what should be interesting/powerful spells.
As for SR, I agree with you. Not just because I hate SR, but because having 3 lines of defense against already-crappy spells is ridiculous.
The other alternative is to implement some way of simulating the blasting specialist. That means you need to be able to cast a spell around oh... Spell Level 20 after Metamagics, except cost reduced enough to fit on a 9 spell level system so you can actually use it. That's about the only way you're getting the damage high enough to be relevant as a Standard. Remember, enemy HP scale FAR faster than 3.5 per level. Assuming they even fail the save (not that likely, less likely as you go on), and don't have any resistance to your element. Even that doesn't work as it means to make blasting work, you have to degrade and devolve yourself into a one trick pony.
If the caster throws out his real spell, then nukes for minor to moderate damage as an afterthought at least blasting is getting used. It's better than nothing. It also lets him blast twice a round by default (choosing to cast the second as a Standard instead of a Swift is not at all unreasonable) which gives him a half assed nova, and do something against the odd super SR beastie when you don't have Assay to flip it off.
Edit: If it's going to take several rounds to charge, that needs to be combat rounds only or you can just always charge up. It also needs to be pretty damn awesome, seeing as charging for several rounds, then attacking means that one attack is your only contribution all combat. It damn well better be awesome.
|
|
Edit: If it's going to take several rounds to charge, that needs to be combat rounds only or you can just always charge up. It also needs to be pretty damn awesome, seeing as charging for several rounds, then attacking means that one attack is your only contribution all combat. It damn well better be awesome.
A valid point, particularly the bit about combat rounds and not wandering around with a fully overcharged fireball hovering over your hand, just waiting to go off like a mushroom cloud the first time you trip, or get startled, or lose your concentration because an arrow hit you...
And yeah, to be worth three rounds of normal fireballs, the overcharged fireball has to be something uber, like an encounter-ending blast from hell.
If you're concerned that damage spells are being overshadowed by other, more powerful spells (eg. save-or-lose spells), wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the power of the more powerful spells? Since when did wizards need more powerful options at their disposal in order to function well in a party?
My thought: if Pathfinder is going to balance the game by making every single option as powerful as the most powerful option of any class, that's poor game design because you end up with "rocket launcher tag" (as Psychic_Robot put it).
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
If you're concerned that damage spells are being overshadowed by other, more powerful spells (eg. save-or-lose spells), wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the power of the more powerful spells? Since when did wizards need more powerful options at their disposal in order to function well in a party?
My thought: if Pathfinder is going to balance the game by making every single option as powerful as the most powerful option of any class, that's poor game design because you end up with "rocket launcher tag" (as Psychic_Robot put it).
That would actually be my suggestion as well. I do see the attraction of making the blasting spells better, since damage from them has stayed the same since 1st Ed and hit points have multiplied by a bunch. It's not entirely an either/or; I can see the point of increasing the damage from blasting spells regardless of what else we do.
That stated, since the clr/wiz/drd/sor are deemed already the most uber-awesome classes, the solution is not to make their weaker spells more awesome, but to DE-power the overpowered SoD/SoS/condition-imposing spells already there. I have some thought on this and I'll post them when we are in the Spells playtest period.
Now I will say this:
A "make blasting better" rule works a lot better with facilitating backwards comp with other 3.5 products, since even if you fix every broken/uber/awesome spell in core, you can't fix all the ones in the Spell Compendium and every other 3.5 book.
You would need to both fix the core spells that will be in PF and establish a "spell nerfage rule" to address spells from external sources. Like:
"Save or die spells instead inflict 10 points of damage/level."
"Spells that cause petrification cause slow, then save again every round or be paralyzed, then save again every round or be turned to stone."
"Spells that cause persistent effects allow victims to make a new saving throw as a free action at the end of their turn each round."
Or whatever. These are vague notions. I have a more detailed writeup someplace but I'll find it and post it at Spells time.
|
|
That would actually be my suggestion as well. I do see the attraction of making the blasting spells better, since damage from them has stayed the same since 1st Ed and hit points have multiplied by a bunch. It's not entirely an either/or; I can see the point of increasing the damage from blasting spells regardless of what else we do.
Post got eated. Grr.
Anywho, I agree that some save or die mechanics could use some tweaking. 'Death' spells could drop one to disabled / dying, instead of just snuffing a foe out (allowing for last second saves). 'Lose' spells could have staged effects, such as a Flesh to Stone spell that causes a target to be Slowed, even if it makes it's save, Paralyzed if it fails the save, and Petrified if it fails the save by five, with new saves over some duration (perhaps ever minute) to allow one to either break the effect or possibly fully succumb! (Every round sounds way too generous, IMO.)
But, in a game where hit points have continued to trend upwards, through starting character options, favored class bonuses, larger class Hit Dice, an improved Toughness feat, etc. I feel that 'blasting' spells have fallen behind, regardless of how save or dies work or don't work. When a 1st level character might have three times the hit points he would have had back in 3rd edition (let alone 1st), that 5d6 Fireball, which hasn't gotten any better since 1st edition, just falls further and further from being a relevant tactic.
No, it wouldn't be better to fix other spells. It's far better to fix one school than to change every other spell in the game around it. Besides, it's not just a balance issue in comparison to other spells. It's a balance issue compared to monsters. As it stands, nukes of every level are a complete and utter joke compared to monster HP. And that's just going by raw MM without conversions of any kind. Right now, a meteor swarm, the best AE in the game, does an average of 112 damage, assuming a failed reflex save, no sr, and no energy resistance. 112 damage from a 9th level spell is a complete and utter joke. What the hell are you going to be killing with this? Assuming they're clustered together, you might be lucky enough to kill some CR 12s. Against anything high enough level to pose a real threat, this is a laugh and a half. And it gets worse the further down you go. Fireball? Chain lightning? Compare the damage they do to the HP of opponents several CRs below (ie, the opponents that AEs are there for), and they fall flat. Really really really flat. At this point, the only nuke not in need of a massive boost is scorching ray, and that's only if you've got sneak attack.
Right now, a meteor swarm, the best AE in the game, does an average of 112 damage, assuming a failed reflex save, no sr, and no energy resistance. 112 damage from a 9th level spell is a complete and utter joke. What the hell are you going to be killing with this?
Who said you should be able to trivially kill a bunch of high CR monsters with a single spell? Why is that the goal we're aiming for?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Right now, a meteor swarm, the best AE in the game, does an average of 112 damage, assuming a failed reflex save, no sr, and no energy resistance. 112 damage from a 9th level spell is a complete and utter joke. What the hell are you going to be killing with this?Who said you should be able to trivially kill a bunch of high CR monsters with a single spell? Why is that the goal we're aiming for?
Beat me to it.
Compare said 9th level spell to the high-level abilities of other classes. Seems like MS is right around where it needs to be.
The problem is not so much with MS, but with the concept that ANY spells (blasting or otherwise) are or should be single-shot encounter-enders all by themselves.
Isn't that something we think is a BAD thing about the game, esp. at high levels? I thought the statement that HL D&D is "Rocket Launcher Tag" was meant as a critique and something that should be fixed.
So your 17th level wizard blows off his meteor swarm, injuring the BBEG, though not grievously, and thrashes on his minions fairly well, perhaps killing some of the weaker CR 12's.
Then your allies move in and pick off some more minions and/or engage the BBEG.
Then the next round you do ANOTHER blasting spell and finish off some of the bad guys, injure the BBEG some more.
And your allies keep doing the same.
Then heaven forbid you have to use another spell on round three. Then the higher hit.
Of course, the same would apply to the bad guys. Nerf down the bad guy SoD/SoS/condition attacks and have them use damaging effects more. Add in some more defensive options to the game (armor as DR among others), and remember that not all high-CR bad guys are pouncing dragons that auto-one-round any PC they attack.
I rather like the idea of combat by attrition. Perhaps not to the extent that it seems to be in 4th Ed, but more in that direction than Velderan would seem to prefer.
Right now, a meteor swarm, the best AE in the game, does an average of 112 damage, assuming a failed reflex save, no sr, and no energy resistance. 112 damage from a 9th level spell is a complete and utter joke. What the hell are you going to be killing with this?Who said you should be able to trivially kill a bunch of high CR monsters with a single spell? Why is that the goal we're aiming for?
I guess you ignored the next sentence. I said you MIGHT be killing some CR 12s. CR 12s are mid-level monsters, and I think a 20th level wizard should be able to take most of them out pretty easily if nuking is their emphasis. But, if you want, move it down. Make it CR 10s. This 20th level wizard MIGHT be able to take out a swarm of CR10s. Traditionally, taking out swarms of low-level monsters is what big AEs are for. And since a caster who likes fire is screwed/bored against big monsters, due to no/crappy single-target nukes, they ought to at least be able to take out the low-level mobs. After all, the AE save-or-dies do that. I guess my question is, why the hell shouldn't evocation be able to take out significantly-lower CR monsters? It can't do anything against else.
|
|
Right now, a meteor swarm, the best AE in the game, does an average of 112 damage, assuming a failed reflex save, no sr, and no energy resistance. 112 damage from a 9th level spell is a complete and utter joke. What the hell are you going to be killing with this?Who said you should be able to trivially kill a bunch of high CR monsters with a single spell? Why is that the goal we're aiming for?
Should a monster eight levels below a Wizards CR then be adjusted to be worth more experience, since he's not expected to be able to kill them with his absolute best damaging spell?
Beat me to it.Compare said 9th level spell to the high-level abilities of other classes. Seems like MS is right around where it needs to be.
The problem is not so much with MS, but with the concept that ANY spells (blasting or otherwise) are or should be single-shot encounter-enders all by themselves.
Isn't that something we think is a BAD thing about the game, esp. at high levels? I thought the statement that HL D&D is "Rocket Launcher Tag" was meant as a critique and something that should be fixed.
So your 17th level wizard blows off his meteor swarm, injuring the BBEG, though not grievously, and thrashes on his minions fairly well, perhaps killing some of the weaker CR 12's.
Then your allies move in and pick off some more minions and/or engage the BBEG.
Then the next round you do ANOTHER blasting spell and finish off some of the bad guys, injure the BBEG some more.
And your allies keep doing the same.
Then heaven forbid you have to use another spell on round three. Then the higher hit.
Of course, the same would apply to the bad guys. Nerf down the bad guy SoD/SoS/condition attacks and have them use damaging effects more. Add in some more defensive options to the game (armor as DR among others), and remember that not all high-CR bad guys are pouncing dragons that auto-one-round any PC they attack.
I rather like the idea of combat by attrition. Perhaps not to the extent that it seems to be in 4th Ed, but more in that direction than Velderan would seem to prefer.
I'm sorry, did you just say MS is comparable to other 9th level spells? I'm going to be nice and ignore that comment.
I'm not pushing for rocket-launcher combat. I'm pushing for a damage formula that isn't static so that spell-casters can keep up with the melees/monsters, and not completely suck. Your scenario of 'takes out some minions and helps against the big bad' is great. I agree, that's what a wizard should be doing. Your scenario is also not currently a reality. Look at the damage evocation spells do versus opponents of that level/several levels below (ie minions). They are almost always a joke. Meteor swarm is actually good compared to crapfests like chain lightning or cone of cold. Try, mathematically, to prove otherwise.
And this is just going by the wizard. Heaven forbid someone wants to play a lightning druid or a fire cleric.
And it doesn't seem you're reading what I'm suggesting. It sounds like you guys are just dismissing it off-hand as being a bad idea to boost evocation spells. What I'm suggesting would require a feat, and an expensive magical item. It's not actually that much of a boost. Most wizards wouldn't even bother unless they were very focused on nuking.
Do some actual numbers. What I'm suggesting is closer to what you want than what currently exists, and it in no way creates 'rocket launcher' combat.
No, Velderan! That's completely overpowered! There's no possible way that the BBEG would have energy resistance, spell resistance, or a ridiculously high Reflex save! Noooo, you can't expect evokers to do damage! That would be BROKEN. I DEMAND THAT ALL CLASSES BE BALANCED AROUND 2[W]+STR DAMAGE OMG OMG
Of course, this ignores mounted/charging builds that can easily do more damage than the evoker. OMG EVOKERS BROKENED Or the fact that a second level spell grants energy resistance 30. OMG HOW DARE YOU WANT TO DO DAMGE ENEMIES Or the fact that a third level spell grants virtual immunity to an energy type. BORKENED HOLY SH*T HOOGE DAMAGES
I'm sorry, did you just say MS is comparable to other 9th level spells? I'm going to be nice and ignore that comment.
..do the numbers...
Please elaborate. Don't retort and ignore— explain so that I know what you are talking about.
I guess my question is, why the hell shouldn't evocation be able to take out significantly-lower CR monsters? It can't do anything against else.
Because if the wizard is instantly killing crowds of significantly-lower CR monsters each round, then the fighter looks like a chump because he can maybe kill one significantly-lower CR monster each round.
Now you can fix that by making the fighter capable of wizard-level effects, or the wizard capable of fighter-level effects, but I prefer to meet somewhere in the middle.
For what it's worth, I don't have a problem with a level 20 wizard being capable of mowing down crowds of CR 14 creatures (say). If that means that Delayed Blast fireball should do 1d6+1 damage per level, or Horrid Wilting does 1d8 damage per level, that's fine (weren't those the values in 2nd edition?). And your suggestions are perfectly reasonable, too. I just don't like the idea that if we give one school of spells a boost, and leave the rest as is, then everything will be great.
I guess my question is, why the hell shouldn't evocation be able to take out significantly-lower CR monsters? It can't do anything against else.Because if the wizard is instantly killing crowds of significantly-lower CR monsters each round, then the fighter looks like a chump because he can maybe kill one significantly-lower CR monster each round.
Now you can fix that by making the fighter capable of wizard-level effect, or the wizard capable of fighter-level effects, but I prefer to meet somewhere in the middle.
For what it's worth, I don't have a problem with a level 20 wizard being capable of mowing down crowds of CR 14 creatures (say). If that means that Delayed Blast fireball should do 1d6+1 damage per level, or Horrid Wilting does 1d8 damage per level, that's fine (weren't those the values in 2nd edition?). And your suggestions are perfectly reasonable, but
Given the fighter HP, fighter AC, and fighter ability to actually damage the BBEG (which the evoker won't, unless he doesn't use, ya know, evocation), I'm ok with the evoker being better with crowds.
Given the fighter HP, fighter AC, and fighter ability to actually damage the BBEG (which the evoker won't, unless he doesn't use, ya know, evocation), I'm ok with the evoker being better with crowds.
I'd love to have an evoker that can actually damage the BBEG. Why should that be impossible?
For instance, I liked the suggestion I saw that energy damage spells shouldn't be affected by SR (except maybe for golems). Why should energy spells have to bypass two sets of resistances?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I'm sorry, did you just say MS is comparable to other 9th level spells? I'm going to be nice and ignore that comment.
Beat me to it.Compare said 9th level spell to the high-level abilities of other classes. Seems like MS is right around where it needs to be.
The problem is not so much with MS, but with the concept that ANY spells (blasting or otherwise) are or should be single-shot encounter-enders all by themselves.
Isn't that something we think is a BAD thing about the game, esp. at high levels? I thought the statement that HL D&D is "Rocket Launcher Tag" was meant as a critique and something that should be fixed.
So your 17th level wizard blows off his meteor swarm, injuring the BBEG, though not grievously, and thrashes on his minions fairly well, perhaps killing some of the weaker CR 12's.
Then your allies move in and pick off some more minions and/or engage the BBEG.
Then the next round you do ANOTHER blasting spell and finish off some of the bad guys, injure the BBEG some more.
And your allies keep doing the same.
Then heaven forbid you have to use another spell on round three. Then the higher hit.
Of course, the same would apply to the bad guys. Nerf down the bad guy SoD/SoS/condition attacks and have them use damaging effects more. Add in some more defensive options to the game (armor as DR among others), and remember that not all high-CR bad guys are pouncing dragons that auto-one-round any PC they attack.
I rather like the idea of combat by attrition. Perhaps not to the extent that it seems to be in 4th Ed, but more in that direction than Velderan would seem to prefer.
Read it again, because that's not what I said at all:
Compare said 9th level spell to the high-level abilities of other classes. Seems like MS is right around where it needs to be.
1. "class abilities" not spells
2. "of other classes" not other spells a wizard might choose to cast instead
In particular I was thinking of a 17th-20th level martial character's full attack, a high-level rogue's greater invisible sneak attack mayhem, a monk's hasted mega-flurry - abilities that can be used off the cuff or with a single round then GO moment.
I was not comparing it to other spells that are clearly more "teh awezom" nor to multi-buff stacked builds that require power up time to CoDzilla.
In looking to address the general principle within the game that casters are already overpowered compared to non-casters, my concept is to push casters back into the realm of what non-casters can do with their high-level abilities. Blasting spells are already in the neighborhood of things casters can do, so they are already relatively balanced with respect to non-casters' high-level abilities.
The fact that other spells are more problematic is itself the problem. Not that blasting is too weak but that it SEEMS weak because other options are too strong.
I'm not pushing for rocket-launcher combat. I'm pushing for a damage formula that isn't static so that spell-casters can keep up with the melees/monsters, and not completely suck. Your scenario of 'takes out some minions and helps against the big bad' is great. I agree, that's what a wizard should be doing. Your scenario is also not currently a reality. Look at the damage evocation spells do versus opponents of that level/several levels below (ie minions). They are almost always a joke. Try, mathematically, to prove otherwise.
My beguiler/sacred exorcist/etc. character in STAP regularly has used a staff of frost (cone of cold/wall of ice/ice storm), holy smite,and blade barrier to do that precise thing - maim minions and injure BBEGs. In some situations mind-affecting spells, his main schtick, are great. But in STAP we fight all kinds of things that are resistant/immune to those. I don't need to kill everything single-handedly. It's nice when I can, like the time last session when I managed to get off a holy word in the middle of a gaggle of demons and neutron bomb them into oblivion.
As for evocations, he also has almost one-rounded several BBEG types with damage spells, using quickened solid fog along with blade barrier (or in two cases with time stop to set up multiple BBs). Is that a dirty trick? Maybe. Does it require multiple spells to achieve success? Yes. Will one spell kill the giant bad guy? No. And it shouldn't. But I've repeatedly used damage spells to crush targets above and below my our party level in CR.
And it doesn't seem you're reading what I'm suggesting. It sounds like you guys are just dismissing it off-hand as being a bad idea to boost evocation spells.
Given the above statement, it is with irony then that I must quote from my first post in this thread, which "it doesn't seem you're reading":
I do see the attraction of making the blasting spells better, since damage from them has stayed the same since 1st Ed and hit points have multiplied by a bunch. It's not entirely an either/or; I can see the point of increasing the damage from blasting spells regardless of what else we do.
Rrright. I'm dismissing off-hand boosting evocs as a bad idea.
What I'm suggesting would require a feat, and an expensive magical item. It's not actually that much of a boost. Most wizards wouldn't even bother unless they were very focused on nuking.
Do some actual numbers. What I'm suggesting is closer to what you want than what currently exists, and it in no way creates 'rocket launcher' combat.
Which is why I said it would be a reasonable idea to incorporate into the rules "regardless of what else we do."
Now, I do think it is MORE important that non-blasting spells be brought DOWN than that blasting spells be brough UP, and that the perceived weakness of blasting is by comparison.
Blasting was, relatively speaking, too good in comparison to monster hit points in 1st Ed. You rarely saw ancillary spells cast because it was pointless in comparison to just fireballing and blowing the bad guys to heck.
Here's a simple fix:
1. Damage dice caps are probably superfluous in a game where the hit points have escalated as much as they have. Remove them.
2. Higher-level spells should do bigger dice, rather than d6/level.
1st-2nd - d4
3rd-4th - d6
5th-6th - d8
7th-8th - d10
9th - d12
3. The above basic die progression holds true for basic AoE effects.
a. Touch spells that affect a single target should do one die size larger. (so 1st level shocking grasp should do d6 per level)
b. Ranged touch or targeted auto-hit spells that affect a single target (or have a single effect that must be split between targets, like magic missile) should do the same die size. (so 1st level magic missile should do 1d4 per level, 6th level disintegrate 1d8 per level)
c. Ranged touch or targeted auto-hit spells that affect multiple targets and affect all the same should do one die size smaller. (so chain lightning would do 1d6/level to ALL targets, pfft on the primary/secondary junk)
d. As a secondary rule, you could suggest that attacks that are not of the FOUR basic energy types (cold/electric/acid/fire) do a die size lower, so negative energy, force, sonic, and all that tooty-frooty stuff would be weaker than your basic energies to compensate for the fact that immunity/resistance to them is so much rarer).
e. If you don't like (d), just say fire/cold/elec/acid all do +1/die. Period. They just do.
See, would that be so hard?
For instance, I liked the suggestion I saw that energy damage spells shouldn't be affected by SR (except maybe for golems). Why should energy spells have to bypass two sets of resistances?
This is the single best suggestion in this thread. It's been mentioned above and it's been mentioned in other threads... it's a great way to keep blasters relevant without overall boosting the wizard too greatly. This is a good idea in particular since conjuration blasting spells already bypass SR.
Energy Resistance is the other big bane of blasters which they should be able to work around. I would suggest bringing Energy Substitution meta magic into core as a possibility. I'm not sure how that would work with copyright but there should be a way around that.
That would give blasters 2 ways around the existing defenses. Enemies still have Saving Throws and Evasion.
For instance, I liked the suggestion I saw that energy damage spells shouldn't be affected by SR (except maybe for golems). Why should energy spells have to bypass two sets of resistances?
Very interesting idea.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Where do you stand on SR, Jason? Seems to me that the dividing line between conjurations and evocations, in terms of what's supposed to be causing the effect, isn't always that defensible.
EDIT: Effectively ninjaed by Dennis
If by Jason you mean Mr. B... I dunno.
If by Jason you mean me, I think this is an idea I could get behind, with the following caveat:
Attacks that inflict acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic damage bypass SR.
Period.
The reason: All of those effects are subject to resist/protection from energy, and MOST of them are subject to evasion. They are the ones that most need the help.
Force damage, negative energy damage, desiccation/dehydration damage, positive energy damage, untyped damage DO NOT bypass SR. Those effects already bypass almost all defenses. With the exception of undead/constructs & negative energy, virtually no creatures are resistant or immune to damages of these types and there are very limited countermeasures against them. Most are also Fort/Will effects or no save at all, so evasion is a non-issue.
If you want an in-game rationale, just say that these kinds of spells are purely focused magical energy, where elemental spells are manipulating the raw forces of the universe. Those forces are fundamentally natural; it is only your channeling and shaping of them that is magical.
A magic missile is a bolt of magical energy. A horrid wilting is trying to tear someone's water out of their body. These are purely magical effects poking or pulling at the target.
A lightning bolt is opening a pinhole into the Plane of Lightning and pointing it thataway. People in the way just get what comes naturally.
Yeah, I know it's not a perfect rationale, but its enough to work.
|
[
If by Jason you mean Mr. B... I dunno.If by Jason you mean me, I think this is an idea I could get behind, with the following caveat:
Attacks that inflict acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic damage bypass SR.
Period.
The reason: All of those effects are subject to resist/protection from energy, and MOST of them are subject to evasion. They are the ones that most need the help.
Force damage, negative energy damage, desiccation/dehydration damage, positive energy damage, untyped damage DO NOT bypass SR. Those effects already bypass almost all defenses. With the exception of undead/constructs & negative energy, virtually no creatures are resistant or immune to damages of these types and there are very limited countermeasures against them. Most are also Fort/Will effects or no save at all, so evasion is a non-issue.
If you want an in-game rationale, just say that these kinds of spells are purely focused magical energy, where elemental spells are manipulating the raw forces of the universe. Those forces are fundamentally natural; it is only your channeling and shaping of them that is magical.
A magic missile is a bolt of magical energy. A horrid wilting is trying to tear someone's water out of their body. These are purely magical effects poking or pulling at the target.
A lightning bolt is opening a pinhole into the Plane of Lightning and pointing it thataway. People in the way just get what comes naturally.
Yeah, I know it's not a perfect rationale, but its enough to work.
Yeah, I meant you. I pretty much agree with that, although I am not sure about positive and negative energy damage (they don't seem to be magic, given that the cosmology is what it is, but if exempting them would be too problematic, fair enough).
Now, you must convince the other Jason.
I think that making acid/cold/fire/lightning/sonic spells bypass SR is an excellent fix.
I also wouldn't be opposed to including a feat(s) to allow the spellcaster to 1) add +1 damage per damage die or 2) add primary casting stat modifier to damaging spells with said energy descriptors.
I'm sorry, did you just say MS is comparable to other 9th level spells? I'm going to be nice and ignore that comment.
..do the numbers...
Please elaborate. Don't retort and ignore— explain so that I know what you are talking about.
Sure. I dunno if that was sarcasm or not, but I can give an example. It's hard to do a direct number to number comparison, since meteor swarm is, quite sadly, the best nuke in the game, so I'm comparing it to non-nukes. Here goes: Meteor swarm does 4 direct attacks for 2d6 damage a shot, then radius explosions for 6d6 a shot. If you hit the BBEG with all 4 attacks, he takes 28 damage, then 84 unsavable fire damage. This is actually pretty good if you hit the big bad each time, you get past SR, and he doesn't have fire resistance. Each 'minion' monster around him will take 84 damage, if they fail their saves, you get past SR, and they have no energy resistance. This is....this isn't going to be much. What the hell is this level 20 big bad be doing with minions that have 84 or less hit points?
Let's compare it to say, Mass Hold Monster. With mass hold monster, if you get past the same hurdles as meteor swarm (failed save, SR), and ignore some hurdles (energy resistance, touch attack), it can potentially completely take out your 20 big bad. And, any minions that fail their saving throw are officially down for the count. Now, I'll be honest, the advantages of meteor swarm are that A:longer range B: bigger area, and C: it has an effect on a failed save. However, medium range is usually plenty, the minions are usually locked in melee, so most will be within 30 feat of another. Plus, you can cast Hold monster without burning the fighter.
A group of 12 troll hunters (level 12s being the lowest that count as a challenge for 20s), for example COULD be hit by a meteor swarm for 84 for all, and 112 for one. The save, for a 30 int wizard will be 19, or 21 with feats. They have a roughly 1/3 chance of saving with a +8. Ie, you're going to be doing 112 to one, 84 to 6, and 42 to 3. It should be noted that you haven't killed any of them, and that you can only do this the first round or so, because the fighter will be closing with them soon, and doesn't want his ass scorched.
Using a Mass Hold Monster, you can probably get about 6 of them within 30 feet of one another. If 2/3 of them fail their saves, you've now completely taken out 4 of them, which means they've lost 1/3 of their damage output. Once they close and clump, you might be able to get more, and, either way, unlike your meteor-swarming buddy, you can use this spell when they've surrounded you, and, indirectly, you will do more damage as the melees off the held trolls every round.
And this is just hold monster, which is only an ok spell. Let's talk about mass heal, energy drain, time stop, shapechange (which is still pretty good) etc etc.
And the problem isn't just meteor swarm. Proportionately, meteor swarm is one of the better sub-par evocations. At the level you get chain lightning, you'll be doing an average of 39 to one foe, and 19 to others, while still allowing for saves. What the hell level 11 foe has 19 hp minions? And so on, and so on.
What I'm suggesting really isn't that much of a boost, and it will fix some really problematic elements of the game.
|
|
Attacks that inflict acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic damage bypass SR.
Period.
The reason: All of those effects are subject to resist/protection from energy, and MOST of them are subject to evasion. They are the ones that most need the help.
Force damage, negative energy damage, desiccation/dehydration damage, positive energy damage, untyped damage DO NOT bypass SR. Those effects already bypass almost all defenses. With the exception of undead/constructs & negative energy, virtually no creatures are resistant or immune to damages of these types and there are very limited countermeasures against them. Most are also Fort/Will effects or no save at all, so evasion is a non-issue.
I'd be willing to look at it as something that should only affect evocations that grant a Reflex saving throw. If somebody makes a Fortitude-saving-throw 'your blood boils, you catch on fire and you die!' spell, that would be a direct attack on the person, regardless of whether or not it is a [Fire] attack, and Spell Resistance would help you resist that spell being cast upon you.
If someone just whips up an enormous ball of fire, the spell is creating fire, and the fire is damaging you. Different mechanic, different save (Reflex) and your ability to resist spells being cast upon you would have no bearing on the casting of fireball, cause it's happening whether you like it or not, and your only option is to dive the heck out of the way (Reflex save, Evasion) or have some sort of energy resistance (Protection from Elements).
Since Force damage usually has no save, it wouldn't be included. Since dessication damage usually has a Fort save, it wouldn't be included. Since negative / positive energy effects generally have Fort or Will saves, they also wouldn't benefit. And yeah, there's some rationalization there, since you could define your 'negative energy wave spell' as a burst of energy pulled from the negative energy plane, but, unlike fire, it's *magically* affecting / attacking your body / life-force, not just setting stuff on fire, which fire does whether it's magically conjured or comes from being tied to a wooden stake and doused in lamp oil.
Given the fighter HP, fighter AC, and fighter ability to actually damage the BBEG (which the evoker won't, unless he doesn't use, ya know, evocation), I'm ok with the evoker being better with crowds.I'd love to have an evoker that can actually damage the BBEG. Why should that be impossible?
For instance, I liked the suggestion I saw that energy damage spells shouldn't be affected by SR (except maybe for golems). Why should energy spells have to bypass two sets of resistances?
I'm fine with the evoker harming the BBEG as well/instead. They should just get to do SOMETHING.
In looking to address the general principle within the game that casters are already overpowered compared to non-casters, my concept is to push casters back into the realm of what non-casters can do with their high-level abilities. Blasting spells are already in the neighborhood of things casters can do, so they are already relatively balanced with respect to non-casters' high-level abilities.
The fact that other spells are more problematic is itself the problem. Not that blasting is too weak but that it SEEMS weak because other options are too strong.
My apologies, when I said you didn't seem to be reading what I had said, it was in reference to you saying I wanted to make combat rocket launcher, which is very far from what I suggested.
And, the problem is, meteor swarm should be better than sneak attack/flurry/a basic attack at level 20, as melee classes can perform their abilities all day.
I like the suggestion of no SR but...it's just not enough. The spells need to do more, and a lot more.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Mister Nelson - in the example you present it is the Solid Fog that is doing all of the work by removing the enemy from combat for several rounds so that the party can easily kill the other enemies, then focus all of their attacks upon that single foe when it escapes to kill it before it can react. The Fog is acting as crowd control, and is effective enough so that the creature within is as good as dead already. The Blade Barrier is simply extratenous. It is not necessary at all to produce the desired effect. This is not a positive factor of the direct damage spell.
Perhaps I should have provided more detail.
The blade barriers inflicted around 200 to 300 points of damage to the target in each combat.
The solid fog prevented the targets (large/huge creatures) from moving away from the intersecting blade barriers and forced them to take multiple iterations of damage from the evocation.
In one combat, the other PCs never got involved because the target was killed by spell damage.
In another, the creature created a strong wind that dispersed the solid fog but that took an action and so it was not able to move far enough to get out of the BBs. The creature had been knocked down enough damage that the party's barbarian & my warriorish cohort were able to finish off its remaining hit points after it left the SF, in particular in a such a way as to avoid activating its contingent teleportation because its hp were already dropped low (but above its contingent threshold) by the spell.
Given the creature's ludicrously high AC, and mega full attacks, and defensive magics going, the damage from the evocations was most assuredly not extraneous.
Clearly, the issue is not blade barrier but solid fog.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
My apologies, when I said you didn't seem to be reading what I had said, it was in reference to you saying I wanted to make combat rocket launcher, which is very far from what I suggested.In looking to address the general principle within the game that casters are already overpowered compared to non-casters, my concept is to push casters back into the realm of what non-casters can do with their high-level abilities. Blasting spells are already in the neighborhood of things casters can do, so they are already relatively balanced with respect to non-casters' high-level abilities.
The fact that other spells are more problematic is itself the problem. Not that blasting is too weak but that it SEEMS weak because other options are too strong.
I wasn't really referring to you as the rocket launcher advocate, but invoking it as a trope of the game in the eyes of many, and one that boosting all of a wizard's spells up to the level of zapyerdead spells would make worse, not better.
I'd advocate making evocs a little bit better, and bringing zapyerdead spells down significantly.
And, the problem is, meteor swarm should be better than sneak attack/flurry/a basic attack at level 20, as melee classes can perform their abilities all day.
This is theoretically true but in gameplay almost always false.
The melee classes can perform their abilities as long as the spellcasters have enough spells to feel comfortable continuing with the adventure. Unless the game forces them to continue with time limits on missions, the fighter gets to do his best tricks the same number of times as the caster does, often less if his tricks are restricted to limited-use feats, class abilities, or magic items.
It's already better in being ranged, being ranged touch vs. AC, and affecting scads of enemies. It only sort of requires a roll to hit - hit = no save and possibility to crit. Miss = only AoE damage.
It's worse in being subject to magical defenses/energy resistance, but so are melee/ranged attacks have to deal with DR, miss chances, etc. It's also worse in that it can partially affect allies as well as enemies, and that in 3rd Ed. you're USUALLY not fighting scads of enemies. You are fighting one or a handful of boss monsters. Mass fights are fairly uncommon.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Let's compare it to say, Mass Hold Monster. With mass hold monster, if you get past the same hurdles as meteor swarm (failed save, SR), and ignore some hurdles (energy resistance, touch attack), it can potentially completely take out your 20 big bad. And, any minions that fail their saving throw are officially down for the count. Now, I'll be honest, the advantages of meteor swarm are that A:longer range B: bigger area, and C: it has an effect on a failed save. However, medium range is usually plenty, the minions are usually locked in melee, so most will be within 30 feat of another. Plus, you can cast Hold monster without burning the fighter.
The problem with hold, of course is:
1. Even if they save, you only have them for one round for sure. They are taken out momentarily, but not killed or even harmed. Every round they get a new save to snap out of it. They still obstruct movement (though they can't block creatures).
2. As I've learned with my beguiler in STAP, a depressingly large number of creatures are immune to paralysis (dragons) or mind-affecting (undead, vermin, constructs, numerous outsiders and templated creatures we've run into, and defensive magics like freedom of movement/mind blank), especially at high levels. This is campaign-dependent, of course. MHM would be great in Against the Giants.
A group of 12 troll hunters (level 12s being the lowest that count as a challenge for 20s), for example COULD be hit by a meteor swarm for 84 for all, and 112 for one. The save, for a 30 int wizard will be 19, or 21 with feats. They have a roughly 1/3 chance of saving with a +8. Ie, you're going to be doing 112 to one, 84 to 6, and 42 to 3. It should be noted that you haven't killed any of them, and that you can only do this the first round or so, because the fighter will be closing with them soon, and doesn't want his ass scorched.
Your math is off. The save DC would be 29/31 (10 + Int bonus + spell level/+2 for feats). The troll hunters would only save on a natural 20.
Really, though, this is more of an argument in favor of MHM than it is for MS, because the consequences for failure are much worse for MHM (paralysis) than for MS (just some more damage).
Using a Mass Hold Monster, you can probably get about 6 of them within 30 feet of one another. If 2/3 of them fail their saves, you've now completely taken out 4 of them, which means they've lost 1/3 of their damage output. Once they close and clump, you might be able to get more, and, either way, unlike your meteor-swarming buddy, you can use this spell when they've surrounded you, and, indirectly, you will do more damage as the melees off the held trolls every round.
Which is a pretty unsatisfying role for the melee character. "Hey, I get to coup de grace the paralyzed monsters! Yay me!"
Still, it's a much better spell when the monsters are among you, akin to horrid wilting amongst the damage-dealing spells.
And this is just hold monster, which is only an ok spell. Let's talk about mass heal, energy drain, time stop, shapechange (which is still pretty good) etc etc.
Lots of the zapyerdead spells are great if you're up against one target. Energy drain is a great example. However, they suffer greatly in comparison when:
1. Your one target has super SR/saves (which is more likely vs. one uber target).
2. Your one target has a ring of counterspells or spell turning (area effects can't be turned).
3. Your one target has other specific countermeasures (death ward, freemvmt, mind blank, prot-evil) that auto-block SoD/SoS effects.
None of this refutes the basic point that, compared to a lot of these spells, the Evocs come off looking weenie. The question is how much of that weenieness is because Evocs are really weak and how much because the others are too good.
Your math is off. The save DC would be 29/31 (10 + Int bonus + spell level/+2 for feats). The troll hunters would only save on a natural 20.Really, though, this is more of an argument in favor of MHM than it is for MS, because the consequences for failure are much worse for MHM (paralysis) than for MS (just some more damage).
LOL, wow, that was terrible. I can't believe I didn't add base. I really must not have been paying much attention.
Anyway, yes, that was just one example. And, compared to it, evocation looks weenie.
I'm honestly not disagreeing with you that casters are overpowered. I'm a mage/changeling man myself, so most consequenceless 6-second D&D magic seems very unnecessarily over the top. However, There's really no way to fix it while keeping it D&D (well, I mean, Wizards tried to fix it and still call it D&D, but...well, we all died inside a little bit on that one). Theoretically, I would like to see the system pared down, but that would completely shiv backwards compatibility, and be a different game. Really, I just want casters to be able to kill things with magic (which, I don't think can be done by changing the spells themselves. There needs to be a feat/resource cost).
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
If it could not simply teleport out of the Solid Fog it could not have been especially powerful since it does not even possess 4th level spells. Between a round of actions from all sides and potential readied actions a single creature will drop if it is within your ability to kill simply because it can be ganged up on and you get four or more turns to its one. I have personally witnessed this in many different games under many different scenarios. The Blade Barriers are extratenous because it is not necessary to cast them. It is either taken out long enough by the Fog, or can ignore the Fog and thereby ignore the hazards you place within the Fog.
It was in a dimensional lock or forbiddance area and so could not teleport normally; ironically, it had a contingent dimension door type of effect or something like that and had some sort of epic ring that let it teleport even in no-teleport zones, but as to why it couldn't do more than one dim-door, I couldn't tell you. Maybe it could only use it once a day and it was saving it for the contingency or something. It was a CR 23-ish linnorm dragon in one of the last STAP modules. I haven't read the adventure so I couldn't tell you its exact capabilities.
I believe it first tried a quickened GDM to dispel the fog and bb's but failed the checks. It then used wings to disperse the fog and leave it the area. The problem was that it had already soaked up several hundred points of damage by the time it was able to escape.
Its weak point was its Reflex saves. It had mega Fort and Will saves and mega AC, which made it difficult for the melee mashers to killer crush it, and because of precast mind blank and death ward was immune to most standard SoD/SoS spells.
There also were not a "single round of readied actions" because, while we had spelled up in anticipation of combat, we had to go into the creature's lair and engage it. We were not sitting in ambush waiting to mega-kill it.
As soon as it appeared, time stop/BB/BB/BB/BB/quickened SF happened on my initiative. Everyone else, bad guy included, was acting on initiative, had to close to combat (which was hard because of terrain and special effects on movement, and his speed was generally much higher than ours), so no insta-full attacks (my cohort does have limited pounce ability, but his attack rolls aren't quite up to PC levels). SF also does not prevent the target from acting; it just slows him down. He was still able to breathe, use SLAs, threaten, and on down the list while he was moving/getting out of the fog.
Anyway, take it as you wish. If you believe the damage from the BBs was incidental to the combat, be my guest.
Mister Nelson - in the example you present it is the Solid Fog that is doing all of the work by removing the enemy from combat for several rounds so that the party can easily kill the other enemies, then focus all of their attacks upon that single foe when it escapes to kill it before it can react. The Fog is acting as crowd control, and is effective enough so that the creature within is as good as dead already. The Blade Barrier is simply extratenous. It is not necessary at all to produce the desired effect. This is not a positive factor of the direct damage spell.Perhaps I should have provided more detail.
The blade barriers inflicted around 200 to 300 points of damage to the target in each combat.
The solid fog prevented the targets (large/huge creatures) from moving away from the intersecting blade barriers and forced them to take multiple iterations of damage from the evocation.
In one combat, the other PCs never got involved because the target was killed by spell damage.
In another, the creature created a strong wind that dispersed the solid fog but that took an action and so it was not able to move far enough to get out of the BBs. The creature had been knocked down enough damage that the party's barbarian & my warriorish cohort were able to finish off its remaining hit points after it left the SF, in particular in a such a way as to avoid activating its contingent teleportation because its hp were already dropped low (but above its contingent threshold) by the spell.
Given the creature's ludicrously high AC, and mega full attacks, and defensive magics going, the damage from the evocations was most assuredly not extraneous.
Well, that's the problem though, isn't it? In order for that damage spell to become good, you had to do a cheap blade barrier-solid fog trick. I mean, yes, it's a clever use of the spell, but probably not one for which it was intended. I'm all for rewarding tactically-minded players, but that doesn't help the people who want to RP a wizard who chucks fireballs. I hate it when D&D starts to feel like Magic:the Gathering.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Psychic Robot is correct. Once the Solid Fog lands, and the target cannot escape easily via teleportation or freedom of movement it is already removed from the fight. Blade Barriers are unnecessary and result in expending multiple spell slots for no effect. You are not helping, you are looking busy.
Uh huh.
The problem with looking busy is you get to show off in Fight 1, but now in Fight 4 you don't have any good magic left because you did not pace yourself. Half the party dies as a result of your showboating. This is not teamwork in action. This is foolishness.
That would be true if:
1. I had burned all good resources. Part of the beauty of being a beguiler is having tons of spell slots. Part of the beauty of being a high-level character is having lots of other options even in the unlikely event that you should ever burn through all of your useful spells (2 staves, frinstance).
2. The encounter occurred somewhere in a long sequence, rather than being an isolated specific quest/side encounter where there is no reason NOT to go nova.
3. The encounter did not represent a sufficient threat of death to me or other party members that it would be okay to just let the encounter play out over the course of several rounds cuz, yknow, I didn't want to blow off all my good spells. Being LG, I have rather more regard for the life and limb of my comrades than that and would rather end the fight quickly than let it drag out. My attempt at summoning celestial monsters as meat shields fizzled during the time stop, alas, or more fungible allies could've been used to protect the party's soft chewy innards.
BTW, I am pretty sure the linnorm also had some sort of quickened flesh to stone power, which along with his true seeing allowed him to target that power on me. Ouch. But, used resources and avoided that. Smoke em if ya got em.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
My post got eaten. Let's try this again.
You cast a Time Stop, 4 Blade Barriers, and a Quickened Solid Fog. That is a lot of resources for a little gain. Were you trying to finish the fight quickly you would need to be doing something a bit more potent than xd6, save for half. It would also need to be a bit more likely to work
Hmm... the likelihood to work seems to have been very high, since it did work... :P
Yes, I know, post hoc ergo propter hoc. Jest being funny.
than expecting a... epic dragon I believe you said to not have access to 4th level spell effects such as Freedom of Movement or Dimension Door. I'm fighting a dragon in a game that is not epic but close. Someone threw a DC 30 effect at it. DM rolls a 3 and announces the dragon passed.
That is often true for dragons with Fort and Will.
It is rarely true for dragons with Ref, given that most dragons (including all SRD standards) have Dex of 10. To pick a random CR 23 dragon, the wyrm blue dragon in the Draconomicon, Aarazthoorus, has Ref save of +20. Pretty good, but not nearly as good as her Will +25 and Fort +28.
You throw a DC 30 spell against her, she fails only 5% of the time on Fort, 20% on Will, but 45% on Ref. You throw four DC 30 Ref effects against her and she'll probably make two and fail two.
You throw four DC 30 Fort saves, she'll probably make em all. You throw four Will effects, she might fail one. Except that she has mind blank going and ignores virtually all Will save effects. And death ward, so ignores the worst Fort save effects.
Also, Time Stop doesn't really allow too much in the way of dropping Fort/Will effects on people, cuz they have to be effects that persist after the TS rounds end. Like BB. So it's not four Ref saves vs. four Fort/Will saves.
It's four Ref saves vs. ONE Will or Fort save.
So I am not particularly optimistic about the chances of you getting that Blade Barrier to do much, at least not without some softening up first via save reducing effects. I am simply not seeing how what you say can ever actually happen barring tactical failure on the DM's part.
1. Whether you see how it can ever happen is immaterial to the fact that, in actual point of fact, it did happen.
2. The fact of dragons having uber-high saves is actually all the MORE reason to use spells that give partial results on made saves, rather than save negates.
3. The point of multiple BBs is to create a situation where one made save will not negate the effect.
4. The only relevance of the solid fog is forcing the creature to take damage for multiple rounds. It's irrelevant to the instant damage as soon as the TS ends. You could achieve the same result with summoned creatures that blocked its movement or any other form of crowd control, but SF only matters for rounds 2 through N of the BB cuisinart. The damage itself applies immediately.
5. Save-reducing effects, with the exception of a blackguard's aura of despair (and that's not really an issue in a good party), usually allow saves themselves, in fact usually Fort or Will, and thus are going right into a dragon's wheelhouse to try to plow through. Others are simply negated by defenses (mind blank vs. any mind-affecting save depressors, death ward vs. enervation/energy drain) and/or have to beat SR themselves (prayer). Some are self-boosters (assay SR, for instance) and would work fine. There are some that can work, esp. as you get further out into splat-land, but then you're giving up actions in the hope of getting a later effect through. Rather than attacking right away where there's already a relative weak spot (Ref saves for dragons).
6. What exactly is the tactical defense against time stop? Time stop works on the caster, not the creature. Therefore, the creature has no countermeasure against suddenly, in the space of an eyeblink, being criss-crossed with 60d6 worth of blade barriers before he gets a chance to react.
His defenses are SR and Reflex saves or AMF. All the rest of the defensive countermeasures only apply after the fact, once the TS ends and after the damage has already hit home.
TS doesn't let you target creatures during the time stop, so most/all of your intended nerf spells can't be applied. You could quicken one and do it BEFORE the TS, and that's a good strategy, but most allow their own saves or are mooted by the creature's defenses.
It proves that Solid Fog works great on those that lack Freedom of Movement or Teleportation. It says nothing about direct damage or says something negative about it depending on your point of view as it did take 4 castings that required a Time Stop to set up to even get that much mileage out of it. This topic is about the effectiveness of direct damage, not Solid Fog and other crowd control effects.
See above. SF comes in handy to prolong the effect but is entirely incidental to the initial effect of the spells.
The Time Stop simply lets you get 2-5 castings of the spell in play at once, inflicting direct damage in copious amounts.
Strange as it may seem to you, whether by one spell (which you would seem to favor) or by six (the actual mix), requiring one standard action of character time, the direct damage was in fact effective in defeating the monster with minimal loss of life, limb, and loot. And, because of the monster's particular defenses, which were fairly well known because of information gathering, Knowledge checks, greater arcane sight to know what spells it had going, and the nature of dragons as monsters (wherein Ref is a relatively weak defense for them compared to Fort, Will, or AC), Ref-based direct-damage spells were possibly the most effective thing to use against it.
Direct damage whittled the monster down to where martial types could finish it off quickly. The majority of SoS/SoD effects were useless against the creature because of its particular defenses.
Always remember this: Spells are cheap. True resurrection is expensive.
I blew a bunch of spells, which cost me nothing and which I got back the next day. In return, our party avoided one or more character deaths, which would have cost us something to fix.
Also, it says something about not being a one-trick pony; a caster who can both control the battlefield and inflict direct damage will have much better success than one who can only do one or the other.