Haste, Summon Monster X, and magic weapon/greater magic weapon anyway, which are the world-beater spells in a setting with very few magic items.
So the mage summons a fighter to fight the fighter? Or he prays that your saves suck and you don't roll good high.
Save or die...OR. Or = boned wizard.
We're assuming a mage in the context of an adventuring party here in a very low magic world. The fighter's DPS is only 60% of what it is in an ordinary setting, which makes the summon monster type spells proportionately more valuable (and they're PLENTY valuable even in a vanilla RAW setting). Magic weapon/GMW are also exceptionally valuable in such settings, to give to your DPR-starved melees so they can credibly delude themselves that they're not gimped by the decision to not hand out magic items vs a wizard. Haste, well, haste has always been the best 3rd level spell for wizards and sorcerors. Save or die or save or suck vs non-monster types is almost a wash, because the bonus you don't get for a hat is comparable to the bonus he doesn't get for a cloak at this level. But here's my take in general as regards magic users:
In a party? So if the wizard is so powerful, what is the party for?
Ok, so your wizard cast summon monster. Mr. Fishy rolls acrobatics to tumble pass and stab the wizard. Summon monster does not force attacks on the summoned monster. If the party focus fires on the wizard he's in trouble. Save or die and summon monster is a blade with two edges. Anything you can do Mr. Fishy can do.
Mr. Fishy does have to outwit your wizard he just has to outwit you.
I removed a post. I feel like I've been saying this a lot lately, but let's not make things personal.
Please feel free to make the post again with a less confrontational tone.
Mirror Image and Displacement means you don't need AC.
That's the thing. Wizards don't need AC. They don't just have other ways of defending themselves, they have better ways. A flying invisible mirror imaged wizard is going to be hit far less then a fighter decked out in magical gear regardless of the AC difference.
Damage is binary. It doesn't matter how much damage you deal to someone as long as they have 1 HP left. You either have HP or you don't - the difference between a wizard with 30 HP and a wizard with 1 HP is nothing. That's why reflex is generally ignored.
Fortitude and Will on the other hand are the two big ones. They're also the two that fighters lack.
The other problem is in summoned monsters. Summoned monsters don't need magic items.
In fact, that's the biggest issue with a low magic item world compared to a low magic world. The druid's animal companion, the cleric, and the wizard's summoned monsters are bar none better at fighting then the fighter without those magic items. That's not even touching APG classes like the Summoner. That is, incidentally, also what a wizard would be doing in such a world - not casting fireball, and not using Save or Die, but mixing battlefield control with summoned monsters. It's what he'd probably be doing anyways, but in this type of setting, it's a hundred times more effective.
I read it. I am completely ignoring everything Sissyl says, but in response to you:
Why would the Wizard only have a 15 in his primary stat? Or anyone, really. Be serious here. If you conveniently forget he can just say screw the rules, I have craft feats the difference is between 26 and 22.
Either 22 or 26 Int is more than sufficient to realize that pewpewpew is a waste of time. He throws win spells instead. The DCs on his throwaway spells, even assuming he can't just laugh and have his items anyways are high enough that Mr. Mook, with his whopping 3 + Wisdom Will saves is going to get zapped at least 3 times in 4. It's beyond trivial to do. It's not just the Fighter that has bad saves though. Every non caster does. Win init, throw win spell, win. Cue victory music.
This might be a stupid question but why are you assuming the wizard has a 22 or even 26 Intelligence in a low magic world but not assuming the fighter would have high stats too?
The wizard cannot say "screw the rules" no matter how much you want to pretend he can. He is limited in how many spells he can cast per day and he has diminishing returns with his spells. If we assume an 18 Intelligence (more than reasonable without stat boosting items and still having other decent stats) then he has only a few bonus spells. He won't have every possible option available, contrary to what people want to pretend. More likely he will have a variety of spells prepared, some defensive, some offensive, and some utility. Even if he is using his craft scroll feat, he is still going to have a limit on what he can be doing. He cannot be prepared for every possibility.
I read it. I am completely ignoring everything Sissyl says, but in response to you:
Why would the Wizard only have a 15 in his primary stat? Or anyone, really. Be serious here. If you conveniently forget he can just say screw the rules, I have craft feats the difference is between 26 and 22.
Either 22 or 26 Int is more than sufficient to realize that pewpewpew is a waste of time. He throws win spells instead. The DCs on his throwaway spells, even assuming he can't just laugh and have his items anyways are high enough that Mr. Mook, with his whopping 3 + Wisdom Will saves is going to get zapped at least 3 times in 4. It's beyond trivial to do. It's not just the Fighter that has bad saves though. Every non caster does. Win init, throw win spell, win. Cue victory music.
This might be a stupid question but why are you assuming the wizard has a 22 or even 26 Intelligence in a low magic world but not assuming the fighter would have high stats too?
The wizard cannot say "screw the rules" no matter how much you want to pretend he can. He is limited in how many spells he can cast per day and he has diminishing returns with his spells. If we assume an 18 Intelligence (more than reasonable without stat boosting items and still having other decent stats) then he has only a few bonus spells. He won't have every possible option available, contrary to what people want to pretend. More likely he will have a variety of spells prepared, some defensive, some offensive, and some utility. Even if he is using his craft scroll feat, he is still going to have a limit on what he can be doing. He cannot be prepared for every possibility.
The wizard can buff himself up.
15 base +5(level ups)+4 spells =24Most people will start off higher than a 15 though.
Edit:He does not have to prepare for every possibility. He has party members. A smart wizard only casts when needed so casting every round wont really be an issue, and if he goes specialist he will have extra spells to cast.
The wizard can buff himself up.
15 base +5(level ups)+4 spells =24
Most people will start off higher than a 15 though.Edit:He does not have to prepare for every possibility. He has party members. A smart wizard only casts when needed so casting every round wont really be an issue, and if he goes specialist he will have...
To make sure I understand, the wizard can use one of his 2nd level spells to buff himself and that will make him be able to cast more spells (that was part of my argument)? Also, why is the wizard assumed to be in a party but the fighter isn't? Why buff the wizard's Intelligence when buffing the fighter is also a good idea, and may be a better choice sometimes?
A smart wizard still only has X number of spells per day. Even as a specialist, he still has the problem of diminishing returns with his limited spell selection/preparation.
As for starting off with higher than a 15 Intelligence, how are you going to address high Constitution and probably Dexterity too? Keep in mind that I am coming from a 15 point buy since that is what the book recommends. You can only do so much.
Keep in mind that I am coming from a 15 point buy since that is what the book recommends. You can only do so much.
FWIW, the lower the point buy you're using, the better the wizard looks compared to most other classes.
Even in 10 point buy, a wizard can scrape a 20 int (after racial mods) and, to be optimized, should -- he only really needs one stat.
20 str two-handed-weapon power melee guy is about the best you can do for a single-attribute-screw-everything-else non-caster character, and even that guy (if point buy is low enough) would probably be smarter to have, say, 18 str and put the savings in con/dex. On the other end of the scale, something like two-weapon fighter is really only even possible in a fairly high point buy, because it desperately needs both a very high strength and a very high dexterity.
The wizard can buff himself up.
15 base +5(level ups)+4 spells =24
Most people will start off higher than a 15 though.Edit:He does not have to prepare for every possibility. He has party members. A smart wizard only casts when needed so casting every round wont really be an issue, and if he goes specialist he will have...
To make sure I understand, the wizard can use one of his 2nd level spells to buff himself and that will make him be able to cast more spells (that was part of my argument)? Also, why is the wizard assumed to be in a party but the fighter isn't? Why buff the wizard's Intelligence when buffing the fighter is also a good idea, and may be a better choice sometimes?
A smart wizard still only has X number of spells per day. Even as a specialist, he still has the problem of diminishing returns with his limited spell selection/preparation.
As for starting off with higher than a 15 Intelligence, how are you going to address high Constitution and probably Dexterity too? Keep in mind that I am coming from a 15 point buy since that is what the book recommends. You can only do so much.
Oops, I misunderstood your argument. I thought you were just asking how a wizard could get attributes that high. Sorry about that, so scratch that self-buff from the record.
As for the limited spells a wizard is not casting spells all the time, only when it is convenient. Having enough spells to last the day is not an issue.
Human wizard
str 8 (-2)
dex 10 (0)
con 12 (2)
int 16 (10) Human racial bonus +2 +5(level ups) =23
wis 14 (5)
Cha 10 (0)
I would take toughness to get an extra hit point per level
Why are you assuming diminishing returns? The top two spells levels are normally very useful, and once get to the higher level even some of the lower level ones remain useful.
|
FWIW, I played a wizard in one campaign in which the two free spells per level comprised almost all of my spellbook.
And you know? Not that bad. I'd even go so far as to say, still better than sorcerer.
Let's compare. We'll assume that both the wizard and the sorcerer start with an 18 in intelligence and charisma, respectively, and that they put all of their ability score increases due to level into that ability. We'll also just look at the baseline sorcerer and the baseline univeralist wizard.
At 20th level, the sorcerer will know 43 spells (9 x cantrips, 5 x 1st, 5 x 2nd, 4 x 3rd, 4 x 4th, 4 x 5th, 3 x 6th, 3 x 7th, 3 x 8th, and 3 x 9th). The wizard will know 49 spells (4 x cantrips, 5 x 1st, 4 x 2nd, 4 x 3rd, 4 x 4th, 4 x 5th, 4 x 6th, 4 x 7th, 4 x 8th, and 8 x 9th).
The wizard knows one more spell each for 6th, 7th, and 8th level. The wizard's big advantage is only seen in 9th level spells, where he knows 5 more than the sorcerer.
However, this is counter-balanced by the number of spells he can actually cast per day. The sorcerer can cast 2 more spells of each level per day. She can cast a total of 62 spells per day (discounting cantrips) as opposed to the wizard's 44. The wizard has more big guns (level 6+ spells). However, he has less ammo for all his weapons across the board.
Also, the wizard commits himself to particular spells when he studies in the morning. The sorcerer has the flexibility to choose from any of the spells she knows.
EDIT: Almost forgot the bloodline spells. So that narrows the gap even more. Basically it's only 9th level spells where the wizard knows more. And, as I noted before, he might have more big guns, but he also has less ammo to use in them.
FWIW, I played a wizard in one campaign in which the two free spells per level comprised almost all of my spellbook.
And you know? Not that bad. I'd even go so far as to say, still better than sorcerer.
Let's compare. We'll assume that both the wizard and the sorcerer start with an 18 in intelligence and charisma, respectively, and that they put all of their ability score increases due to level into that ability. We'll also just look at the baseline sorcerer and the baseline univeralist wizard.
At 20th level, the sorcerer will know 43 spells (9 x cantrips, 5 x 1st, 5 x 2nd, 4 x 3rd, 4 x 4th, 4 x 5th, 3 x 6th, 3 x 7th, 3 x 8th, and 3 x 9th). The wizard will know 49 spells (4 x cantrips, 5 x 1st, 4 x 2nd, 4 x 3rd, 4 x 4th, 4 x 5th, 4 x 6th, 4 x 7th, 4 x 8th, and 8 x 9th).
The wizard knows one more spell each for 6th, 7th, and 8th level. The wizard's big advantage is only seen in 9th level spells, where he knows 5 more than the sorcerer.
However, this is counter-balanced by the number of spells he can actually cast per day. The sorcerer can cast 2 more spells of each level per day. She can cast a total of 62 spells per day (discounting cantrips) as opposed to the wizard's 44. The wizard has more big guns (level 6+ spells). However, he has less ammo for all his weapons across the board.
Also, the wizard commits himself to particular spells when he studies in the morning. The sorcerer has the flexibility to choose from any of the spells she knows.
EDIT: Almost forgot the bloodline spells. So that narrows the gap even more. Basically it's only 9th level spells where the wizard knows more. And, as I noted before, he might have more big guns, but he also has less ammo to use in them.
The wizard should never need 44 spells, unless he feels the need to cast for the sake of casting. Once I got to about level 5 as a sorc or wizard I stopped worrying about running out of spells. Barring a marathon running out of spells is a non issue, and if there is a marathon run it should not be in a low magic campaign. Basically running out of spells in the average game is a non issue. Honestly being able to handle 3 regular fights, and then the boss fight should be the only way useful spells get used up, and a good portion of those go towards the boss fight. Most players normally know when a long day is coming. You recruit(charm/dominate) some bad guys and use them as meat shield until they die. This removes enemy from fight number one, and helps get rid of the ones in fight number too. If the player runs out of spells it is normally more of a player issue than a caster issue. If the specialist wizard is used, which is better for impatient types, the difference in castings per day, just got smaller.
|
|
The wizard should never need 44 spells, unless he feels the need to cast for the sake of casting. Once I got to about level 5 as a sorc or wizard I stopped worrying about running out of spells. Barring a marathon running out of spells is a non issue, and if there is a marathon run it should not be in a low magic campaign. Basically running out of spells in the average game is a non issue. Honestly being able to handle 3 regular fights, and then the boss fight should be the only way useful spells get used up, and a good portion of those go towards the boss fight. Most players normally know when a long day is coming. You recruit(charm/dominate) some bad guys and use them as meat shield until they die. This removes enemy from fight number one, and helps get rid of the ones in fight number too. If the player runs out of spells it is normally more of a player issue than a caster issue. If the specialist wizard is used, which is better for impatient types, the difference in castings per day, just got smaller.
Ah, but I wasn't really saying that they WOULD cast all those spells. I'm simply responding to the opnion that seems so prevalant here that the wizard is so many orders of magnitude more powerful than the sorcerer. I find them very well balanced, and I personally think that the flexibility of spontaneous casting gives the sorcerer a slight edge. And in a low-magic campaign like that I described, I think the sorcerer comes out well ahead of the wizard.
I've also never been a huge fan of the "four encounters and quit" mentality. I think the plot should dictate how many encounters there are, not some number some developer thought would be fair. If it makes sense for there to only be one encounter in a given day, there should only be one. If it makes sense for there to be ten or twelve, then that's how many there should be.
The wizard should never need 44 spells, unless he feels the need to cast for the sake of casting. Once I got to about level 5 as a sorc or wizard I stopped worrying about running out of spells. Barring a marathon running out of spells is a non issue, and if there is a marathon run it should not be in a low magic campaign. Basically running out of spells in the average game is a non issue. Honestly being able to handle 3 regular fights, and then the boss fight should be the only way useful spells get used up, and a good portion of those go towards the boss fight. Most players normally know when a long day is coming. You recruit(charm/dominate) some bad guys and use them as meat shield until they die. This removes enemy from fight number one, and helps get rid of the ones in fight number too. If the player runs out of spells it is normally more of a player issue than a caster issue. If the specialist wizard is used, which is better for impatient types, the difference in castings per day, just got smaller.Ah, but I wasn't really saying that they WOULD cast all those spells. I'm simply responding to the opnion that seems so prevalant here that the wizard is so many orders of magnitude more powerful than the sorcerer. I find them very well balanced, and I personally think that the flexibility of spontaneous casting gives the sorcerer a slight edge. And in a low-magic campaign like that I described, I think the sorcerer comes out well ahead of the wizard.
I've also never been a huge fan of the "four encounters and quit" mentality. I think the plot should dictate how many encounters there are, not some number some developer thought would be fair. If it makes sense for there to only be one encounter in a given day, there should only be one. If it makes sense for there to be ten or twelve, then that's how many there should be.
I do think the wizard is better even though I prefer sorcerers, but I would not say magnitudes better, not in an actual game anyway. I don't think anyone runs four encounters and goes to sleep. I just use that because it was what the game was designed on. If you person A will try to use 2 encounters to prove his point, and person B will try to stretch it out to 10 to say he is right. There have been tough fights where I went 3 and out, and times I did take on double digit encounters as a player.
So now we have a 15 int wizard with all the stat increases in intelligence, who can not craft stat boost items (since they do not exist), who only has a 12 con, compared to the 18 con and 26 int monster from earlier in Mistah Green's discussion. This wizard, at lvl 10, supposedly still uses lvl 2 spells to utterly destroy lvl 10 fighters who are at melee range, using his "win spells", and the fighter only exists to better the wizard. However, the wizard still can't fight for more than 4 battles a day.
So what would happen after eight or ten battles? With people who use ranged attacks on the wizard, and specifically target him to avoid his "win spells"? Well, let's ask the fighter what he thinks:
"Well, we tried to protect the poor little wizard, but you know, he can't take much punishment, so we have had to raise him three times today so far. Also, he's not a fighter, he can't dish it out after just four battles, claiming he was "out of spells". As much as we have tried to support him, we're seriously thinking of asking him to leave. He just doesn't pull his own weight. "Out of spells", can you believe the nerve of some people?"
"There are rumours that wizards are actually far superior to fighters. What are your comments on this?"
"Far... superior... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!! Oooh, look, I can summon a fiendish octopus, FEAR MY POWER!!!"
"Thank you, fighter."
So now we have a 15 int wizard with all the stat increases in intelligence, who can not craft stat boost items (since they do not exist), who only has a 12 con, compared to the 18 con and 26 int monster from earlier in Mistah Green's discussion. This wizard, at lvl 10, supposedly still uses lvl 2 spells to utterly destroy lvl 10 fighters who are at melee range, using his "win spells", and the fighter only exists to better the wizard. However, the wizard still can't fight for more than 4 battles a day.
So what would happen after eight or ten battles? With people who use ranged attacks on the wizard, and specifically target him to avoid his "win spells"? Well, let's ask the fighter what he thinks:
"Well, we tried to protect the poor little wizard, but you know, he can't take much punishment, so we have had to raise him three times today so far. Also, he's not a fighter, he can't dish it out after just four battles, claiming he was "out of spells". As much as we have tried to support him, we're seriously thinking of asking him to leave. He just doesn't pull his own weight. "Out of spells", can you believe the nerve of some people?"
"There are rumours that wizards are actually far superior to fighters. What are your comments on this?"
"Far... superior... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!! Oooh, look, I can summon a fiendish octopus, FEAR MY POWER!!!"
"Thank you, fighter."
LoL. I understand you and MR.Green did not get along, but I would like to resume a real debate now. Well actually I am about to go to bed, but we can resume this tomorrow. Hopefully we get along better than you and Mr.Green. I can tell how I expect to live with my 12 con(for as long as possible anyway assuming the DM does not adjust CR's, to match the no magic item world he has created). Honestly both classes are in trouble, but at higher levels the wizard's(insert other caster as needed) survival rate goes up while the fighter's goes down.
My entire campaign takes place in an Anti-magic shell and every monster there instinctively and automatically kills all wizards the second they see them, so you see wizards are really the weakest class in all of 3.5.
QED :smug:
Mirror Image and Displacement means you don't need AC.
That's the thing. Wizards don't need AC. They don't just have other ways of defending themselves, they have better ways. A flying invisible mirror imaged wizard is going to be hit far less then a fighter decked out in magical gear regardless of the AC difference.
Terrain and other features can damatically alter the "unneeded AC". You cannot fly high in cave. A nalfeshnee does not care of your mirror image. The higher level you go, the more is likely you find monster able to have both high mobility and dispelling attacks.
Don't assume spells like "I win" buttons because they are not. At least, not always.
Nevertheless, I agree with you about the magic items and the effect of the various classes. +1 to that.
However, this is counter-balanced by the number of spells he can actually cast per day. The sorcerer can cast 2 more spells of each level per day.
It looks like that at first blush, but, no:
1) Arcane Bond
2) Specialization
3) The wizard, half the time, is a spell level ahead.
Take a pair of level 5 casters for example; I'll assume neither has a casting stat bonus to keep it simple although the more likely case would be that both would have an equally high bonus. I'll also assume the Bonded Object spell is the highest level the wizard can cast even though it doesn't necessarily have to be.
Wizard:
4 1st, 3 2nd, 3 3rd.
Sorcerer:
6 1st, 4 2nd.
So the sorcerer is 2 1sts and a 2nd ahead, and the wizard is 3 3rd's ahead. They cast an equal number of spells per day, but the wizard's spells are higher level.
Edited to add: Actually, using real casting stats makes this even worse for the sorcerer, because the wizard can get a bonus 3rd level spell and the sorcerer can't.
I don't think sorcerer is an order of magnitude weaker than the wizard, but I think it is clearly a little weaker.
As for the limited spells a wizard is not casting spells all the time, only when it is convenient. Having enough spells to last the day is not an issue.
Human wizard
str 8 (-2)
dex 10 (0)
con 12 (2)
int 16 (10) Human racial bonus +2 +5(level ups) =23
wis 14 (5)
Cha 10 (0)I would take toughness to get an extra hit point per level
Why are you assuming diminishing returns? The top two spells levels are normally very useful, and once get to the higher level even some of the lower level ones remain useful.
This wizard is in for trouble against Reflex and Fortitude saves. He will also have a hard time with AC at this point too. Even using spells like mirror image and displacement are only going to be so useful if the enemy is using area effect spells. Since the basic assumption in these arguments (not one you have made but others have and will again) is that the monsters will ignore the fighter to attack the wizard, this is not good.
As for diminishing returns, the DCs for this wizard's spells (barring feats) are 16+ Spell level. Looking at the CR 16 creatures in the Bestiary shows that you are only going to be using your higher level spells because the saves are very good. Your wizard's spells have about a 50% chance of success with the 8th and 9th level spells. It gets worse as the spells get lower or the creatures get more powerful.
This might be a stupid question but why are you assuming the wizard has a 22 or even 26 Intelligence in a low magic world but not assuming the fighter would have high stats too?Answer: I am assuming the Fighter will have 22 str. Someone else is bringing the gimpy 19s into it, and you're bringing the gimpy 18s into it.
And it's much easier to deal with enemies as a caster in a low magic world as they all have gimpy saves, and less immunities.
I thought we were discussing a low magic world. Getting a 22 is putting a lot into one stat if there are no stat boosting items available.
Also, how is an 18 more gimpy than a 19? They are both +4.
I am noticing how your argument is working though. You are making the assumption that the world is low magic for everyone except the wizard. That's why the wizard is so powerful. If you make it low magic for everyone, the wizard will have as difficult a time as anyone else. You are not giving equal footing to both classes in your argument.
As for gimpy saves, I'm not so sure about that. Take a look at the CR 15+ creatures in the Bestiary (I'll post them so we know exactly what we are working with). Since these discussions are putting the wizard at high level, let's look at that. Note that your wizard's DC are, assuming the 22 Intelligence, 16+Spell Level. You will need your highest level spells to have about a 50% chance of success assuming you get through the spell resistances. Every fight, every round, you will be less and less useful. I highly doubt that you'd have all your spells as offense. You have 4/6/6/5/5/5/5/4/4/4 spells to work with. How many offensive spells did you prepare for the day? Even if we assume 50% of your spells are offense, that still doesn't give you nearly as much as you are assuming. The wizard is not going to be casting "win" spells all the time.
====
CR 15 (6 of these is EL 20):
Gold Dragon, Adult: AC 30, touch 8, flat-footed 30 (+22 natural, –2 size); hp 225 (18d12+108); Fort +17, Ref +11, Will +18; DR 5/magic; Immune fire, paralysis, sleep; SR 26; Weaknesses vulnerability to cold
Neolithid: AC 30, touch 4, flat-footed 30 (–2 Dex, +26 natural, –4 size); hp 230 (20d8+140); Fort +15, Ref +4, Will +16; DR 10/cold iron; SR 26
Pheonix: AC 28, touch 14, flat-footed 20 (+7 Dex, +1 dodge, +14 natural, –4 size); hp 210 (20d10+100); regeneration 10 (cold or evil); Fort +17, Ref +19, Will +14; Defensive Abilities self-resurrection; DR 15/evil; Immune fire SR 26; Weaknesses vulnerable to cold
White Dragon, Ancient: AC 37, touch 8, flat-footed 37 (+29 natural, –2 size); hp 283 (21d12+147); Fort +19, Ref +14, Will +16; DR 15/magic; Immune cold, paralysis, sleep; SR 26; Weaknesses vulnerability to fire
====
CR 16 (4 of these is EL 20):
Black Dragon, Ancient: AC 38, touch 8, flat-footed 38 (+30 natural, –2 size); hp 297 (22d12+154); Fort +20, Ref +13, Will +18; DR 15/magic; Immune acid, paralysis, sleep, SR 27
Brass Dragon, Ancient: AC 38, touch 8, flat-footed 38; (+30 natural, –2 size); hp 297 (22d12+154); Fort +20, Ref +13, Will +18; DR 15/magic; Immune fire, paralysis, sleep; SR 27; Weaknesses vulnerability to cold
Devil, Horned: AC 35, touch 17, flat-footed 27 (+8 Dex, +18 natural, –1 size); hp 217 (15d10+135); regeneration 5 (good weapons, good spells); Fort +18, Ref +17, Will +13; DR 10/good and silver; Immune fire, poison; Resist acid 10, cold 10; SR 27
Angel, Planetar: AC 32, touch 13, flat-footed 28 (+4 Dex, +19 natural, –1 size; +4 deflection vs. evil); hp 229 (17d10+136); regeneration 10 (evil weapons and effects); Fort +19, Ref +11, Will +19; +4 vs. poison, +4 resistance vs. evil; DR 10/evil; Immune acid, cold, petrification; Resist electricity 10, fire 10; SR 27
====
CR 17 (3 is EL 20):
Copper Dragon, Ancient: AC 39, touch 8, flat-footed 39 (+31 natural, –2 size); hp 310 (23d12+161); Fort +20, Ref +13, Will +19; Defensive Abilities uncanny dodge; DR 15/magic; Immune acid, paralysis, sleep; SR 28
Green Dragon, Ancient: AC 36, touch 5, flat-footed 36 (–1 Dex, +31 natural, –4 size); hp 310 (23d12+161); Fort +20, Ref +12, Will +20; DR 15/magic; Immune acid, paralysis, sleep; SR 28
Ice Linorm: AC 32, touch 8, flat-footed 26 (+6 Dex, +24 natural, –8 size); hp 279 (18d12+162); regeneration 10 (cold iron); Fort +20, Ref +19, Will +16; Defensive Abilities freedom of movement; DR 15/cold iron; Immune cold, curse effects, mind-affecting effects, paralysis, poison, sleep; SR 28
Demon, Marilith: AC 32, touch 17, flat-footed 28 (+4 deflection, +4 Dex, +15 natural, –1 size); hp 264 (16d10+176); Fort +25, Ref +18, Will +13; DR 10/cold iron and good; Immune electricity and poison; Resist acid 10, cold 10, fire 10; SR 28
====
CR 18 (2 are EL 20):
Blue Dragon, Ancient: AC 37, touch 5, flat-footed 37 (–1 Dex, +32 natural, –4 size); hp 324 (24d12+168); Fort +21, Ref +13, Will +19; DR 15/magic; Immune electricity, paralysis, sleep; SR 29
Bronze Dragon, Ancient: AC 37, touch 5, flat-footed 37; (–1 Dex, +32 natural, –4 size); hp 324 (24d12+168); Fort +21, Ref +13, Will +21; DR 15/magic; Immune electricity, paralysis, sleep; SR 29
Kraken: AC 32, touch 6, flat-footed 32 (+26 natural, –4 size); hp 290 (20d10+180); Fort +21, Ref +12, Will +11; Immune cold, mind-affecting effects, poison
====
CR 19:
Red Dragon, Ancient: AC 38, touch 5, flat-footed 38 (–1 Dex, +33 natural, –4 size); hp 362 (25d12+200); Fort +22, Ref +13, Will +21; DR 15/magic; Immune fire, paralysis, sleep; SR 30; Weaknesses vulnerability to cold
Shoggoth: AC 33, touch 15, flat-footed 26 (+7 Dex, +18 natural, –2 size); hp 333 (23d8+230); fast healing 10; Fort +19, Ref +14, Will +15; DR 10/—; Immune blindness, charm effects, cold, deafness, ooze traits, sonic; Resist acid 20, electricity 20, fire 20; SR 30
Silver Dragon, Ancient: AC 38, touch 5, flat-footed 38; (–1 Dex, +33 natural, –4 size); hp 337 (25d12+175); Fort +21, Ref +15, Will +23; Defensive Abilities reflective scales; DR 15/magic; Immune acid, cold, paralysis, sleep; SR 30; Weaknesses vulnerability to fire
====
CR 20:
Demon, Balor: AC 36, touch 20, flat-footed 29 (+4 deflection, +7 Dex, +16 natural, –1 size); hp 370 (20d10+260); Fort +29, Ref +17, Will +25; DR 15/cold iron and good; Immune electricity, fire, poison; Resist acid 10, cold 10; SR 31
Gold Dragon, Ancient: AC 39, touch 5, flat-footed 39 (–1 Dex, +34 natural, –4 size); hp 377 (26d12+208); Fort +23, Ref +14, Will +24; DR 15/magic; Immune fire, paralysis, sleep; SR 31; Weaknesses vulnerability to cold
Devil, Pit Fiend: AC 38, touch 18, flat-footed 29 (+9 Dex, +20 natural, –1 size); hp 350 (20d10+240); regeneration 5 (good weapons, good spells); Fort +24, Ref +21, Will +18; DR 15/good and silver; Immune fire, poison; Resist acid 10, cold 10; SR 31
Tarn Linorm: AC 36, touch 10, flat-footed 28 (+8 Dex, +26 natural, –8 size); hp 385 (22d12+242); regeneration 15 (cold iron); Fort +24, Ref +23, Will +20; Defensive Abilities freedom of movement; DR 20/cold iron; Immune acid, curse effects, flanking mind-affecting effects, paralysis, poison, sleep; SR 31
Now if only outsiders were better than weak to average at melee, the fact they have True Seeing to bypass the real defenses might be a concern! But alas, they are not. Even optimized they still aren't great at it. Been there, done that.
Outsiders are not good at melee?
What's an example of monster good at melee?
18 base 2 racial 2 levels. Same as it would normally.
Also, how is an 18 more gimpy than a 19? They are both +4.
Who said it was?
You implied it. An 18 starting stat and then bonuses is a hell of an investment and not one that I think a well rounded character would have. The game assumes a 15 point buy. With an 18 to start, your stats are just getting silly. 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 18. If you want to increase any of them to at least a 12, you now have two 8's. I just don't see this as a realistic character. What if the character was built with a more reasonable stat array? The elite array is pretty reasonable (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).
At 20 point buy you could have 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 18. I still don't see that as a reasonable character. To me a reasonable character is better rounded than that. A reasonable 20 point buy character would be closer to 10, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16.
Well no, the class who has innate magic will not be screwed in the same way. There's also two different discussions going on. One about level 10, which is what I'm actually talking about and another at 20. The 20 guy will have a much higher number, even not counting enhancement bonuses.
Sorry, my bad. If we go with level 10 though, then I think your argument holds less, not more water.
The gimpy saves comments are in regards to the Fighter and the Wizard, not monsters. I'm also still talking about level 10, not 15+. So I'm not going to go on about some side tangent regarding a scare crow with a shirt labeled Wizard.
I don't see the fighter's saves as any more gimpy than anyone else's. Shouldn't we compare how the characters will do against opponents instead of themselves? I think that would have a lot more meaning.
I ask it again: what's an example of a monster good in melee instead.
Moreover, a Nalfeshnee could UMD a glitterdust and other monsters would then attack the wizard in melee. The nalfeshnee could grapple the wizard.
And then you could say that the wizard could have freedom of movements and I could answer that it could be dispelled and then a long discussion about which one of the two could teleport and where..
IMHO you put it too simple.
LoL. I understand you and MR.Green did not get along, but I would like to resume a real debate now. Well actually I am about to go to bed, but we can resume this tomorrow. Hopefully we get along better than you and Mr.Green. I can tell how I expect to live with my 12 con(for as long as possible anyway assuming the DM does not adjust CR's, to match the no magic item world he has created). Honestly both classes are in trouble, but at higher levels the wizard's(insert other caster as needed) survival rate goes up while the fighter's goes down.Remind me again why you're only taking a 12 Con and 16 Int? Because all deliberately gimping yourself is doing is cementing certain delusions. You know which ones.
I was limited to a 15 point buy according to one of the other posters
Keep in mind that I am coming from a 15 point buy since that is what the book recommends. You can only do so much.
Now I think a DM that takes away magic items, and gives you a 15 point buy without adjusting encounters is out to kill the party or has no idea what they are doing, but since I only have to post stats here, and not do a build I don't mind playing along.
PS:I was not saying Bob plans to do that, but I am under the understanding that we are comparing the wizard and fighter to each other without the use of magic items in an otherwise standard game.
As for the limited spells a wizard is not casting spells all the time, only when it is convenient. Having enough spells to last the day is not an issue.
Human wizard
str 8 (-2)
dex 10 (0)
con 12 (2)
int 16 (10) Human racial bonus +2 +5(level ups) =23
wis 14 (5)
Cha 10 (0)I would take toughness to get an extra hit point per level
Why are you assuming diminishing returns? The top two spells levels are normally very useful, and once get to the higher level even some of the lower level ones remain useful.
This wizard is in for trouble against Reflex and Fortitude saves. He will also have a hard time with AC at this point too. Even using spells like mirror image and displacement are only going to be so useful if the enemy is using area effect spells. Since the basic assumption in these arguments (not one you have made but others have and will again) is that the monsters will ignore the fighter to attack the wizard, this is not good.
As for diminishing returns, the DCs for this wizard's spells (barring feats) are 16+ Spell level. Looking at the CR 16 creatures in the Bestiary shows that you are only going to be using your higher level spells because the saves are very good. Your wizard's spells have about a 50% chance of success with the 8th and 9th level spells. It gets worse as the spells get lower or the creatures get more powerful.
If I was playing a game without stat boosters I don't know if my DC's would be hard to get past so save based spells would not see a lot of use from me anyway. Actually I don't use a lot of them now, and I can get magic items. Those that focus on SoD or SoS spells may be more affected though so I can't really speak for that.
Now if only outsiders were better than weak to average at melee, the fact they have True Seeing to bypass the real defenses might be a concern! But alas, they are not. Even optimized they still aren't great at it. Been there, done that.Outsiders are not good at melee?
What's an example of monster good at melee?
Outsiders have about 1 BAB per CR, and Str, and that's about it. This makes them weak to average. In order to be good at melee you need many other bonuses.
Bonuses they don't get, and can't get enough of even with optimization. I distinctly recall fighting a bunch of buffed up outsiders in one campaign. Due to some significant optimization they had about +15 more to hit than they normally do... but were still trivial as that's only +35, and this was a CR 16 foe. Also, 20-30 damage an attack, with optimization is nothing special. Obviously this enemy would be significantly weaker run straight out of the MM. And Mariliths are one of the better outsiders for meleeing, using another as an example would yield worse results.
The real point though is that the things that are actually good at melee don't have constant True Seeing to negate the real defenses. The weak and average ones sometimes do, but because they're only weak to average this is not a problem.
I think I see the problem. Your style of game doesn't match the basic assumptions.
I was looking at the Horned Devil, a CR 16 outsider. It's actually pretty good at melee. It has 5 attacks per round plus stun and infernal wound (2d6 bleed per round DC 26 Heal to stop). It's attacks may not seem potent at first, but with each three dealing 2d6+11, one at 2d8+5, and one at 2d6+5, plus potential power attack adding another +9 to the first three attacks and +6 to the other two, the poor soul is looking at a possible 8d6+2d8+82 damage, I don't think he's bad in melee.
To make it more fun, he also has some direct damage spells that your 10 Dex wizard needs to roll on well on to avoid 10d6 damage.
I just don't see what you are talking about. At level 20, you should be able to fight 4 of them but I honestly think they will put up one heck of a fight. Remember that they can bring in barbed devils as well (most likely 3-6 of them). That would certainly have an impact on the battle as well.
In my games, I know my players would be very concerned. 7-10 opponents that are smart enough to use effective tactics against them would be terrifying.
Mr.Green those monsters work against average groups. Now when people start optimizing they(the monsters) get weaker and weaker by comparison. I think the issue is you want the monsters to challenge an optimized party, but many parties would get smashed. If the DM is going to cater to a hi-power campaign, which I know is only normal to you, then he will have to buff the monsters to make them relevant.
I have DM'd very good players, and not so good/ok players, and the gulf between them is immense.
Not aimed at Mr.Green: I think that without magic items in such a game the party will die, but as I said before as the party's level goes up the wizard(insert caster as needed) gets better at surviving while the fighter does not.
As for the true sight thing, some monsters do have it, but not all high level monsters have it, and true sight has a limit of 60 feet IIRC. As long as the caster stays out of range he should still survive the encounter. I do know that rooms may not make this an option.
15 PB gives you 7/10/16/18/7/7. Your only loss is -2 Will saves. The Fighter on 15 PB, and low magic? Don't make me laugh. If you can't assume that no one is deliberately making a gimp toon, there is nothing to discuss.
If you come into my game with a character like that and I will tell you to make a new character. Three 7's is certainly not acceptable at my table. It's BS and clearly smacks of trying to "win the game."
As for level 10, it's true that low magic non casters will suffer less at 10 than at 20. I'm sticking with 10 because it illustrates the problem happens much sooner, and that they aren't living anywhere near level 20 without dying enough times to give an I Wanna Be the Guy player pause. As such if we compare against opponents it goes like this:
Wizard throws win spells, and still wins.
Fighter herp derps for 10 damage. Enemy regards him contemptuously before splatting him. Oops.
I don't believe you on the fighter. Here is a quick, non-magical, reasonable level 10 fighter that is actually incomplete. He has no race, and therefore no racial bonuses. He still has some feats to choose and skills to work with.
Fighter Level 10
Str: 16
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wis: 12
Cha: 8
Will: +4
AC (Masterwork Platemail/Heavy Steel Shield): 21/25
HP: 85
CMB: +19
CMD: 15
To Hit (Power Attack calculated for all attacks): +15
Damage (Masterwork longsword 1-handed): 2d8 + 13 (ave 22)
Damage (Masterwork longsword 2-handed): 2d8 + 16 (ave 25)
Damage (Masterwork composite longbow +3): 2d8 + 4 (ave 13)
Weapon Mastery: Heavy blades, Bows
Feats: Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Weapon Specialization, Shield Focus, Toughness, Greater Weapon Focus, Vital Strike, Greater Shield Focus, Any 3
Opponents:
CR -3 to CR +3
To Hit (Min/Max): +8/+27
Damage (Min/Max): 1d4+1 (3.5)/4d8+22(40)
CMB (Min/Mean/Max): -6/18/32
CMD (Min/Mean/Max): 6/30/49
AC (Min/Mean/Max): 3/22/32
Hit Points (Min/Mean/Max): 52/105/202
I just don't agree with you at all on this. The fighter is not gimped anymore than any other character. Your arguments are meaningless if all you've got is "the wizard throws win spells" but don't actually back that up with a reasonable build or spell list.
I think I see the problem. Your style of game doesn't match the basic assumptions.No, there were two separate points there. One that they were weak to average at melee by default. As in as written. Another that even with optimization they still weren't good at it despite the massive buffs optimization gives. In other words, so far below par even massive buffs don't help.
I was looking at the Horned Devil, a CR 16 outsider. It's actually pretty good at melee. It has 5 attacks per round plus stun and infernal wound (2d6 bleed per round DC 26 Heal to stop). It's attacks may not seem potent at first, but with each three dealing 2d6+11, one at 2d8+5, and one at 2d6+5, plus potential power attack adding another +9 to the first three attacks and +6 to the other two, the poor soul is looking at a possible 8d6+2d8+82 damage, I don't think he's bad in melee.And with what attack accuracy? An outsider using PA isn't going to hit the broad side of a barn. 13-23 is tickle damage. 7-21 is more so, and 7-17 more so still. This is level 16 we are talking about here, not 10.
To make it more fun, he also has some direct damage spells that your 10 Dex wizard needs to roll on well on to avoid 10d6 damage.Oh noes, 10d6 damage on a level 16 enemy! Whatever shall I do? Oh right, laugh. Just like I did 6 levels ago.
4 of them at level 20? Really? Do I even need to explain how a level 20 party annihilates things that are at a minimum 4 levels lower than themselves?I just don't see what you are talking about. At level 20, you should be able to fight 4 of them but I honestly think they will put up one heck of a fight. Remember that they can bring in barbed devils as well (most likely 3-6 of them). That would certainly have an impact on the battle as well.
In my games, I know my players would be very concerned. 7-10 opponents that are smart enough to use effective tactics against them would be terrifying.
Perhaps you should look it up and see for yourself. Don't forget that these creatures can improve their chances to hit by flanking, higher ground, charging, etc. Remember that it's 10d6 from each devil. That's more like 40d6. Even if you make your saves, that's still 20d6 damage. 70 points is quite a bit for a wizard with a 7 Con (or is it 16?). That's either going to kill your wizard or still deal with half his hit points. Next round would kill him. Don't forget that these creatures are teleporters (at will) and have 3 fireballs and 3 lightning bolts each with save DCs of 19. Your wizard either has a Reflex save of 4 or 6 but has 142 hit points or has a Reflex save of 9 with 82 hit points. He's just not going to survive without magic items. That means you have, at best, a 50% chance to take half damage. Most likely you will take 30d6 damage, which is 105 damage. You can add 20 to 40 hit points if you want to have your favored class bonus go to hit points and Toughness.
You aren't playing the game by the same assumptions it was written with. If that's how you play, that's fine. Just remember that this doesn't mean that there is a problem with the game as written.
Mr.Green those monsters work against average groups. Now when people start optimizing they(the monsters) get weaker and weaker by comparison. I think the issue is you want the monsters to challenge an optimized party, but many parties would get smashed. If the DM is going to cater to a hi-power campaign, which I know is only normal to you, then he will have to buff the monsters to make them relevant.
I have DM'd very good players, and not so good/ok players, and the gulf between them is immense.None of this is relevant as we are simply discussing the melee abilities of outsiders. Outsiders earn their CRs via save or lose spells, not auto attacks.
Edit: If you can't stick to RAW in a RAW thread, stop talking. If they didn't want people taking 7s on PB, there'd be a rule against it. Since there isn't you're free to abuse it on SAD characters. Gimp toons do not make valid arguments.
It is a perfectly valid argument. It is a BS character that has no place adventuring. I wouldn't be bothered by one 7. Three 7's is clearly trying to "win the game" and is BS. The DM is more than welcome, and encouraged, to disallow abusing the rules.
|
@ Bob Loblow
Arguing against Mistah Green will never work as he comes from a completely different perspective. He has a DM who happily indulges the groups every whim.
I want every spell in the game - Sure
I want unlimited time to craft items - Sure
I want access to every splat book written - Sure
I want opponents that act in completely expected ways - Sure
I want my charcter gimped in every stat except the ones I like - Sure
I don't want you to use my characters weakneses against me - Sure
Don't track equipment weight or I can't carry all my crafteed gear - Sure
I want all my divination spells to give me all the information I need - Sure
If I leave spell slots open, make sure I have time to put the correct spell in for any situation - Sure
When you approach a game with those assumptions, and all your gaming history is based around this, then I can see why he thinks as he does. It's a perfectly valid assumption from that type of player coddling.
Most of us have DM's or are DM's who try to make the players work for their gains, rather than create the illusion of working for their gains.
If you keep those thoughts in your mind, it's easier to deal with his over use of absurd numbers and lack of justifiable statements.
Cheers
|
@ Bob Loblow
Arguing against Mistah Green will never work as he comes from a completely different perspective. He has a DM who happily indulges the groups every whim.I want every spell in the game - Sure
I want unlimited time to craft items - Sure
I want access to every splat book written - Sure
I want opponents that act in completely expected ways - Sure
I want my charcter gimped in every stat except the ones I like - Sure
I don't want you to use my characters weakneses against me - Sure
Don't track equipment weight or I can't carry all my crafteed gear - Sure
I want all my divination spells to give me all the information I need - Sure
If I leave spell slots open, make sure I have time to put the correct spell in for any situation - SureWhen you approach a game with those assumptions, and all your gaming history is based around this, then I can see why he thinks as he does. It's a perfectly valid assumption from that type of player coddling.
Most of us have DM's or are DM's who try to make the players work for their gains, rather than create the illusion of working for their gains.
If you keep those thoughts in your mind, it's easier to deal with his over use of absurd numbers and lack of justifiable statements.
Cheers
This +1
Mr.Green those monsters work against average groups. Now when people start optimizing they(the monsters) get weaker and weaker by comparison. I think the issue is you want the monsters to challenge an optimized party, but many parties would get smashed. If the DM is going to cater to a hi-power campaign, which I know is only normal to you, then he will have to buff the monsters to make them relevant.
I have DM'd very good players, and not so good/ok players, and the gulf between them is immense.None of this is relevant as we are simply discussing the melee abilities of outsiders. Outsiders earn their CRs via save or lose spells, not auto attacks.
Edit: If you can't stick to RAW in a RAW thread, stop talking. If they didn't want people taking 7s on PB, there'd be a rule against it. Since there isn't you're free to abuse it on SAD characters. Gimp toons do not make valid arguments.
I agree with the 7 comment. It is legal by RAW. Personal bias(rules wise) should not be factor in such a debate. I know I like to attack ability scores as a DM. That is why my wizard did not drop below a 10. Some DM's are nice to their players, and would not attack a low stat, but I have no such compunctions.
Their save or lose spells don't have DC's high not to worry an optimized PC. They also struggle against optimized AC.<--Maybe this is why the idea of low magic campaigns pop up.
Back on track:If a DM threw me into a no magic(item) campaign, but the monsters kept all their goodies, there is no way I play anything but a caster. Any and everything else is owned if after a certain point.
From a social contract PoV(an example being the anti-7 argument) which is where a lot of arguments are coming from, the wizard might want to buff the fighter. From an, "I want to survive" point of view, ignoring the fighter is the best option in many cases. I don't play that way, but I do understand the relevance of it.
Summoned monsters can hit CR appropriate enemies for the party. I bring this up because it was discounted earlier. Summoning the monsters just before combat is possible also, and the party can be sneaky enough to get the drop on a lot of bad guys so the 1 round casting is not much of an issue.
PS2:Does anyone really think the casters suffer as much as the melee types for not having magic items?
Next we'll find out he's actually talking about gestalt characters from UA, but keeps calling them wizards, and generic characters from the same book, calling them fighters. Wouldn't surprise me. And 3 attributes at 7? Whee.
|
|
Next we'll find out he's actually talking about gestalt characters from UA, but keeps calling them wizards, and generic characters from the same book, calling them fighters. Wouldn't surprise me. And 3 attributes at 7? Whee.
I'm not going to criticize. This is the closest he has ever gotten to posting any kind of build at all.
Baby steps.
I removed a post (and a reply to it). Please be respectful of your fellow posters.