ThingsNice post. I've just got my paws on Red Hand of Doom and am really keen to run it. Along with most of paizo's AP backcatalogue and a 2E game, so it may be on hold for a while. At risk of running OT here, did you run this game in Golarion?
Actually no. I was running it my own campaign setting.
If low level mooks can let loose these same save or dies thats more or less proving the point RD is trying to make. Of these dip feats I find augment summoning would be the only one I'd miss, and even blaster wizards could be able to find the feats to take it anyway (with an added boost to web, glitterdust and cloud spells.)
The low-level mook used a scroll of summon monster III (or maybe it was a wand, I had to do a bit of converting and tinkered around with their gear a bit to match new NPC wealth guidelines). With that one spell from the scroll, he not only distracted the party but inadvertently dropped a crowd-control spell on them as well. Success.
Using a fireball would have dealt around 17.5 damage, with a DC 14 save for half. Since most of the party had well over 30 Hp at 5th level (a wizard begins with 6 + Con by default, with an average of 3.5 + Con per level, so a 5th level wizard with a +2 Con has 30 Hp, which means the fireball couldn't have incapped the weakest of the weak in the party unless it was maximized and they failed their save). Which would have meant that the 7 person party would have unleashed hell on the ambushers. However, the party's DPS front-liner ended up wasting a round on the summon while getting shot at by the hobgoblins. At least three of the party members were going to be nauseated for 3-4 rounds, which meant that that one spell gave the hobgoblins several rounds to pound face with their bows. Fortunately for the party, they had an alchemist, and three front-liners who escaped without being nauseated, and managed to move out of the thicket of entangle, and managed to overcome several of the hobgoblins before they realized the were outmatched.
Due to the AC/HP of the front-liners, and the alchemist being a gnome who was also able to stealth around in the bushes to avoid getting shot to death, the party suffered no casualties, and only two of the hobgoblins died before they ran off. The party, however, felt like they had gotten schooled.
Regarding the spell slot issue, I always found this a weakness of the wizard class as a whole, no matter what you fill those slots with. This is why I favour sorcerers. That said, a blaster wizard need only prepare enough blasts to make a difference. With a (cheaper) ring of wizardry thanks to my bonded item, an open spell slot, coupled with a high int/cha, I find I can throw around as many lightning bolts and magic missiles as I please without suffering for it, and I'd say I'm doing a damn sight better than if I prefered AoE save-or-suck spells exclusively.
Most wizards will supplement their spells with scrolls or wands. Scrolls being the easiest because EVERY wizard can make scrolls. Since damage spells always deal a little damage even on failed saves, I again note it as being good for counterspells. A 9th caster level scroll of magic missile costs 112.5 gp to scribe, but will virtually assure that an enemy spell is not going to be cast. Also, don't forget Pearls of Power, and the fact many of the best control spells offer no saves or spell resistance. Black Tentacles for example is completely unaffected by your casting stat. Sleet Storm doesn't care. A control wizard who pops summoning spells can fight golems, while a blaster can do diddly.
And you're right. With the right magic items, tossing a few blasty spells now and then when you don't want to waste your good spells is entirely valid. Lightning bolt is an ideal method for countering spells (as is a maximized 9th+ level magic missile, since that's DC 35 + spell level Concentration).
Also, resource management can be important with wizards. You probably shouldn't drop a save or suck every round. You wouldn't drop a fireball on your teammates, so why drop a save or suck at bad times? The main difference is that many of the control spells have utility uses as well. Stinking cloud still creates a cloud of fog, which means it can cover your escape from enemies, even if they are immune to the cloud's nausea effects (such as undead). Black Tentacles can make it so that enemies will move where you want them to move (to avoid the ongoing AoE), allowing you to herd and control enemy movement.
Also, teamwork combines exceptionally well with save or suck. Better in fact than damage. A fighter can pickup a life-drinker (see magic weapons) and the cleric can cast death ward on him. Now every time he hits an enemy the enemy gains 2 negative levels (or 6 on a critical hit) in addition to the damage. A fighter that hits a foe twice in a round will inflict a -4 to all saves for that foe. Time for that flesh to stone or maximized disintegrate, or even phantasmal killer spell, since the fighter just stuck a -20% chance of saving on the foe. If the Fighter does that, and the barbarian intimidates (-2 again), they're saving a -6. If you use Persistent Spell (metamagic) then they have to save twice at -6 or effectively die. This also works wonders with spells like dominate person/monster, or even charms!
Enemies get a +5 bonus to saves vs charm spells when you attempt to charm them in combat. Fighter smacks, say, a giant 3 times with his axe and suddenly the giant is actually saving at a -1. If he succeeds, you have a new giant buddy who you can force to do random stuff with an opposed Charisma check. Since he takes everything you say in the best possible way, you can simply ask him to let you keep charming him, and you have a giant-minion.
This is how teamwork comes together. Everyone gunning for dealing damage is not going to combo, but just hope that the combined solo-activity will be enough to stop something.
While you address the problem with immunities to blast spells and then... list the variety of control spells that the wizard should be taking on the side. I don't think it's a real issue. A caster can always find something to do, in my experience.
They can, but as a caster it's important to make sure that "always something to do" doesn't mean wasting time. See, if I prepare fireball and then come across foes that are immune to fire, there's literally nothing I can do with that spell that will assist us. The list of things I can do with stinking cloud is pretty good, since I can use it as a harsh AoE crowd control spell, a battlefield control spell (most foes will choose to go around the cloud rather than through it to avoid risking nausea), and a battlefield control spell (yes I said it twice, since it can also be used to block line of sight). It combos well with the cleric's animated undead, since you can throw it down right on top of them without issue (that's REAL teamwork right there).
I really dig that use of magic missile. I'm surprised how much I'm falling back on it with my wizard. It's really a lot more solid than I ever gave it credit.
Grab a maximize wand and ready actions to hit people casting with it. It's most amusing.
Also thanks for the history lesson. As a relatively young player I really dig these throwbacks to first/second edition. I'm always glad to see some of that.
No problem. There's a myth that damage spells were all the rage in previous editions. They were better, but it was still way better to have a hasted party, or to slow your enemies, or put them to sleep, more often than not. This was especially true because spellcasters had even harsher problems with spell resistance in previous editions than they do today. In 2E, creatures just had a % chance to outright avoid your spells. In 1E, creatures had a % chance to avoid your spells and the % chance rose by 5% for every level you were beneath 11th level.
So if you're fighting a demon with spell resistance 60%, then literally 6/10 spells you cast against it are likely to fail. Many of them also have resistances to stuff like fireball. Since they might not have more than 50 hp, there's nothing at all wrong with buffing the heck out of your Fighter and sending him in to hit the critter for 1d8+6 * 3 damage every round. This was especially true since wasting spells on spell-resistance is lame, when in previous editions (not in the BG I & II PC games mind you but in tabletop) you had to spend 1 hour per spell level to prep a spell. So why drop cone of cold or something on a foe and have it do nothing, when you could summon a buncha monsters, or buff your Fighter with a 2nd level spell and let him beat the demon to death?
Human Diviner11
S 7 I 20 W 7 Con 12 Dex 18 Ch 7Magical Lineage: Magic Missile, Reactionary
Feats: Improved Init, Spell Focus, GSF, Elemental Spell, Familiar evolution, Dazing Spell,
quicken, EF, GEF, heightenInit: +4 from Dex, +4 from Compsognathus, +5 from Diviner, +2 from Reactionary. Ie., +15, or 13 more than your gnome.
Gear: lesser quickening Rod. Wand of Summon X
I have a familiar with tentacles, able to activate items. Plus a quickened action and a regular each turn.
Fire off a quickened dazing magic missile. Followup with a dazing heightend scorching ray.
etc....
Very nice. I purposely kept Wis @ 10 on mine because I can't bring myself to dumpstat Will saves ever (and also try to not dumpstat Str below 8 on small characters). The init is particularly great in your build for long-range magic missile plus getting scorching rays off before positioning starts tacking cover bonuses on (which is annoying even for touch attacks).
(I'm personally of the opinion that init can be important but gets overrated in optimization discussions. That's another topic entirely.)
My built-on-the-fly gnome should probably dump out the elem focus feats for improved familiar... especially since rodding fire to other elements would be a common thing in higher-level encounters. (Although neither of our builds can take the Evolved Familiar feat unless I'm missing something... it has a Cha 13 prereq.) The rods in my OP were assumed to be all cheap 3k lessers, but he'd definitely snag a quickened lesser rod for the usage once he could afford one at higher levels/prestige. Also, I can't stress enough the benefit a blasting-focused wizard gains from investing in spell spec/gtr spell spec... telling him he can prepare a versatile array of spells but spontaneously convert them into his go-to blast (tacking on metamagic as needed) is very useful. Especially whenhe can change that go-to blast at every even level.
Blast spells still contribute to bring a soft control spell. Can they be as versatile as some of the better control spells, nope, but damage is damage. If you do a decent amount of damage, now enemies have to take into consideration of how badly injured they are and the risks of the current combat. Sure, a group of orcs might just roll with it, but if you use a blast spell to disrupt another caster they might loose the spell and now have to decide many things. Should they focus you, what protections must they use, continue thier current course of actions. Blasting is only soft control and really depends on your DM's going to have NPC's react to it.
.
..
...
....
.....
Your opinion is invalid.
Here's one take on a PFS Blaster:
Elf Evoker (Admixture, Arcane Bond, anti-Div, anti- Enc)
S: 10 C: 12 D: 16 I: 18 W: 10 Ch: 10 (20 pt build @ 1st))
Feats:
1: Spell Focus: Evocation
3: Heighten Spell
5: Preferred Spell (Fireball)
W: Empower Spell
7: Preferred Spell (Scorching Ray)
9: Greater Spell Focus: Evocation
W: Persistent Spell
11:Quicken SpellSpells (Mandatory Evocation Spells):
1st: Magic Missile
2nd: Flaming Sphere
3rd: Lightning Bolt
4th: Dragon's Breath
5th: Wall of Force
6th: Cold Ice StrikeOther Spells:
All buffing, debuffing, control, defensive spells, and the like.
This build can dish decent damage by "spontaneously" casting Scorching Ray and Fireball without having to memorize the spells. They can be of any energy type (min 8) times per day.
At 12th: AOE One Round Damage (~106 total)
- 12d6 Cold Ice Strike (2 per day, but up to 5 if focused)
- 15d6 Empowered Fireball (5 per day)At 12th: Single Target One Round Damage (~117 total)
- 12d6 Quickened Scorching Ray (5 per day)
- 18d6 Empowered Scorching Ray (10 per day)
AoE
Cold Ice Strike 12*3.5=42 Since this one is a cone it also means you might get charged by the monster depending on init order.Fireball empowered equals 10*3.5*1.5=52.5
the total is 94.5, not 106, and that is assuming both saves are failed
Single Target
quickened 12*3.5=42
empowered 4*3.5*1.5=21 21*4=84
42+84=126
They all only have to hit touch AC, but you may or may not have to deal with shooting into melee, and soft cover.
I noticed a list of god spells, but you can't craft due to your choice of feats. You don't have improved init so the getting those blasting spells to work may be an issue if the bad guys close with the party.
You don't have toughness. If the campaign has monsters with SR you dont have spell penetration. You don't have Great Fortitude to boost your fort save.
I am not just theorycrafting. I had a blasting wizard in my game before, and not firing into melee makes things harder. Carefully placing AoE's is also an issue.
That applies to weapon attacks.
outside of empower and maximize, all metamagic feats stack normally atop one another, in the order you generally choose.
so, it is indeed x2, x2, x2. Twin Spell and Admixture actually create NEW SPELLS tacked onto the old ones...you're actually throwing four bundles of the original spells. Three Thunders just adds 1/2 each lightning and sonic damage.
So, you're not just multiplying damage. It's more akin to creating new spells beside the old ones, sharing in all effects.
Pathfinder is MUCH more careful with this, of course. A successful blaster build is a button-push...there IS nothing better to do then kill your opponent. MM builds make it come down to SR and PERHAPS Spell Immunity. There are only two effects which stack damage in PF, and they do so very strangely.
and for the naysayers...note, the rest of his spells are WIDE OPEN. The blaster sorc can easily choose a secondary function of summoning and/or battlefield control without any trouble, and so can the blaster wizard. Remember, the primary power with full casters is the SPELL LIST, not the feats behind it. As long as he doesn't want to do double duty with save or die spells, the blaster is completely golden.
==Aelryinth
How exactly does making a 3.5 wizard damage build show anything?
By now it should be common knowledge that 3.5 ended up very broken, because of all the prestige classes and wierd feats. I would go out on a limb and claim that u can enhance every build to insane levels by just finding that broken 3.5 stuff. So besides a "that is a it cool, but oh wait its 3.5", and a "yes this is backward compatible and all, but very few games actually alow that" reactions, i cant see the point in showing that he can do 900 damage.
You didn't read my posts at all, did you?
THE SAME ARGUMENT WAS AROUND IN 3.5, i.e. Blasters Suck.
It was false then, too.
There's also the fact Pathfinder is OGL and backwards compatible and a lot of people reading this will use 3.5 stuff.
=======
I also noted that there are exactly THREE feats in PF that add to blasting damage for this very reason...Energize, Empower, and Maximize. PF does NOT want the push-button kill. Bonus damage beyond that is entirely a function of class/archetype, or racial bonuses.
I.e it's totally possible with PF+3.5 to make a 180d6 fireball and maximize it for 1080 damage. The best you can do with PF is 90 +7.5d6, + class bonuses. The argument has a lot more viability in PF because of this.
that being said, being able to drop 100 pts of damage among 3+ enemies with a decent high save DC is extremely effective at aiding your melees in disposing of the enemy. Each enemy is weakened by that much, and so dies that much faster. It's just not an 'opening round knockout', which often has highly variable success chances.
Still, if you want ranged direct attack damage, you're generally better off with an archer. AoE's, now, thems fun.
==Aelryinth
THE SAME ARGUMENT WAS AROUND IN 3.5, i.e. Blasters Suck.
It was false then, too.
There's also the fact Pathfinder is OGL and backwards compatible and a...
The game is backwards compatible, but not necessarily allowed at a gaming table depending on what the 3.5 ability is.
I wont get into the blasters suck thing because I don't think that is true.
The party should be the wizard, fighter, cleric, and the 4th character is unknown. If you have one fighter you don't need 2.
The other issue is how it will be run. If it is just combats it won't simulate an actual game and will be dismissed no matter what happens.
Are these 14 encounters back to back?
How many are social encounters?
How many are traps? If one person sees the other wizard group fight monster X it gives then it gives wizard group #2 time to think, if they figure out a GM's(person controlling the monsters) style of running a game.
will there be a chance to do research and find out info about the monsters in advance.
I think these questions and more should be answered.
If low level mooks can let loose these same save or dies thats more or less proving the point RD is trying to make. Of these dip feats I find augment summoning would be the only one I'd miss, and even blaster wizards could be able to find the feats to take it anyway (with an added boost to web, glitterdust and cloud spells.)The low-level mook used a scroll of summon monster III (or maybe it was a wand, I had to do a bit of converting and tinkered around with their gear a bit to match new NPC wealth guidelines). With that one spell from the scroll, he not only distracted the party but inadvertently dropped a crowd-control spell on them as well. Success.
Using a fireball would have dealt around 17.5 damage...
I didn't mean to say that fireball would have been a better option here. On the contrary. I'm merely saying that if a DC13 stinking cloud was so effective in this scenario, that building to blast isn't a sin.
I'm afraid we might have to agree to disagree on the teamwork issue. I think your example is painfully specific, and such combos are best used against single high CR opponents. A well-placed fireball or disintegrate is likely dealing enough damage that the fighter can mop up the survivor(s).
Purely from my own experience with a three-person party. With only two other damage dealers I find that after I thin the ranks a little with a SINGLE control spell, it's prudent to contribute as best I can to the parties damage, of which I make up (at least) a third, probably more. Typically I start off with a "control" spell and follow up with damage. With a larger group, I understand this would be a different dynamic, but I think people are underestimating the importance that damage plays.
As for the spell immunity, this is an issue with control spells as much as damage spells. If the undead are immune to stinking cloud, don't cast it. If the enemy is immune to lightning bolt, don't cast it. Doing any differently is "wasting spell slots" even more. And you also seem to be under the assumption that these damage spells don't have additional effects. An old PC of ours (Nikola Tesla, lightning mage) and the countless forest fires we caused beg to differ (and smoke can be pretty damned brutal). We were constantly on guard for dry leaves and tinder after that.
People also seem to forget that many of these monsters also have VULNERABILITIES. Any wizard that's hit a white dragon with a well-placed scorching ray knows exactly what I'm talking about. I think it's one of the things that makes fighting dragons so fun.
Tangentially, this is also a good way to earn the ire of a very angry dragon.
"You dare wield fire against me, spell-slinger?
Being pinned against a cliffface and getting off that last fire spell to seal the deal though? That was priceless.
Here's one take on a PFS Blaster:
Elf Evoker (Admixture, Arcane Bond, anti-Div, anti- Enc)
S: 10 C: 12 D: 16 I: 18 W: 10 Ch: 10 (20 pt build @ 1st))
Feats:
1: Spell Focus: Evocation
3: Heighten Spell
5: Preferred Spell (Fireball)
W: Empower Spell
7: Preferred Spell (Scorching Ray)
9: Greater Spell Focus: Evocation
W: Persistent Spell
11:Quicken Spell
I noticed a list of god spells, but you can't craft due to your choice of feats. You don't have improved init so the getting those blasting spells to work may be an issue if the bad guys close with the party.
You don't have toughness. If the campaign has monsters with SR you dont have spell penetration. You don't have Great Fortitude to boost your fort save.
I like this build, Rory. I'd personally tone down the metamagic. And while I have to agree that it might be missing some feats (namely spell penetration) Prefered Spell would make me a little more comfortable playing a wizard.
As for craft feats? Bonded item. Sure, your party members dont get to capitalize on it, but they'll acquire their own gear. Craft Wonderous Item woudnt go astray with a stingy GM, but I dont necessarily thing it's an issue. For initiative? +3 dex and the reactionary trait leaves it at a solid +5. Not perfect, but we can skip that. Toughness? Peh. If our almighty caster is taking a full attack, those extra 10 or so hit points won't make much difference. Between +1 con and favoured class and a d6 hit dice, the wizard does alright. Great Fortitude? Really? Sure, these feats are nice, but is it really a necessity?
... whew. This is a fun thread, but it takes a lot out of you. I'm going to go get some work done now.
How many of you guys are playing with magic mart?
Look, I actually like blasting. Unfortunately the real high level wizards churning out those customized +4 dragon bane meteor hammers your party fighter REALLY wants are bloody rare in PF.
By the end of most AP'S all the party want their custom gear and I'm not sure how easy you make it to get that stuff but the last three casters I played had craft wondrous item, wand, magicarms/armor.
Then after persistent spell (which youre silly for not taking) and quicken (same) there ain't room for all those blasty feats.
Stick with Dazing and empower. They'll do the job.
And sorry, but I'd take a persistent save or lose over an uber blast any day.
(Pretty sure my last arcane blooded human favored extra spells sorcerer only knew scorching ray and dragons breath as far as blasts went.)
Having lost that round, many "blaster-haters" decry such builds as being FAR too focused and requiring FAR too many resources, a point they believe to be in their favor since other spellcasting styles (summoning God-wizarding, battlefield control, buffing/debuffing, save or die, etc.) require far less investment--in fact, almost none at all.
Please note a round that is "lost" only as long as one ignores saves, resistances/immunities, and spell resistance completely while focusing to the point of exclusion on one (at most two) energy types.
AKA being a one trick pony that ignores all the times his trick don't work.
It's like watching the person playing a fighter with a 7 wisdom and no ranged combat abilities at all complain about the fact his melee ground based fighter is useless at higher levels and always fails his save throws.
All you can do is shake your head and move on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All you can do is shake your head and move on.
Then please do so.
You and others seem to continue ignoring the simple solutions posted by pro-blasters to overcome such things. Saves and SR are laughably easy to overcome more often than not (particularly at higher levels or with Reflex saves), as is energy resistance.
And hey, I can spend the resources on bettering blasting and getting past those kinds of things. Why? Because I can STILL be an awesome battlefield controller, buffer, controller, debuffer, snuffer, or summoner with no investments outside of spells and a high intelligence.
You CAN'T spend your resources on those other spell combat styles in the same way you can on blasting. There just isn't enough meaningful stuff there. Fortunately, you don't need much, if any to be effective with those types of spells, so it all works out quite well.
Improved Initiative, Spell Focus, and a handful of others DO help, but they only get you so far.
To make a comparison, it's like a pair of fighters. One with lots of feats and deep feat trees to choose from (Pathfinder), the other with lots of feats and only shallow feat trees to choose from (v3.5), as well as a few skill/defense feats to round himself out.
The former fighter will almost always end up better (from a combat perspective at least) for having deeper feat trees. In many cases, he has enough feats that he can get one or two WHOLE deep feat trees, and STILL get some of the feats and abilities of the other guy to round himself out.
So the question is this: Why isn't the other guy doing the same?
I just don't understand why anyone would give up the option to deal 300+ damage in a single round to a large group of enemies just for some minor scattered bonuses. Forgo those minor bonuses and be a badass god wizard who can blast, buff, control, debuff, dominate, snuff, or summon as well! You play long enough and you will most certainly encounter situations that need each and everyone of those. The "normal" wizards you and others describe will make it just fine until they run into a situation where a good blast spell would have saved everyone whole heaps of trouble.
Slow it down or blast it to smithereens? The answer is obvious: route them into tightly packed bunches, limit their ability to escape/retaliate, and THEN blast them to smithereens. Alternatively, skip to the third step if you have reason to believe you can get them all in one fell swoop.
All you can do is shake your head and move on.Then please do so.
You and others seem to continue ignoring the simple solutions posted by pro-blasters to overcome such things. Saves and SR are laughably easy to overcome more often than not (particularly at higher levels or with Reflex saves), as is energy resistance.
And hey, I can spend the resources on bettering blasting and getting past those kinds of things. Why? Because I can STILL be an awesome battlefield controller, buffer, controller, debuffer, snuffer, or summoner with no investments outside of spells and a high intelligence.
If saves are laughable then they are equally laughable for the SoD and SoS spells. As such the SoD and SoS spells WIN where as your blasting -- doesn't. Energy resistance doesn't have much that bypasses it or immunity for that matter and all your builds rely on focusing on one energy type. Spell resistance might be laughable -- but when you are still losing 5~15% of your spells to it you are still losing out on something that you don't have to lose out on at all with other spell choices.
Spell perfection is nice... up until someone casts spell immunity. Now yes you can go with a different spell, but you won't get as much mileage out of it.
There are more spells now that help get around the energy resistance/ immunity problems... but they still have to be prepared for a wizard which means more spells of other types that aren't prepared.
Just so you can try and keep up with the fighter -- and still not really do so, while trying to not kill your friends at the same time.
Minor scattered bonuses?
I disagree -- +10 to damage and rerolling spell resistance is minor compared to never being surprised and having a +10 on Initiative as well as a free choice of a d20 roll each round. It's also lacking compared to having yourself a 15 hit dice archon with level 15 clerical spell casting as a lackey at all times. It also stinks compared to lots of free teleportation, especially when such is supernatural and a swift action.
300+ damage yes... if you pass all the spell resistances, no one saves, and you happen to have the right energy type to by pass any and all resistances, and you count the damage across multiple creatures.
Where as the fighter with a bow can do the same thing all day long so long has he has arrows.
I like this build, Rory. I'd personally tone down the metamagic. And while I have to agree that it might be missing some feats (namely spell penetration) Prefered Spell would make me a little more comfortable playing a wizard.
As for craft feats? Bonded item. Sure, your party members dont get to capitalize on it, but they'll acquire their own gear. Craft Wonderous Item woudnt go astray with a stingy GM, but I dont necessarily thing it's an issue. For initiative? +3 dex and the reactionary trait leaves it at a solid +5. Not perfect, but we can skip that. Toughness? Peh. If our almighty caster is taking a full attack, those extra 10 or so hit points won't make much difference. Between +1 con and favoured class and a d6 hit dice, the wizard does alright. Great Fortitude? Really? Sure, these feats are nice, but is it really a necessity?... whew. This is a fun thread, but it takes a lot out of you. I'm going to go get some work done now.
HP just like weapon damage is more dependent on the modifier than the base so if a wizard dumps con he/she can have a lot of hp. Since this wizard only has a +1 con modifier he should be making up for it with toughness and great fortitude.
If he has that trait for +2 I did not see it in the build. I did look for it.PS:I still don't see it. A monster only needs improved init to bypass the current +3 the caster has.
I just don't understand why anyone would give up the option to deal 300+ damage in a single round to a large group of enemies just for some minor scattered bonuses. Forgo those minor bonuses and be a badass god wizard who can blast, buff, control, debuff, dominate, snuff, or summon as well! You play long enough and you will most certainly encounter situations that need each and everyone of those. The "normal" wizards you and others describe will make it just fine until they run into a situation where a good blast spell would have saved everyone whole heaps of trouble.Slow it down or blast it to smithereens? The answer is obvious: route them into tightly packed bunches, limit their ability to escape/retaliate, and THEN blast them to smithereens. Alternatively, skip to the third step if you have reason to believe you can get them all in one fell swoop.
Your 300 damage is not guaranteed, and it is spending a lot of resources to not do it, and taking away from other options.
Having to bypass 3 defenses, while using all those resources and potentially only upsetting the bad guys is not a good move.A non blaster can solve many problems out of combat, and direct the battle as it takes place with one or two spells at times, then sit back and let the rest of the party clean up. It could possibly do this without any magic enhancing feats, even though they do make it easier.
In short it is inefficient. Nobody, at least not me, is saying blasting can't be effective, but it does not get me the same bang for my buck.
edit: Why would I want to waste all those resources on blasting when I can handle the enemy in so many ways if I don't? It seems this is a playstyle issue. Our normal wizards seem to be doing fine in our games, and your blasters don't the same versatility.
You must have missed my post where you party members get in the way of blasting. Now the god wizard might have this issue also with certain spells, but there are other spells that can be cast. From your statement your blaster does not really come to life until level 15. The god wizard is always useful. I also mentioned that many monsters at that level are hard to force into a convenient space. They can fly and/or teleport since many of them are outsiders or dragons. Those underpowered Linnorms are an exception, but for the most part being conveniently placed is not going to happen.
Exactly what did I miss? The amount of damage keeps climbing seemingly arbitrarily. I saw someone post a build that could hit 212 damage pretty well if all their ducks landed in a row, then someone comes and says 250+, and now Ravingdork is saying 300+; WTF is all this extra damaging coming from?
I didn't mean to say that fireball would have been a better option here. On the contrary. I'm merely saying that if a DC13 stinking cloud was so effective in this scenario, that building to blast isn't a sin.
I'm afraid we might have to agree to disagree on the teamwork issue. I think your example is painfully specific, and such combos are best used against single high CR opponents. A well-placed fireball or disintegrate is likely dealing enough damage that the fighter can mop up the survivor(s).
If it had been a DC 17 save, virtually none of the party members would have been able to act, so it would be badguys get 4 free rounds vs the party. But that one, dinky, pitiful, DC 13 (lower than you can even cast it normally) stinking cloud screwed them up just that much. Followed by a single, dinky, DC 11 (via magic item) entangle, screwed them up that much more. So now, let's imagine a real caster bother to cast something like that. Say a real caster had a 20 Int. That's DC 18. Spell Focus (just for Augment Summoning) brings it to DC 19 at 5th level. At 5th level a Fighter with a +3 Con only has a +7 to his save, meaning that he will fail the save vs this spell more often than not. Rogues, wizards, bards, oracles, etc? Worse odds.
Now imagine chaining this stuff together. Round 1, stinking cloud. You roll and they're nauseated for 3 rounds after, so on round 3 you drop a slow spell, and now they go from no standard actions and just moves to only one standard or move action. Assuming of course they're not just strait-up dead because your party's Fighter went over and butchered them like lambs while they were choking, gagging, and vomiting on themselves because you saw fit to make their lives miserable.
Which the moral of our story is in either case, blasting or fighting, you're goal is to take out the enemies. Either A) you blast the crap out of them and then the fighter takes them out, or B) you disable to crap out of thme and the fighter takes 'em out, or C) the fighter attacks first and wounds them enough that your blast damage takes them out; but in any case, only option B will reduce or negate the pain that the enemy can bring to you.
If I kill the guy who stabs my friend, then I did good. If I prevent him from stabbing my friend, I did better.
The party should be the wizard, fighter, cleric, and the 4th character is unknown. If you have one fighter you don't need 2.
The other issue is how it will be run. If it is just combats it won't simulate an actual game and will be dismissed no matter what happens.
Are these 14 encounters back to back?
How many are social encounters?
How many are traps? If one person sees the other wizard group fight monster X it gives then it gives wizard group #2 time to think, if they figure out a GM's(person controlling the monsters) style of running a game.will there be a chance to do research and find out info about the monsters in advance.
I think these questions and more should be answered.
The point is to differentiate between blaster wizard and control wizard. Traps are immaterial to the question of blaster vs control - so I no traps.
So, yes: The encounters are back to back.Each encounter will occur in rounds here; each player may refine his tactics, if he has the capability to do so, until all players are satisfied with their answers for the round. In which case, the encounter advances to the next round.
No information will be given about the encounters. Prep the best rounded characters you can.
Traps do matter. A non blasting wizard is more likely to have a spell ready to bypass it, assuming no party trap finder is there.
With 3 fighters he wont even have to cast a spell every round. He can extend haste and go from fight to fight watching the fighters tear through everything. When the duration is about out he does it again.
Now some will cry foul if no spells are cast but the non-blaster works best by empowering others, not by doing the work himself, and running through a dungeon crawl is not a measure of real game effectiveness. It is only a measure of battlefield effectiveness. You must model the game in all accounts to be full validated and get rid of all excuses.
I would soooo take a god wizard over a blaster wizard if I was doing an endurance game. Especially since I could devote a fair amount of my resources scribing scrolls of some nice spells, which I could fall back on as needed. Stuff like scrolls of party buffs, since they don't need my high saving throw DCs. Scrolls of stuff like fireball are wastes of time, after-all (no free-scaling, poor save DCs, etc).
Actually, I recently ended up doing this exact sort of thing in an online game. We were doing a dungeon crawl in a dungeon with a bunch of drow, drider, and various giant arachnids. I think I cast 1 spell per fight, on average, and it usually made the difference. We were all about 5th level or so. Haste pretty much owned. Enlarge person lasted 5 minutes per casting so in most cases our meatshield was doing quite well. I think once I dropped a summon spell. We ended up half-way through the dungeon before I was half-way through my spells.
I didn't even use consumables, but I had a few in case I needed them, 'cause I tend to enjoy micromanaging, planning, and doing the whole prepared-adventurer thing.
EDIT: Also I kept detect magic up which helped with any magic traps we'd come across, as well as any drider or drow using tricks like invisibility or similar. If they pre-buffed, it saved us a surprise round when I could sense buffs on the other sides of doors and such.
I've changed mind on the buffs between enounters. You will have 20 minutes between encounters. Penalizes God wizards even more - buffs won't last well.Can we all agree this is heavily favoring the blaster?
I should have stayed quiet about the extend spell tactic. :)
You didn't read my posts at all, did you?THE SAME ARGUMENT WAS AROUND IN 3.5, i.e. Blasters Suck.
It was false then, too.
There's also the fact Pathfinder is OGL and backwards compatible and a...
What you are trying to do here, is to conclude that blasters dosnt suck, because they can dish out loads of damage, in 3.5 ofc. That logic will only be good as long as 3.5 stuff is allowed.
I thought it was common knowledge that 3.5 was broken in multiple ways, and thus banned from most gaming tables, atleast if u use it for optimization.
By the same reasoning, i could just jump into a "monks suck thread", and start arguing that they can deal over 8000 damage if you just combine these 3 different 3.5 prestige classes and start using certain feats (they actually can do that, jsut go look at the psychic monk and one or 2 other prestige classes i cant remember).
I am not arguing that blasters suck, just that saying they dont suck in 3.5 isnt proving anything.
I do have one question though, how long can the blasters keep at it ? if all they work with is quickened fireballs, scorching rays and all that, it should be kinda obvious that they are going through their spell slots very fast.
Cold Ice Strike = 12*3.5 + 6 (evo wizard) = 48
Empower Fireball = 10d6 * 1.5 + 6 (evo wizard) = 58
= 106 average potential totalQuickened Scorching Ray = 12d6 + 6 = 48
Empower Scorching Ray = 12d6 * 1.5 + 6 = 69
= 117 average potential totalAnd, if I'm constantly in fear of something charging me, I'll cast a spell to protect myself (Stoneskin is a nice one as it lasts two hours at level 12, False Life lasts 12 hours, memorize a Quickened Mirror Image).
Where is the +6 coming from?
If you are casting stoneskin then that is one less blasting spell you are using. Not only are you now prolonging the fight and willing putting yourself in harms way you are not helping the party.
The build has a +9 touch attack prior to buffs....
You take a -4 for firing into melee, and if someone is in between you and the target they get +4 AC bonus to do soft cover so technically you only have a +1. You can't claim buffs and not list them.
That's just plain funny... No one has everything, even a god-wizard.
If you must have some of those things, then swap out something, buy equipment to shore up your fear, pick the traits, or optimize a bit further than what I did.
Example: swap Spell Focus for Improved Init, swap Persistent Spell for Selective spell, pick...
I never said everyone had everything, but those are feats that you don't have, and example of feats that make you better overall that a blaster can't have because of everything that goes into blasting.
I am just of the mindset that is better to be really good at a lot of things, while being mediocre at one, that it is to be really good at one one thing, and mediocre at the others.This blasting thing works in vacumn, and if the monsters fail their saves, and the blaster rolls well the fight can be ended quickly, but that does not always happen. If I were to play my bad guys realistically they would all home in one the caster and he would be dead. That is why I don't advocate just making the bad guys upset.
edit:When did anyone say this was PFS only, and the majority of us don't play PFS.
On another note if the blaster builds worked as well as you thought they did the GM would probably pull you aside and ask you to tone it down since the other PFS players would not get to really do much.
I do have one question though, how long can the blasters keep at it ? if all they work with is quickened fireballs, scorching rays and all that, it should be kinda obvious that they are going through their spell slots very fast.You definitely have to play blasters just as smart as other casters. Playing a blaster is not the "easy button" for casters persay.
That said, blasters are not dishing max damage every round of combat. They should only do that when it is needed, similar to controllers not wasting control spells in wrong situations. Other rounds might be spent buffing the party (haste!), using wands (enlarge person!), using scrolls, etc.
The build I showed could do 100+ damage potential (going nova) for only 5 rounds per day, burning all 5th and 6th level slots (you have 5 of each roughly). After that, you are stuck with lower damage rounds (~41 to 48 AOD, ~69 single target), or just keep with the god-wizard spells at that point if you prefer.
In theory, you can use quickened meta magic rods to extend the nova effect by perhaps 3 rounds, but that gets expensive!
...but the title of this thread is "why every wizard should be a blaster", and to be a blaster it normally means prepping more blasting spells than others.
With the rod being a necessity in many cases, and not just an option that is another resource, and seems like a reason to not play a blaster.
If the title of the thread was "how blasting can contribute" that would be different.
Hey now, blasters are NOT relegated explicitly to blast spells. That's saying that control wizards can never cast a buff spell.
That's a wrong way to look at blasters.
My point was that you are now extending combat, and using more spells to get that blasting done. This particular spell also cost gold. Using more spells and gold is part of the resource issue I keep bringing up.
Of course I didn't list them. I didn't list the -4 to hit and +4 to AC, because they aren't always applicable either.
One or the other is common with respect to ranged attacks, if not both. If you are using scorching ray as one of your key spells then I would at least pick up precise shot, which requires point blank shot. I had a wizard in my game missing quiet a few times before she did that.
I am not asking for too much. I want someone that is good at lot of things, has the init to go first, can take a decent beating, has a decent fort save, and can debuff/buff as needed, and handle utility things on a regular basis, among other things I may have forgotten to mention.
Blasting takes away from all that.
The blaster wizard is alive and well, Sylvanite posts all the time about it. Just look his posts up.
1 Fighter/5 Wizard/10EK/Arcane Archer4
Simply put, the best possible blaster wizard is doling out a Rapid Fire/Manyshot/Hasted volley of arrows when he isn't casting. It's sustained all day and he still has plenty of caster level to be able to use the wizards spell selection whenever he likes. Between his bonded bow and his outrageous selection of buffs it should more than compensate for the +4 AC most everything has to his attacks from cover.
It's playable the whole way through the progression, but once you have those third level spells and a rod of extend you're basically the star of the show.
The blaster wizard is alive and well, Sylvanite posts all the time about it. Just look his posts up.
1 Fighter/5 Wizard/10EK/Arcane Archer4
Simply put, the best possible blaster wizard is doling out a Rapid Fire/Manyshot/Hasted volley of arrows when he isn't casting. It's sustained all day and he still has plenty of caster level to be able to use the wizards spell selection whenever he likes. Between his bonded bow and his outrageous selection of buffs it should more than compensate for the +4 AC most everything has to his attacks from cover.
It's playable the whole way through the progression, but once you have those third level spells and a rod of extend you're basically the star of the show.
You have to do more than show class progressions to convince anyone.
Does he have a detailed version of this build?
You have to do more than show class progressions to convince anyone.
Does he have a detailed version of this build?
But I am under no delusion that I'll convince anyone of anything. It is my own opinion that archery is outstanding single target damage though, and far more sustainable through a long adventuring day than a wizards spell count.
You have to do more than show class progressions to convince anyone.
Does he have a detailed version of this build?But I am under no delusion that I'll convince anyone of anything. It is my own opinion that archery is outstanding single target damage though, and far more sustainable through a long adventuring day than a wizards spell count.
Those supporting blasting want to include AoE's also. Everyone knows about the power of archery.
His build is not that detailed after looking at it since it does not really build the blaster's case.
I removed a post. Refrain from name calling.
Tactic against treantmonk- take improve initiative (you will need it)
- cast an area blast spell (now you kill his mephit)
- now he hate you run for your life XD.
You can't run far or fast enough!!!
I think the crux of the argument is: hey, if they save, you still got something!
Which I don't find that compelling, but, hell, at the levels at which relatively silly amounts of fire damage come together, go ahead and throw Fear and Quickened Fear in the same round. You get something for that if they make both saves, and fear-non-immunity is really about as common as monsters that don't laugh at most elemental damage at the same ridiculously high levels.
