None commented because this stop the discussion. If you use rules blindly, caster got little to do for the party, just buff and teleport.
A wizard can give you this DC : int 31 (20 at 1st, plus 6 item and 5 from book), so 10, plus 19 (spell), plus 4, maybe 6 with some spells, that is 33, 35. Not enough.
20% chance to fail a saving throw, x3 rolls of which you only have to fail one is still a pretty decent chance. And of course you haven't addressed the no save spells or disjunction which shuts down your lovely little item.
Yeah, I said he was my first wizard and I've multiple times mentioned that I've been playing for 30 years, math must not be your first language...
Still, that's what he did, and that's how he protects his stuff. If it's so "cliche" then there must be a lot of other wizards who do the same thing. It seems to work just fine without having to hide every night in a rope trick or live as a luxurious nomad in seventh level magnificent mansions all the time. Which was my point.
Actually its that I don't follow you around from post to post.
And how is hiding in a tower any better than hiding in a rope trick, magnificent mansion, or demiplane?
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesDisjunction.htm ST: will negates.
Consider that the DC of spells I wrote is maximized, the ST bonus not.
Removed a post. Please don't make personal attacks. This didn't add to the discussion.
Rather than trying to nerf a character whether it be the fighter or wizard why not just change the way you are GM'ing. That way you don't have to go out of your way to try to control how someone RP's.Case and point. You just defined everyone's notion of fun. You don't seem to see varying perspective therefore this conversation serves no purpose.Actually, we can. So, the degree to which players are forced into doing things that aren't fun (such as being wall flowers)
we cannot attribute an absolute value of right and wrong to gaming stylesI defined everyone's definition of "fun" as "wanting to actually contribute positively to the game". That's a definition I'm going to stand behind.
Somethings ARE bad.
Every single person who has contributed to this thread will, I'm confident, control how someone RPs if push comes to shove. If some player tries to interject something in the game which makes no sense (forex. constantly having his character talk about Obama and watching the football game on the television) and the game is aiming to be a more serious fantasy game, I'm confident that every single poster in this thread will interject.
Because it breaks the suspension of disbelief - the same way that having characters engage in risk mitigation which is not believable breaks the suspension of disbelief - and interjecting to get PCs to act in believable ways is encouraged.
That is different, and extreme. Breaking the 4th wall is something I only see happening when a player is trying to be annoying.
So just wondering, has anyone toyed with the idea of making your maxed out wizard a lich? +2 all mental attributes, all the benefits of being old without any of the penalties, d8 hit dice and better base ac.
So just wondering, has anyone toyed with the idea of making your maxed out wizard a lich? +2 all mental attributes, all the benefits of being old without any of the penalties, d8 hit dice and better base ac.
Just out of curiosity, where does it say a lich doesn't suffer from the physical aging penalties?
So just wondering, has anyone toyed with the idea of making your maxed out wizard a lich? +2 all mental attributes, all the benefits of being old without any of the penalties, d8 hit dice and better base ac.Just out of curiosity, where does it say a lich doesn't suffer from the physical aging penalties?
Common sense, its an immortal undead creature that used magic to overcome mortality.
Is it really common sense? Or just hopeful munchkin cheese? :P
Seriously though, I'm just playing devil's advocate.
Aren't there plenty of sources that say liches decay over time, even sometimes becoming nothing more than powerful skulls eventually? Sounds like growing old to me.
A human lich is still human and still has all the human traits, that includes bonus feat, bonus skill, and the aging rates (though the lich template clearly takes dying of old age off the table).
TO be fair, a Sorcerer Lich would be almost inherently more effective as charisma governs their hit points as well.
Is it really common sense? Or just hopeful munchkin cheese? :P
Seriously though, I'm just playing devil's advocate.
Aren't there plenty of sources that say liches decay over time, even sometimes becoming nothing more than powerful skulls eventually? Sounds like growing old to me.
A human lich is still human and still has all the human traits, that includes bonus feat, bonus skill, and the aging rates (though the lich template clearly takes dying of old age off the table).
You have such a strange reputation. I like your questions even when I think they are off the wall.
Anyway, I looked and there is nothing that says they stop aging. Even being undead does not make them immune to aging. A human lich should still die at 110 years old. Very interesting. I don't think any GM would actually do that, but RAW, a human lich "dies" at 110 years old.
|
Just out of curiosity, where does it say a lich doesn't suffer from the physical aging penalties?
I would go with this.
Not subject to nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Constitution, Dexterity, and Strength), as well as to exhaustion and fatigue effects.
Just out of curiosity, where does it say a lich doesn't suffer from the physical aging penalties?I would go with this.
Not subject to nonlethal damage, ability drain, or energy drain. Immune to damage to its physical ability scores (Constitution, Dexterity, and Strength), as well as to exhaustion and fatigue effects.
However, the aging adjustments are not drain or damage. They are simply an adjustment. Looks like we may have another place where RAW and RAI don't line up well. Fortunately, we have GMs that know how to overlook such problems.
A lich dying from old age would only reform in 1d10 days. :D
Ok.. I keep reading about these unbalanced WiZarD's that wipe the floor with everything. I have yet to see ONE build posted. As i play a wizard alot (running 2 wizards and a sorcerer, currently). I would like to see a "god wizard" built out to 20th lvl with a complete spell list. It must be playable (defense + offence), no stupid dump stats,etc. 25 pt build.
I must be holding the wrong end of the wand or something... :)
I don't have a 20th level wizard built, so maybe you will be satisfied with a 15th level wizard I built using NPC rules (15 PB, NPC wealth). His name is "Knot Opey" (get it? Not-OP. :P), and he was put together as a demonstration for some of my online players who complained that Wizards were weak and underpowered. They were then welcomed to build 15th level characters with 25 PB, PC-Wealth, and take him on. Thus far, he has not actually taken any damage during a duel, and he has come out victorious 4 - 0 in the battles.
Just to prove the point that wizards were not in fact underpowered, I let the challenger pick where the fight would go down. So far he has engaged in a battle over a volcano, inside a dungeon, in an open field, and a forest.
He has thus far battled a ninja, a 3.5 material using monk with a splatbook wu-jen spell that makes him colossal, an assassin, and a spellcaster who had the Spellfire ability from Forgotten Realms (which allows them to absorb magic that targets them and spit it back at you as non-elemental blasts). In the case of the character with Spellfire, the player of that character rage-quit at the beginning of round 2, because she didn't actually have any skill in using her character, and really was only relying on her not being able to be targeted by spells (but of course, who really needs to target the character with spells, right? :P).
Taken from this post:
Yeah it is. My demo wizard Knot Opey has 2 11 HD solars whom he created via simulacrum, which is counted versus his NPC wealth. Simulacrums don't lose their racial features, so they retain the majority of their abilities, which means their angelic aura of good, continual true-seeing, spell-like abilities, etc. A common strategy for Knot Opey is to pop project image followed by ethereal jaunt which turns him Ethereal without breaking his LoS to his image, which allows him to cast spells through his image as if the image was himself, while being mostly immune to reprisal while his pet solars spam summon monster VII to summon celestial Tyrannosaurs into the battle.
He's a pretty tough fellow to beat actually. However, I think a player of mine has a Fighter that will probably kill him by the time they are about equal level. This is mostly because I've been training my players to prepare and handle crazy stuff like this. By the time he eventually faces Knot Opey (who I'm using as a BBEG at some point), the Fighter will probably have invested in a few short-range teleports, death ward armor, the ability to go ethereal, and probably a +1 net ghost touch net or two. I'm even pretty sure the Fighter will be able to shrug the combo of limited wish (-7 to next save) followed by flesh to stone.
If you're curious here he is.
Knot Opey:Human Wizard (Conjurer) 15
Init +10, Perception +19
====================
AC 14, touch 14, flat-footed 10
HP: 136, Init +10, AC 11
Fort +15, Ref +15, Will +15
====================
Scythe +10 (2d4+1/x4)
====================
Spells Prepared (DC 19 + Level)
8th (2+1) - Mind Blank, Persistent Flesh to Stone x2
7th (3+1) - Limited Wish x 1, Project Image x1, Ethereal Jaunt x1, Summon Monster VII
6th (4+1) - Flesh to Stone x2, Disintegrate x1, True Seeing x1, Acid Cloud
5th (6+1) - Telekinesis x3, Hold Monster x2, Wall of Stone x2
4th (6+1) - Black Tentacles x3, Bestow Curse x2, Dimensional Anchor x1, Globe of Invulnerability x1
3rd (6+1) - Gaseous Form x2, Ray of Exhaustion x2, Halt Undead x1, Displacement x1, Stinking Cloud
2nd (6+1) - Mirror Image x2, Glitterdust x2, Blur x1, Hideous Laughter x1, Web x1
1st (7+1) - Grease x6, Shield x1, Mage armor x1
Cantrips - Acid Splash, Prestidigitation, Detect Magic
====================
Feats - Improved Initiative, Spellcasting Prodigy, Scribe Scroll,
Heighten Spell, Persistent Spell, Spell Focus (Conjuration), Greater Spell Focus (Conjuration),
Toughness, Combat Defense Training, Craft Wondrous Item, Skill Focus (Stealth), Great Fortitude, Lightning Reflexes
Traits - Reactionary (+2 Initiative)
Traits - Heirloom Weapon (Scythe)
====================
Skills - Stealth +25, Spellcraft +27, Knowledge (arcana) +27, Knowledge (religion) +27, Knowledge (local) +27, Linguistics +27, Craft (Alchemy) +27, Perception +19, Bluff +16, Disguise +16, Survival +19
====================
Str 12, Dex 18, Con 18, Int 28, Wis 18, Cha 12
BAB +7, CMB +8, CMD 29
====================
Equipment - Scroll of Mage Armor, Scroll of Obscuring Mist, Scroll of Expeditious Retreat,
Scroll of Disguise Self, Spellbook, Spell Pouch, Acid Flask (2), Solar Simulacrums (2), 1500 gp diamonds (5),
true seeing oinment (4), Scroll of Ethereal Jaunt (2), Scroll of Project Image (2), Cloak of Displacement, Gloves of Dexterity +1, Amulet of Health +1, Headband of Wisdom +1, Cloak of Resistance +2Solar CR (Included With Creator)
NG Large outsider (angel, extraplanar, good)
Init +9; Senses darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision, detect evil, detect snares and pits, true seeing; Perception +33
Aura protective aura
============================
AC 44, touch 11, flat-footed 42 (+14 armor, +1 Dex, +1 dodge, +19 natural, -1 size; +4 deflection vs. evil)
hp 170 (11d10+110); regeneration 15 (evil artifacts, effects, and spells)
Fort +25, Ref +14, Will +23; +4 vs. poison, +4 resistance vs. evil
DR 15/epic and evil; Immune acid, cold, petrification; Resist electricity 10, fire 10; SR 34
============================
Speed 50 ft., fly 150 ft. (good); 35 ft., fly 100 ft. (good) in armor
Melee +5 dancing greatsword +35/+30/+25/+20 (3d6+18) or slam +30 (2d8+13)
Ranged +5 composite longbow (+9 Str bonus) +31/+26/+21/+16 (2d6+14 plus slaying arrow)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft.
============================
Spell-Like Abilities (CL 11th)
Constant—detect evil, detect snares and pits, discern lies (DC 21), true seeing
At Will—aid, animate objects, commune, continual flame, dimensional anchor, greater dispel magic, holy smite (DC 21), imprisonment (DC 26), invisibility (self only), lesser restoration, remove curse, remove disease, remove fear, resist energy, summon monster VII, speak with dead (DC 20), waves of fatigue
3/day—blade barrier (DC 23), earthquake (DC 25), heal, mass charm monster (DC 25), permanency, resurrection, waves of exhaustion
1/day—greater restoration, power word blind, power word kill, power word stun, prismatic spray (DC 24), wish
============================
Spells Prepared (CL 20th)
9th—etherealness, mass heal, miracle, storm of vengeance (DC 27)
8th—fire storm (DC 26), holy aura (2) (DC 26), mass cure critical wounds (2)
7th—destruction (DC 25), dictum (DC 25), ethereal jaunt, holy word (DC 25), regenerate
6th—banishment (DC 24), heroes' feast, mass cure moderate wounds, undeath to death (DC 24), word of recall
5th—break enchantment, breath of life, dispel evil (DC 23), plane shift (DC 23), righteous might, symbol of sleep (DC 23)
4th—cure critical wounds (3), death ward, dismissal (DC 22), neutralize poison (2) (DC 22)
3rd—cure serious wounds, daylight, invisibility purge, magic circle against evil, prayer, protection from energy, wind wall
2nd—align weapon, bear's endurance, bull's strength, consecrate, cure moderate wounds (2), eagle's splendor
1st—bless, cure light wounds (3), divine favor, entropic shield, shield of faith
0 (at will)—detect magic, purify food and drink, stabilize, virtue
============================
Str 28, Dex 20, Con 30, Int 23, Wis 27, Cha 25
Base Atk +11; CMB +32; CMD 47
============================
Feats Cleave, Deadly Aim, Dodge, Great Fortitude, Improved Initiative, Improved Sunder, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Mobility, Power Attack, Toughness
============================
Skills Craft (any one) +31, Diplomacy +32, Fly +32, Knowledge (history) +31, Knowledge (nature) +31, Knowledge (planes) +31, Knowledge (religion) +31, Perception +33, Sense Motive +33, Spellcraft +31, Stealth +21, Survival +31
============================
Languages Celestial, Draconic, Infernal; truespeech
SQ change shape (alter self)
============================
Special Abilities
Spells Solars can cast divine spells as 20th-level clerics. They do not gain access to domains or other cleric abilities.
Slaying Arrow (Su) A solar's bow needs no ammunition, and automatically creates a slaying arrow of the solar's choice when drawn.If you want to just be a huge douche, you can make simulacrums of the Terrasque. It's very difficult to kill, so having one named Fido that follows your commands is pretty handy sometimes. While his HD are drastically lower, the regeneration and immunities mean you probably won't need to replace it often. :P
Now if I was powergaming him, he would have been a Diviner instead of a Conjurer, because that would have given him a +17 Initiative and prevented him from ever being surprised by anything. :3
EDIT: Also, speaking of undead spellcasters, Ghasts are probably the strongest, though they lack the immortality that liches do. Ghasts have some truly massive ability score adjustments (Str +6, Dex +8, Con -, Int +6, Wis +8, Cha +8). Liches are better for just being strait-up unkillable. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just to let everyone know, this thread was made in november, 2010. You can tell because CoDzilla was the first reply, which definitely dates it.
Whatever the discussion is, you can safely ignore the opening post.
And maybe the next like 7 or 8 pages.
Actually you can probably just ignore this thread. Move on folks, nothing to see here.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesDisjunction.htm ST: will negates.
Consider that the DC of spells I wrote is maximized, the ST bonus not.My bad on the mage's disjunction.
No, your DC is not maximized. You didn't include the ability ups from leveling, which would be another +3, and I suspect there's another 1 or 2 floating around some where that the mage could get if it really pushed it.
I have lost some bonus on the way but the bonus on ST is far from be capped. Plz consider that in my games none of this two things happens: there are not PC that gives this DC nor have this bonus on ST. It's just a discussion on actual rules.
|
There is a reason why there are options that a wizard can take in order to protect their spellbooks so that means spellbooks can be effected. If I am not mistaken, spells and effects like fireball and breath weapons have the chance to destroy spellbooks, scrolls etc...
It is up to the wizard to go that extra mile to protect his stuff.
Actually you can probably just ignore this thread. Move on folks, nothing to see here."Stop having fun guys!"
I feel silly, now.
And yet, this discussion is as relevant today as it was back in the ancient times of CoDzilla.
Actually you can probably just ignore this thread. Move on folks, nothing to see here."Stop having fun guys!"
BARBARIAN SUNDER FUN, AM MAKING MUCH FUNBITS FOR CHILDREN TO GNOSH ON AFTER BRUSHING TEETH.
AM PART OF AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION FOR CAUSING CAVITIES IN CASTY KIDS FOR LONG-TERM PLAN TO TAKE DOWN WBL TO MANAGABLE AMOUNT.
My internet sense motive is failing so in case anyone is serious about the Codzilla comments, Codzilla the poster is what ToZ was referring to, not Codzilla the D&D/PF codename for druids and clerics.
I think we were talking about him there, anyways.
He still exists, somewhere in the bowels of the internet.
I think we were talking about him there, anyways.
He still exists, somewhere in the bowels of the internet.
Yep. The "caster edition" of the internet.
Yep. The "caster edition" of the internet.I think we were talking about him there, anyways.
He still exists, somewhere in the bowels of the internet.
So, web 3.5?
In all my years of playing the various versions of D&D I've never had a spellbook stolen. I've had a couple destroyed in combat but not stolen. In all my years as a GM (over 30) I've never had an NPC even attempt to steal a wizard's spellbook outside of a couple of random pickpocket attempts that were not targeting the spellbook. Back in the old days of 2e I used to have my main spellbooks which I left "home" and my traveling spellbooks which I carried with me on adventures.
Well, in my experience i only played a wizard at a table top game once;they were the first years the 3rd ed had come out.
That wizard never managed to keep his spellbook more than 30 minutes.We camp,the book is stolen ; i find it, it has been sold to a random merchant, i have to pay for it again ; i put it in a trapped chest, they steal the chest ; i buy a new one and write the avaible spells in it then i say to DM "i'll never leave it anywhere and always take it with me"; of course in every session something happens that causes the book to suffer damage/get wet/ whatever. I leave it in a dry place and it is stolen.....i started to have the doubt the DM was just teasing me.
Ok it is a risk every wizard must play with or around it,but a DM is supposed to let you play your PC.
There are many routes to create powerful wizards, but I've been playing around with this idea for a level 10 wizard (as an NPC) for a bit and thought to share.
Take an evil, necromancy focused wizard, high int, some positive charisma and whatever else you feel like. The charisma is for the command undead ability. Then with the charisma leadership feat is an obvious optimization. For a necromancer a negative energy cleric is also a logical choice.
From here these two will kill and animate everything they see in sight. They can also create undead at higher levels and take control of those too. So assuming they combine efforts, between the two of them they can control 90HD worth of undead at level 10. At level 20 this will scale to 190HD worth. The effective cost of this army is just the HDx25gp so for a high level character it's minimal expenditure.Now this wizard walks into battle with a small army under his command and he'll still have a full compliment of spells to use.
I'm sure that there are single characters out there which can deal with this wizard, but its quite a powerful concept none the less.
Removing leadership will still allow for 50HD worth of undead at level 10 and 100HD at level 20.
Though any sane GM will never allow this, it is by the book. :)
Yeah I've seen the undead commander necromancer. It is incredibly un-fun to play with, in a party. They monster spam everything, take very long turns, yeah, not fun.
Funniest thing though, a dm worked around this. Foes attacking only the wizard, then players, then undead. So going for the general as it were. The undead were there just to tie them up after all. The nec has to be there to properly command them, even if they take cover they can still be hit, flying foes can snatch them, great hp enemies wade in to grab the nec, or pure attack opponents cut a line through.
But yes, very boring to play with.
proper god wizards that rule the world wont leave their towers past level 14.
They are too busy crafting yet another simulacrum of that 28 hd half troll-red dragon great wyrm... and when they have 150 of those, send them out to do something fun (like conquer half the world or just erase a religion or two etc) :p
In essence, no more dungeon roaming and surprise rounds. Spells dont count rounds either, but days or cast to last forever.
Playing one of those can still be semi-possible in a group. Just instead of fielding the wizard, its the horde of simulacrums/undead. But just semi-possible. Better tell the wizard player (s)he can have just one monster at a time.
There are 3 main types of wizards. The blaster, the SOD/SOS caster, and the god caster. The problem with SOD/SOS casters is that they draw incredible amounts of GM aggro (and frequently from the other players also) from most GM types. Narrativists, in particular, will come to absolutely LOATHE a SOD/SOS caster. Frequently, you'll find that their saving throw rolls will miserably fail a chi-square or similar test when dealing with major enemies. They just do not like having a single caster one-round one or more of their major foes. So I'm going to give you a bit of metagame advice if this describes your GM and fellow players...
Don't haul out the SOD in round 1 (or worse yet, in a surprise round). If you do, and it has, say, a 70% probability of working, you'll notice that it fails to work WAY more than 30% of the time, especially if you've been making a habit of this. Conversely, you'll find that it'll probably work much more than 70% of the time when you're late in the combat and the chips are down. Narrativists are like that, and almost all gms have a bit of narrativist in them.
That, however, is not a valid point about the efficiency or not of SoD spells. A narrativist GM will react in the same way against the paladin archer smiting his demon BBEG to death in one single full round, the pouncing barbarian killing charging him for 300hp, or the blaster sorcerer burning it to cinders with maximized empowered quickened spells: Will give him more hp. Enough of them to make him last whatever his "narrativism" thinks it is appropiated. So that's not really a point about the validity of each of those strategies.
To be fair, SoS has a higher chance to get through the "narrativist shield" in the first round. While most narrativist GM won't allow his BBEG fail his Flesh to Stone save in the first round, they are often more willing to accept a Bestow Curse, Blindness, Slow, Ray of Exhaustion or Confusion. That same GM will "react" harshly against 300 fire damage from scorching rays.
|
Do we hate narrativist GM's? Are they bad or taboo? If the goal is for all the players to leave the table satisfied then one overpowered character wrecking everything doesn't really make a problem for just the GM, he makes a problem for the whole table. Just a thought.
Jack your intelligence up really high, take spell focus and spell perfection feats, and cast weird on a group of 'character' types with class levels. Unless they are purposefully built to have the highest saves possible using obscure rules from multiple books, etc, you'll be impressed with the results. Statistically speaking many of them will probably die.
Do we hate narrativist GM's? Are they bad or taboo? If the goal is for all the players to leave the table satisfied then one overpowered character wrecking everything doesn't really make a problem for just the GM, he makes a problem for the whole table. Just a thought.
The solution to that is not narrativism. It's saying "hey, Bob, I think your character is way too powerful when compared to your mates. You should try to relax a little bit, you are stealing the fun from others". Making every BBEG to be inmune to all Saving throws by fudging the dice is not the solution, imho. It's a wrong, bad mistake.
Jack your intelligence up really high, take spell focus and spell perfection feats, and cast weird on a group of 'character' types with class levels. Unless they are purposefully built to have the highest saves possible using obscure rules from multiple books, etc, you'll be impressed with the results. Statistically speaking many of them will probably die.
There aren't that much spells that kill a group of people, if any. And casting a Flesh to Stone or Dominate to one of them in the first turn and kill him is not really much different to being charged by a smiting evil paladin with a lance that get a crit and kill you right on the spot with 400 damage.
By and large I've always found that the "God Wizard" example most people tend to trot out is a Wizard who is fully buffed and has selected the ideal spells for the given situation with full awareness of what he is facing ahead of time.
It's a nice hypothetical but it's a situation that rarely actually happens in game.
The risks of having access to every spell is that you can make mistakes about what you are going to be facing. If you assume the mysterious haunted tower of doom is filled with undead you can prep an arsenal of undead slaying magic and just mop up the place.
only to discover the place is actually filled with slimy extra planar beasties with tentacles and you don't have a single spell that is going to work on them.
(stupid Qlippoths....seriously who fills a haunted tower with Qlippoths)
That is the Wizard's main weakness he has to plan ahead. He is at his strongest when he knows what he's going into and at his weakest when he's makes a mistake in judgement
"Through forbidden necromantic rites long forgotten to sane minds the beast has awoken."
Does this automatically make this thread evil? (Seeing as Paizo has the belief that all raising of dead that is not Raise Dead/Resurrection is evil)