Hmm, think the forum monster ate my post. Here's try number 2.
I've played a blaster for quite a long time (over a decade), and I have to speak up for them when given the chance. My character isn't a blaster because it's the most optimal, there are more direct routes to small party superiority. He's built for large scale military engagements, he's a General, he's the bastard lovechild of General Sherman and General Patton. He's a devotee of a literal scorched earth policy, a student of siege weaponry, design, engineering and also the diplomat when things get down to the peace table, but Paladine help you if you meet him on a battlefield.
Most of the game is not played on large scale battlefields and part of the interesting challenge of playing a character like this is adapting what he knows works well against a tightly packed column of soldiers versus a field of scattered skeletons and zombies. His typical armaments are not what you'd probably find useful against a host of demons (fire and electricity) but that doesn't mean he's useless, scrolls are a valuable commodity, in pathfinder I can even memorize spells from his opposed schools.
He's turned the tide more than once with a pair of fireballs (quickened and normal) or a well placed wall of fire and haste is certainly one of his more used spells. He's not 'optimal' as defined by others, but I've had more fun than I would have playing a different character.
Short version: It's alot of fun. :)
I had a vision of your character as the colonol from "Apocolypse Now"
"I love the smell of Fireball in the morning. It smells like..... victory"(he dosent call the napalm strike, he IS the napalm strike) ;)
I had a vision of your character as the colonol from "Apocolypse Now"
"I love the smell of Fireball in the morning. It smells like..... victory"
(he dosent call the napalm strike, he IS the napalm strike) ;)
While I'd have no qualms about Robert Duvall playing that character in any movie lol. I'd have to say he's a bit more sane than Kilgore, but certainly has the same enthusiasm. I could certainly imagine the 'Ride of the Valkyries' scene with a group of mages instead of helicopters. :D
The spell itself lists this exeption. It is ONE spell effect for the purposes of ER.
Where?
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/r/resist-energyNot according to the spell:
The subject gains resist energy 10 against the energy type chosen, meaning that each time the creature is subjected to such damage (whether from a natural or magical source), that damage is reduced by 10 points before being applied to the creature's hit points. The value of the energy resistance granted increases to 20 points at 7th level and to a maximum of 30 points at 11th level. The spell protects the recipient's equipment as well.
I'll reinterate the most important line:
"meaning that each time the creature is subjected to such damage"
Not once/rd, but each time.
Unless there is a FAQ that says otherwise.
Blasting is like anything else. If you know how to properly build a blaster, they can be downright nasty. The best blasters are sorcerer builds. You can build an ok Evocation specialist wizard. But cross-blooded sorcerer dragon/wild-blood elemental or orc/elemental wild-blooded or dragon blooded are the best blasters bar none.
Given the insane damage that physical damage dealers do, you can't keep up with them for damage output on single targets unless you have a very optimized build. And even then it is difficult.
Unless you truly enjoy blasting, hard for it to shine as bright as other arcane caster builds like enervate, enchantment, or transmutation builds that can annihilate someone with one missed save.
I do enjoy blowing apart a huge group of baddies as a blaster. But I tend not to shine as brightly against single target BBEGs. That's where the Save or Suck casters shine and the physical damage dealers.
The spell itself lists this exeption. It is ONE spell effect for the purposes of ER.
Where?
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/r/resist-energy
Not according to the spell:
The subject gains resist energy 10 against the energy type chosen, meaning that each time the creature is subjected to such damage (whether from a natural or magical source), that damage is reduced by 10 points before being applied to the creature's hit points. The value of the energy resistance granted increases to 20 points at 7th level and to a maximum of 30 points at 11th level. The spell protects the recipient's equipment as well.I'll reinterate the most important line:
"meaning that each time the creature is subjected to such damage"Not once/rd, but each time.
Unless there is a FAQ that says otherwise.
As I said, they changed meteor swarm.
I do not have the impression that blasting is bad, though you usually make a tactical decision to either use a blast spell or any other kind of spell. If a caster can help take out a number of foes before they got any chance to act that is a great help, often this means finishing off opponents or taking care of opponents with lower hp.
It isnt always about the ammount of damage you can dish out, but the number you actually do dish out, fighters are generally stuck in one attack mode, which is massive physical damage within a limited reach.
Casters can usually pick an energy or damage type to use and use them from range, on a single opponent or several opponenets at once. Softening up the enemies with a fireball often allows the fighter to take them down in one round or two rounds instead of two or three. Also AC is relatively easy to buff, just by making opponents fight defensively they can often reduce the damage a fighter does by a lot, PA often causes misschance to rise in less than a favorable hit/damage ratio than people would expect.
Altogether it might not be a casters strongest option all the time, though with some builds you can pull off a very decent one, but can make a huge difference depending on encounter set up
The half-orc sorcerer fireball guy. That combo isn't too bad. But I don't like it myself because at higher level every smart caster and his mother can defeat it. A minor globe of invulnerability, immunity to fire, counterspell with 3rd lvl fireball spell, spell immunity, and fire shield are good counters.
My new favorite blasting spell is Caustic Eruption. That is the best blasting spell in the game. Serious hammertime with very few defenses other than resistance or immunity to acid or whatever energy you elemental it with.
Raving Dork, you do a Caustic Eruption build yet?
.
..
...
....
.....
If you do it right, people will wonder if you did anything at all.
As usual, you're a bit on the extreme side. Fudging is a tool that helps keep a campaign entertaining for both sides. It's something to be used with discretion and above all subtlety. If the DM's good at it, you'd never know he's doing it.
That is seriously discouraging. Why play a game like that when I can just sit and listen to the GM tell his story? If the player's decisions don't matter, than it's essentially the same thing.
I roll all my dice in front of the players. I make my players roll all their dice in front of me.
I find the randomness of the dice almost always end up improving my stories rather than taking away from them. When the dice rolls are going bad for the players, they get so discouraged. You can practically see the despair on their faces as they worry that their characters are going to buy the farm.
When the dice are going their way or they get a lucky roll and the bad guy an unlucky roll, you can see the joy or they let out a cheer.
I feel the immersion is greater if things are happening in a random fashion with the dice falling where they may.
The half-orc sorcerer fireball guy. That combo isn't too bad. But I don't like it myself because at higher level every smart caster and his mother can defeat it. A minor globe of invulnerability, immunity to fire, counterspell with 3rd lvl fireball spell, spell immunity, and fire shield are good counters.
My new favorite blasting spell is Caustic Eruption. That is the best blasting spell in the game. Serious hammertime with very few defenses other than resistance or immunity to acid or whatever energy you elemental it with.
Raving Dork, you do a Caustic Eruption build yet?
Caustic Eruption seems like it would be harder to build a readily repeatable combo around, due to it already being a 7th level spell, leaving you with only 2 levels (okay, 4 after spell perfection) of metamagic that can be applied.
You would also be prevented from using Maximize and Quicken at the same time, due to them both being +3 adjustments. One will have to be cast from a rod, and the other neglected entitrely.
Which isn't to say caustic eruption is a bad choice, or impossible to build around. It just seems to lend itself to the caster having stamina problems.
Also, far more likely to risk party injury, depending on how your table reads the spell. The description implies that the burst should be centered on the caster (ie, "Acid erupts from YOUR space") while the mechanics portion of the spell seems to imply it it can be done at range.
We're going with the ranged entry until we hear otherwise.
Magical Lineage leaves 3 levels open.
Advantages of caustic eruption:
1. Higher DC for save
2. No spell resistance which means no Greater Spell Immunity or the like. No Globe of Invulnerability.
3. Affects golems and other resistant creatures.
4. Additive effect if save is missed. To the point where you're practically doing fireball damage in the following two rounds if they miss their save.
5. Will allow for Intensify Spell after lvl 20, which you can do with Spell Specialization.
I like the spell. Very potent. You have to wait longer to get it. But once you do, you can do a great deal with it. It hits real hard. My cross-blooded dragon (silver)/orc sorcerer hammers. I picked him up Elemental Cold. So he can do cold caustic eruptions for a 7th lvl slot. Magical Lineage reduces metamagic level by 1 for Elemental Cold and then empower the spell for no increase with Spell Perfection for a lvl 7 slot. Pretty nifty.
Lvl 18 sorcerer:
Round 1: 20d6+40 x 1.5=165
Round 2: (20d6+40 x 1.5) + (10d6+20 x 1.5)=247
And so on and so on.
Toss in some quickened fireballs or a cold ice strike or some similar spell. The damage can really add up.
Where?
The spell itself lists this exeption. It is ONE spell effect for the purposes of ER.
In METEOR SWARM.
Edit: And Ravingdork even beat me with a quote from the spell. Thanks RD.
The damage type swapper is the first level power, not the arcana IIRC.it's the arcana
that's not even a bloodline, its a wizard school.
The downfall of evocation for me is how much resistance someone can get from a 2nd level spell, Resist Energy. By 11th level it pretty much negates the majority of damage from most energy based spells. At the end of Rise of the Runelords, I was playing a paladin who was caster level 11, he was hit by a meteor swarm and took no damage.
level 2 Abjuration > level 9 evocation
Then you or your GM made a mistake. Meteor Swarm has changed significantly since previous editions. Among other things, you add the damage from all the spheres and bursts AND THEN apply resistance. There's no way you could have take 0 damage unless you passed ALL of your saves AND the caster rolled near minimum damage.
Meteor Swarm does 24d6 damage.
24 x 3.5 = 82 average damage.
40 points of Fire Resistance and a successful save means that you ignore up to 80 points of damage. I was playing a paladin, so I had pretty good saves. A very slightly under average roll equals zero damage. Is my math wrong? Did I make a mistake? If you roll 80 points of damage (not very outside the realm of possibility), and don't have any modiifiers, a level 9 spell is defeated by a level 2 spell and a decent save.
Is my math wrong?
Yes. Resist Energy maxes at 30 points not 40. So a successful save would still cause 10 points of damage. Not whole lot but there it is. Plus your forgetting the 8d6 Bludgeoning damage it also does which gives no save and is no affect by energy resistance, so that would have been 28 (average) more ignoring Fire Resistance Although since it is not specifically exepted, like the fire damage is, your DR (if any)should apply equally to each 2D6 of each sphere.
If that caster had either a Greater Maximise or Empower rod though, it could have been a bit more. Assuming Maximise, you would have taken 44 fire + 48 bludgeoning on a successful save. Assuming Empower you would have taken 30 fire + 42 bludgeoning on a succesful save.
And Paladins usually make their saves, even at lower levels, so they are really hard for casters to harm with spells that allow them. The same spells are a bit more effective on other classes who have worse base saves and don't also add a key class stat (Cha) to all their saves too.
Also, if your the specific target of the spell, the caster can make ranged touch attacks against you and negate any saving throw with Metero Swarm, which will cause significantly more damage.
A smart caster would aim all 4 on you for the touch attacks so as to cancel your excellent save advantage.
Then you would have taken 52 Fire Damage after ER and 28 Bludgeoning, minus any DR that would be applicable (x4). 80 Damage is never anything to sneeze at.
And if it was maximized? Your looking at 114 Fire and 48 Bludgeoning damage after Fire Resistance. 162 total damage could kill weaker party members outright, even with Fire Resistance.
What, if anything, in Ultimate Magic would make a blaster caster even better? I don't have the book, so please indulge me. Are there other variations or improvements to the half-orc cross-blooded sorcerer? Just curious. Thanks!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I'm what? Two months late to this thread?
Oh well.
I was referenced in the OP (or more accurately, my Wizard guide was referenced) along with the wording
It seems that alot of people here hate damage-dealing spells. Yes, I've read Treantmonk's guide...
I feel like I need to respond to this, even though I'm very late in my response.
Here's how I sum up blasting in my guide (after a more detailed breakdown that is too large to quote here):
I'm not saying you should never do pure blast. In fact, my own wizards usually have a blast or two at hand. I'm just saying that blasting is something you do after you've ensured tactical advantage in the combat...
This is in a guide that is unapologetically hyperbolic. Trust me, if I hated blasting, it would be crystal clear in the wording.
I do think that blasting isn't the most useful thing a wizard can do (I would rank it fourth). I think a Wizard's most useful options are helping the party indirectly, by using battlefield controls to grant tactical advantage ("best" option when applicable), or buffs and debuffs to grant mathematical advantage (second and third "best" options IMO). I'll stand behind those opinions and back them up with examples and evidence as necessary.
However, how that would imply that I "Hate" blasting is beyond me. In fact, of the "types" of spells, note that I have 4 ratings, and I did not give blasting the lowest rating. (blue-green-orange-red, and I gave blasting "orange" which I define as "an OK option")
If someone were to suggest I "Hate" save or die spells (for wizards), then at least there would be evidence for the claim (since I gave them the "Red" rating, which is "should be avoided")
Just wanted to clear that up.
It seems to me that blasting is a better option for sorcerers than it is for wizards. Since wizards have to pick exactly how many fireballs, etc they will have available each day, and each blasting spell they prepare is a utility spell they don't get to prepare, it is simply less optimal for them.
That said, I did recently play an admixture evoker and it was very effective. To the people who says fighters will always do more damage, I beg to differ. Maybe against single targets that is true, but when the wizard is hitting several enemies per round, the total amount of damage inflicted per round simply leaves fighters in the dust. On those rounds I didn't want to use a spell, I used my ring of telekinesis to hurl rocks and other weapons, grapple foes or use the scenery strategically. It was a blast (pun intended).
Of course, my character didn't just blast. That would be like playing an illustionist that only uses illusion spells. I utilitzed things like summoned monsters, black tentacles, cloudkill, image spells (to make monsters waste attacks on imaginary threats), etc.
This is the thing, haste gives basically an extra attack for everyone. Not only that but it gives bonus ac, to hit, and movement at the same time. While a fireball does only damage and can potentially harm allies. Also we can consider that a huge amount of creatures have immunity or resistances to fire. A pure blasty wizard or sorcerer isn't mechanically viable because what you get out of it sometimes does next to no damage and can hurt allies. No one will argue with you that some blasty spells are good. However most of them also have an aspect of control attached to them.
While a fireball does only damage and can potentially harm allies. Also we can consider that a huge amount of creatures have immunity or resistances to fire. A pure blasty wizard or sorcerer isn't mechanically viable because what you get out of it sometimes does next to no damage and can hurt allies. No one will argue with you that some blasty spells are good. However most of them also have an aspect of control attached to them.
More enemies have DR than fire resistance/immunity. A "pure" blasty wizard or sorcerer is viable (but not optimal) between levels 4 and 10, roughly, and even better after that (see the 'Dorks build above).
A pure blasting mage is harder to build than a "god" mage, but it is viable. Now, even a blasting mage should dabble in "god" tactics, and even a god mage should dabble in blasting - because let's face it, when there's 50 mad goblins marching towards your camp, nothing says "hi" like a fireball in the face. Haste can't top that, and neither can Sleet Storm.
More enemies have DR than fire resistance/immunity.
You do see the difference though right?
The weapon I need to bypass DR 20/magic is a magic weapon, or a weapon with "magic weapon" cast on it, or arcane strike.
DR/Silver can be bypassed with Alchemical silver, silversheen or mithril
DR/- is usually very low, so you don't worry about bypassing at all, you just blow through.
Energy resistance can't be bypassed, you have to change energy types or reduce the full amount from damage (quite often after the damage has already been halved)
Also, energy resistance is usually much higher than DR, (case in point, you can get up to DR 30 with a 2nd level Wizard spell, and you can get up to DR 15 with an 8th level wizard spell).
Oh yeah, and there is energy immunity, but no damage immunity.
Oh...and there is no saving throw vs. axe blade to the skull. We haven't even started with evasion/improved evasion yet.
A "pure" blasty wizard or sorcerer is viable (but not optimal) between levels 4 and 10, roughly, and even better after that (see the 'Dorks build above).
"Even Better" suggests what you are comparing too was really quite good, not "viable (but not optimal)"
and even a god mage should dabble in blasting - because let's face it, when there's 50 mad goblins marching towards your camp, nothing says "hi" like a fireball in the face. Haste can't top that, and neither can Sleet Storm.
When you have a lot of weak enemies huddled together, fireball is unquestionably satisfying, but the satisfaction is a bit hollow.
In fact, just to play devil's advocate here, Sleet Storm could quite easily be more effective in this situation depending on the layout. Sleet storm covers a much larger area than fireball, and slows/prevents movement which can give the party a chance to gain proper defensive positioning. The tactical advantage it could potentially provide in this situation could be invaluable.
Rope Trick could also be hugely advantageous (and may already be cast as a standard "camping" spell) "come up the rope one at a time my little goblins! Meet big stupid fighter!"
Silent Image could be a battle winner here too.
Finally, although this isn't really about optimization, none of the suggestions I've made steal the thunder from the rest of the party. They create a tactical advantage that the rest of the party can use to wipe out the gobbies.
Generally speaking blasters won't steal the thunder from the rest of the party, because generally combats aren't a bunch of weak creatures with low HP and poor ref saves all huddled together in a blast shaped bunch. However, should you come up with the ability to kill creatures with one blast in "real" scenarios repeatedly through the adventuring day, and that's the character you make, aren't you being a bit of a douche then?
The goal of optimization should not be to make the rest of the party irrelevant.
More enemies have DR than fire resistance/immunity.
You do see the difference though right?
The weapon I need to bypass DR 20/magic is a magic weapon, or a weapon with "magic weapon" cast on it, or arcane strike.
Of course I do. But "damage reduction 20/non-fire" (aka fire resistance) can be solved via any of the ways to deal some other kind of blasting spell.
Energy resistance can't be bypassed, you have to change energy types or reduce the full amount from damage (quite often after the damage has already been halved)
That's a bit like saying that you can't bypass DR/cold iron if you're using a non-cold iron weapon. Yes, it's true, but that's why you don't use it in those circumstances.
(Though the DR type to watch out for is DR/slashing and other damage types in my experience).
Also, energy resistance is usually much higher than DR, (case in point, you can get up to DR 30 with a 2nd level Wizard spell, and you can get up to DR 15 with an 8th level wizard spell).
Yes, but single spells usually deal more damage than single attacks and only apply the resistance once.
Oh yeah, and there is energy immunity, but no damage immunity.
There is immunity to certain types of physical damage.
Oh...and there is no saving throw vs. axe blade to the skull. We haven't even started with evasion/improved evasion yet.
Very true, but spells and attacks in general usually follow a principle of "attack roll or save". Spells are save-heavy, but there are attack roll spells, while physical attacks are attack roll heavy, but there are save-based ones.
That said, attack roll is usually better than save.
I do however see evasion (and certainly improved evasion!) as fringe cases in style with ethereality.
A "pure" blasty wizard or sorcerer is viable (but not optimal) between levels 4 and 10, roughly, and even better after that (see the 'Dorks build above)."Even Better" suggests what you are comparing too was really quite good, not "viable (but not optimal)"
I may have worded it badly, seeing as how English isn't my main language. My point was that at levels 4-10, they perform viably but not more - like a TWF barbarian or whatever odd build's out there. Levels 10+, like ravingdork has proven, they become good builds right up with standard ones like a decently optimized sword and board fighter. The issue is in the levels optimization needed to be viable. Say at level 10, to contribute meaningfully, a god wizard has to do about 10% optimization (choosing decent spells), a fighter has to do about 25% optimiziation (choosing at half of his feats as decent but getting a lot of bang with just his class abilities) and a blaster wizard has to do about 90% optimization. This also makes all blasters look the same.
When you have a lot of weak enemies huddled together, fireball is unquestionably satisfying, but the satisfaction is a bit hollow.
In fact, just to play devil's advocate here, Sleet Storm could quite easily be more effective in this situation depending on the layout.
No. Killing 90% of the enemy force IS better than hindering their movement for a turn or two without killing a single one. 10 goblins at full speed ARE less dangerous than 50 goblins where you get a round or two to prepare. Unless they're on a thin bridge and the sleet storm would get them killed, fireball is better. And if they are, just blast the damn bridge out of the sky.
I'm not saying blasting is a good choice of spells normally. I'm saying it's not quite as bad as some make it out to be. I recommend you read some of Ravingdorks builds and, not the least, read some of his actual gaming reports from where he's blasted. They are enjoyable and nice. RPG's are weird in that I put anecdotal evidence higher than theoretical and clinical tests.
Some say that blasting is good again. I will agree that it can be effective but not good. The reason for this is that invariably, the effective blaster exploits the orc/draconic crossblooded arcanas and half-orc favoured class ability. It's hideous that the only effective blaster is restricted into so obscenely narrow and specific a concept.
I have a reason to believe my GM fudges the enemy's saves in their favor from time to time.I have yet to find a GM who does not.
Pleased to meet you. I'm Ashiel and I won't be fudging rolls this evening.
Of course I do. But "damage reduction 20/non-fire" (aka fire resistance) can be solved via any of the ways to deal some other kind of blasting spell.
Good, then we're on the same page.
That's a bit like saying that you can't bypass DR/cold iron if you're using a non-cold iron weapon. Yes, it's true, but that's why you don't use it in those circumstances.
That's true.
There is immunity to certain types of physical damage.
That doesn't really address the point I made regarding resistances to energy being higher on average.
I would also point out that there are 4 types of energy, and immunities to one of them aren't that rare.
Again, look at outsiders.
That said, attack roll is usually better than save.
Exactly
I do however see evasion (and certainly improved evasion!) as fringe cases in style with ethereality.
What about SR? Do you consider that "fringe" too?
My point was that at levels 4-10, they perform viably but not more - like a TWF barbarian or whatever odd build's out there. Levels 10+, like ravingdork has proven, they become good builds right up with standard ones like a decently optimized sword and board fighter
Perhaps for damage potential in a limited scope. Not round for round over an adventuring day. Also, not defensively.
No. Killing 90% of the enemy force IS better than hindering their movement for a turn or two without killing a single one.
Even if you bunch them exactly as a blast, with no spaces, you STILL aren't killing 90%
Also, Sleet storm isn't just slowing them down, it's removing their ability to coordinate (no visibility) and giving them different movement speeds. That will stagger their approach.
Since the rest of the party could probably defeat 10 goblins without a expending resources, it doesn't really matter if it is one group of 10, or 5 staggered groups of 10, the end result is the same.
What is different is the certainty. Are those all non-levelled goblins? How do we know that? Is it 50 level 1 rogue goblins? How do we know it isn't? Are we rolling decent on the damage roll? Isn't that a matter of luck? Can we be certain of dealing decent damage? Not really. We know what the fireball will probably do, but we know what the sleet storm will certainly do. That's the difference.
10 goblins at full speed ARE less dangerous than 50 goblins where you get a round or two to prepare.
So you are killing 40? So they ARE bunched together in a blast template with no spaces? That's fairly convenient.
If we assume that they aren't always bunched as a spell template, then radius does matter. Also, we aren't just waiting 1 or 2 rounds and again are dealing with 50 goblins. Sleet storm will stagger their approach. It's a divide and conquer strategy as well as giving time to prepare.
Unless they're on a thin bridge and the sleet storm would get them killed, fireball is better. And if they are, just blast the damn bridge out of the sky.
I'll finish with this: Realistically, if we consider that goblins are probably not marching shoulder to shoulder, front to back, in a perfect circle formation, but instead are probably running towards the group with spaces between them, the fireball will be lucky to drop 20. That's assuming these are standard average goblins, which, frankly, is probably a guess.
Sleet storm gives the rest of the party a tactical advantage. If we assume we will need the rest of the party to finish this encounter (a good assumption I think), then the value of this can mean the difference between victory and defeat.
The great thing about battlefield control, is it's not based on a die roll. It's based on the tactical ability of the player, not luck. Taking luck out of the equation is an advantage which is hard to define with math.
What about SR? Do you consider that "fringe" too?
No, that's something you're going to have to cope with. But at least it hits god wizards and blasters about equally hard, since both have about the same difficulty getting through it and both might have to use no-SR spells instead.
My point was that at levels 4-10, they perform viably but not more - like a TWF barbarian or whatever odd build's out there. Levels 10+, like ravingdork has proven, they become good builds right up with standard ones like a decently optimized sword and board fighterPerhaps for damage potential in a limited scope. Not round for round over an adventuring day. Also, not defensively.
It depends on the setup, but yeah it's true that you can't put all your eggs in the blasting basket. But you could probably put 50% combat spells blasting, 25% god'ing, and 25% defensive, instead of the 10%/70%/20% I'd take with a god wizard and still be viable. Remember that blasting spells can often be used as crowd control too, buy destroying "stuff". It's clear that it's mostly useful against swarms of enemies though, and as such is very campaign dependent.
No. Killing 90% of the enemy force IS better than hindering their movement for a turn or two without killing a single one.Even if you bunch them exactly as a blast, with no spaces, you STILL aren't killing 90%
Fireball damage is 5-30, without spending any resources (though I think you should if you want to blast). Goblin health: 4 hit points or the like. Chance of both saving and rolling near minimum damage is minimal, so it's safe to say they kill of at least 90% if they hit them. Actually, 90% was counting low. And hey - that's 40 less heavy crossbow bolts in their faces.
And that's not "no spaces". A 30 ft. radius blast covers what, 113 squares? For 50 small creatures? That seems about right for a loosely hustling group of skirmishers.
Since the rest of the party could probably defeat 10 goblins without a expending resources, it doesn't really matter if it is one group of 10, or 5 staggered groups of 10, the end result is the same.What is...
We were talking about 50 goblins, not 10. How are you going to kill them without line of sight from how many feet away? Blasting takes care of them 400 ft. away (if you don't go by completely ridiculous spotting rules, and if you do, it's the same for both spells regardless). Sleet storm lasts for what, 5 rounds? It probably takes less than that for most of the goblins to get out and reorganize. But say 5 rounds. Your melees and other have to take at least two rounds running if you cast at 200 ft. away, and then have three rounds to finish of as many as they can. I think the risk of you taking serious damage is far greater with the sleet storm than with the fireball.
Remember that you suffer the same difficulties attacking them as they do to you.
Nah, if you're lucky the sleet storm might give the same effect. Fireball is more reliable in mass combat though.
And fireball also gives a tactical advantage. Less enemies to fight, which means less risk of mass aid-another combat maneuvers in melee, or mass heavy crossbow death at range. And that's not counting any structural damage you can do with it.
Sorry to interject, but I am still curious if UM has anything in it that improves upon a blaster caster built around a cross-blooded half-orc draconic bloodline sorcerer?
Also, where does cross-blooded come from? Thanks!
Raving Dork, you do a Caustic Eruption build yet?
Acid is resisted nearly as much as fire. Sure you have higher DCs, but you have much less versatility with metamagic (often limiting yourself to just one at a time), which is a shame, seeing as you have at least three such feats you could be using. Also, a higher level spell means you are using a higher level slot, which also means you can cast it far less times per day.
Sphere of invulnerability doesn't matter, as you could easily have picked a lower level spell that would have bypassed that and STILL allowed you some versatility and combat endurance.
Despite my fire sorcerer build using fireball here on the forums, my build that I actually use in real games utilizes fire snake instead, which is more limited in some respects (namely range), but has higher DCs, bypasses spheres of invulnerability, more precision (no blasting allies) and still deals comparable damage to a metamagic'd fireball. I merely used fireball as my example, because it is an iconic spell choice.
I could make similar builds using just about any blasting spell, but you will likely never see me using anything higher than a 6th level spell for Spell Perfection (at least not on a blaster build). Being able to get two spells off each round with Quicken Spell, every round, as a blaster, is just too important. It's where a lot of the damage comes from.
This is in a guide that is unapologetically hyperbolic. Trust me, if I hated blasting, it would be crystal clear in the wording.
This forum is notorious for distorting peoples' words and making everything into black or white situations. Giving any and all situations "clear sides" makes the hate speech more palatable to the ignorant.
I think the hate goes to just how dramatic a good blast seems on the battlefield. Yes, a fighter with high BAB and the right feats is going to lay into everyone around him and deal a lot of damage one-on-one. But when a spellcaster gets off a blast on an area filled with low HD foes, and they all fail their saves, it can look pretty amazing, especially if you've got minis on the table.
The fighter types might not take into consideration the low HP and bad saves of the grouped up baddies, and so the impression is made that the blaster was somehow more powerful and out-of-balance. In fact, we had one guy who played the blaster who thought pretty highly of himself for doing just that. I don't think he ever took into consideration that he was just wasting grunts while the paladin was fighting the biggest threat face-to-face.
That said, being able to "cover" your fighter by blasting away the smaller foes, is essential. So I have no problem with blasters as long as they don't boast too much.
SR doesn't affect buffing and summoning, which, as I understand it, are god wizard staples.No, that's something you're going to have to cope with. But at least it hits god wizards and blasters about equally hard, since both have about the same difficulty getting through it and both might have to use no-SR spells instead.
What about SR? Do you consider that "fringe" too?
God wizard also like to use battlefield control spells like Grease, obscuring mist, wall of stone, etc. These spells are uneffected by spell resistance.
Yes, that is true. I retract my earlier statement. However, a blaster wizard can (as mentioned) still dabble in other spells and the number of HIGH-sr monsters isn't that huge. In those cases, blasting sucks.
And that's not "no spaces". A 30 ft. radius blast covers what, 113 squares? For 50 small creatures? That seems about right for a loosely hustling group of skirmishers.
Fireball is a 20ft radius, so 44 squares. Thus Treantmonk is right, to get 90% of them (in truth you can only get 88%), they'd have to be walking/running as bunch/phalanx instead of charging as a savage goblin mob.
Thanks, Rory! That explains why I can't build it in HeroLab (I don't have UM for it), and why I couldn't find it in my books (don't own it).
It's going to make it awfully hard for me to stat out my orc warlord who is riling up the orcs in Belkzen to go free you-know-who. Ah well. I was hoping to see what the stats looked like for an 18th level half-orc sorcerer npc with a 20-point buy and pc-level wealth. *grin*
Not being a PC means they can't take traits, though, right (HeroLab doesn't allow it as far as I know)? Which means they can't take the trait that drops metamagic levels by 1 for a particular spell. Is that critical to the build? Just curious.
And that's not "no spaces". A 30 ft. radius blast covers what, 113 squares? For 50 small creatures? That seems about right for a loosely hustling group of skirmishers.Fireball is a 20ft radius, so 44 squares. Thus Treantmonk is right, to get 90% of them (in truth you can only get 88%), they'd have to be walking/running as bunch/phalanx instead of charging as a savage goblin mob.
I remembered fireball as a 30ft. radius. I retract my earlier statements.
In the past 4 years of me playing, I can recall exactly one situation where Fireball was the best option. That was when we were defending a keep, and there were hordes of enemies trying to break through.
I cast Fireball, knocked a few of them out.
They returned fire with Fireball, knocking me to -8.
I should've cast Haste.
It seems that alot of people here hate damage-dealing spells. Yes, I've read Treantmonk's guide and am familiar with the typical arguments against it. The thing is, is it really that bad?
Yeah, Haste is a great spell and, depending on how many fighter-types you have in your group, it can, over its duration, contribute more damage than Fireball. Yes, fireball does fire damage and has a saving throw. But your fighter can also miss on his attacks and enemies can have DR that he's not able to circumvent. Fireball also hits a ton of enemies at once, while it may take several rounds for the fighter types of deal as much damage to as many enemies thanks to haste.
And yes, summoning is great. No argument there. But once you've summoned a monster and hasted your party, then what? Does your wizard just sit there and pick his nose? That's when, it seems to me, you should start blasting, because the sooner your enemies die, the less damage your party takes. Sure, he can do other things too, like use enchantment or other debuff spells, or use other tactics as best fits his character. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with blasting either.
Yeah, things like black tentacles and sleet storm can be great "control" spells, but they also aren't party friendly. You hasted your fighter, but now he has to pull out a bow and start shooting the enemies because they're in your crowd control zone of doom that he doesn't dare enter. That's counter productive. I'm not saying that spells like Black Tentacles suck, on the contrary, they can be devastating when used appropriately. I'm just saying that they aren't always superior to blasting spells. Things often appear much better on paper than they are in practice.
You don't get the hatred towards blasting spells? Why don't you allow me to cast some blasting spells at you, and then maybe you would learn how to hate blasting/damage dealing spells!!!!!!!