First, you are forgetting something crucial, once again. You know all those fancy weapon and armor price enhancement etc quotes you threw me? They are a one time cost, with the possible exception with a rust monster. Meanwhile, all those spell prices you quoted me? They happen each and every time a Wizard wants a new spell, plus it costs a large amount of time (personal) to achieve. Meanwhile, the warrior just pays somebody else to do it, and only does so once.
Barring upgrades to the item, sure. Now look here. Let's assume a Wizard wants to know every possible 3rd level spell and below, and a Fighter wants a +3 weapon and +3 armor.
By my count there are 95 1st level spells, so 950 gp there.
There are about 145 2nd level spells, so another 5800 gold.
Then there are 120 3rd level spells, so a final cost of 10,800 gold.
Total = 17, 550 gp. The Wizard could afford this by 7th level, and still have about 6k gold left to play with.
Grand total for Fighter = 27,000 gp. A Fighter might be able to afford this by 8th level and still have 6k gold left to play with.
Most of the Wizard types I've seen are continually running on E for dough, in comparison of warrior types. The latter tend to save up for armor and weapon enchantments, meaning they have large amounts of moolah available for emergencies. Wizards just blow them on new spells, in order to get all that vaunted flexibility the class is reputed.
Try again.
But wait there's more!
That's making the ludicrous assumption that A.) The Wizard wants to know EVERY SPELL (when is he ever going to use Serren's Armor Lock or Enter Image, for example?), and B.) The Fighter doesn't need nifty things like a Belt of Giant's Strength/Great Constitution, a cloak of resistances, and all that jazz. The Wizard probably just wants an Int headband (+2 for 4k gold) and a Cloak of Resistances (+1 for 1k gold) which he can easily afford.
Try again.
Now, as for needing AC, you people DO realize that to get one's AC up like that, means your typical spellcaster has to spend the first several rounds casting defensive things like Mage Armor, right?
Considering by level 8 nifty spells like Mage Armor and False Life last all day, no.
Meanwhile, the warrior is moving in and attacking. It also means that a spellcaster can easily be caught with his pants down, far more so than a warrior since it happens nearly each and every fight. Mage Armor might last, but other protective spells have a duration of minutes or rounds. Why cast Blur instead of Displacement? Check the duration. Think about having to do that each and every new combat. Usually several minutes at minimum pass between combats, meaning your spell effects have expired.
Or you could simply use, say, a Summon Spell first off while the other caster locks down the opposition with Entangle or its ilk while relying on your respectable long duration buffs to bear the brunt of whatever slips through except in emergencies.
Try again.
Took the words right out of my mouth.
Recall that warrior types have access to early, and relatively cheap armor in comparison to primary spellcasters. You can enchant shields and body armor relatively quickly, too. Meanwhile the Wizard had to either cast Shield etc in each and every beginning of combat, or spend serious moolah on Amulets of Natural Armor and Bracers of Armor. Getting those items means you don't spend the first precious rounds of combat defending your unarmored butt via spells.
More likely just the AoNA except at higher levels, since Mage Armor goes up to +4 and lasts all day. Though those things ARE ludicrously expensive.
Do you guys get it? There is no uber class here (with the possible exception of Summoners). Each necessary role must be filled, and there are certain classes that are better than others for each role. Each class ends up needing each other. A Barbarian needs a Sorcerer around, and vice versa. A Wizard needs a Paladin around, a Cleric needs a Rogue, etc.
Why does the Wizard need a Paladin and a Sorcerer need a Barbarian? And why does ANY ONE OF THEM need a Rogue?
Like I've said before, the game might be slightly difficult for a while, but once the casters get rolling they don't really need martial classes any more, though they're still nice to have around.
Whereas martial characters NEED casters around to be successful in 90% of adventures. THAT'S THE ISSUE.
That's the point I am trying to make. You keep citing various situations that prove the superiority of spellcasters over warriors, especially Wizards over say, Fighters, but it just doesn't work. If I had a group of all 10th level Wizards, they'd blow their spells far too early, and be caught with their pants down especially when it comes time to rest.
Just because your group is apparently incapable of keeping an eye on their resources and try to go nova every round doesn't mean most people play that way. A 10th level Wizard has a collective total of 16 spells per day (without Int modifier bonuses), and a party of them would have about 64 between them all. Depending on which spells they have prepared, they're likely not going to cast more than two per encounter unless it's an encounter with HUGE numbers or a really tough enemy.
Having limited spells per day does that to you, as does limited ki etc. Meanwhile ye old Ranger can keep swinging that sword, and use long term enchantments to stay healthy. Your Wizard would end up blowing their wad on fancy spells and AC items, while the warrior would blow their wad on fancy arms and armor. Same diff. Doesn't change a thing.
And you keep assuming the Wizard needs to blow his cash on EVERY SPELL EVER and AC items, when what he's likely doing is blowing his cash on the spells he NEEDS and Wands, Scrolls, and Staves to increase his staying power. Everything gets into near auto-hit territory later on anyway.
All upper level spellcasting changes is raw versatility, but even then you have to prepare before the encounter starts, or you are screwed. The warrior just needs to nock an arrow or draw a blade, both of which takes almost no time. Why do you think a lot of primary spellcasters take Improved Initiative, even more so than warriors or skill monkeys? More time.
No, it's so they can go first and start chucking AoE f&~@ you spells before their allies start getting in the way (or for Summoning).
A 10th level Wizard has a collective total of 16 spells per day (without Int modifier bonuses)
You've left out school slots. Unless this is a universalist wizard, it's 21 slots without Int modifier bonus slots, pearls of power, etc.
That's making the ludicrous assumption that A.) The Wizard wants to know EVERY SPELL (when is he ever going to use Serren's Armor Lock or Enter Image, for example?)
Can I just add, too, that enemy spellcasters drop spellbooks and scrolls, too, which means they don't need to spend anything on copying them--and in fact, can make money selling the spells from the new spellbook.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Heh, my druid carried a spellbook from a wizard she had defeated for like four levels before she finally decided to get rid of it... She kept trying to learn the spells, but couldn't...
Playing spellcasters can be challenging for some players. In our group we have two players who simply feel that spell casters have too many options and it overwhelms them to try to figure out which options to take. When they do play spellcasters they tend to gravitate towards a small number of spells they use over and over, and they then very much fall into the analogy of "I have a hammer, so everything looks like a nail to me." Fireball and magic missile tend to become the default "solutions" for most combat situations.This approach to playing a spellcaster always seems to leave them perfectly on par with the rest of the group and they don't ever seem to become a problem to manage either for the player or the DM.
I've always wondered what the game would look like if full casters only got 1 spell known per level, but could cast them as many times as they wanted. Any spells not appropriate for that would be moved to special (presumably long) rituals or otherwise have weird kinks to them that make them impractical in most situations. Heck, the ability to do such rituals might even require a feat.
Even better, in my mind, would be to make it so that casters only had 1 spell at first level and gained another every even level thereafter, but also had the potential to improve a subset of those spells drastically via their feat and class ability choices. Again, this assumes they could use those spells at will.
EDIT: I has a grammar?
You mean like 3.5 warlocks?
|
You mean like 3.5 warlocks?Playing spellcasters can be challenging for some players. In our group we have two players who simply feel that spell casters have too many options and it overwhelms them to try to figure out which options to take. When they do play spellcasters they tend to gravitate towards a small number of spells they use over and over, and they then very much fall into the analogy of "I have a hammer, so everything looks like a nail to me." Fireball and magic missile tend to become the default "solutions" for most combat situations.This approach to playing a spellcaster always seems to leave them perfectly on par with the rest of the group and they don't ever seem to become a problem to manage either for the player or the DM.
I've always wondered what the game would look like if full casters only got 1 spell known per level, but could cast them as many times as they wanted. Any spells not appropriate for that would be moved to special (presumably long) rituals or otherwise have weird kinks to them that make them impractical in most situations. Heck, the ability to do such rituals might even require a feat.
Even better, in my mind, would be to make it so that casters only had 1 spell at first level and gained another every even level thereafter, but also had the potential to improve a subset of those spells drastically via their feat and class ability choices. Again, this assumes they could use those spells at will.
EDIT: I has a grammar?
Sort-of, yes, though they would need a few more class features if updated to Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When people started arguing about casters being vulnerable and unable to be prepared for everything--unskilled players end up with bad luck like that. Skilled players make their own luck.
Hogwash. Say we are exploring some cave, and because of the tight confines I've prepared short range, high damage or incapacitation spells. Suddenly the cave opens up into a huge room, with plenty of ceiling space, and we are attacked by some flying monster.
Am I to blame for having prepared short range spells? Nope. I couldn't have predicted what the environment was about to do. I am not the DM.
Lemme ask you, is your ego so huge that you actually expect yourself to be psychic? That's impossible. Existence doesn't work that way.
By my count there are 95 1st level spells, so 950 gp there.
There are about 145 2nd level spells, so another 5800 gold.
Then there are 120 3rd level spells, so a final cost of 10,800 gold.
I don't mean to be nitpicky but I think you're leaving out the cost to borrow the spellbook (1/2 the cost to scribe the spell), which I'm assuming is relevant since we're talking about acquiring spells in the cheapest expected fashion. Which would bring the cost to:
1st Level (95) = 1,425 gp
2nd level (145) = 8,700 gp
3rd Level (120) = 16,200 gp
And would require 7.45 spellbooks to contain (another 111.75 gp).
Total Cost = 26,436.75 gold pieces.
Sorry if this seems a bit nitpicky, but I'm playing a wizard in a campaign right now and so these thoughts are fresh in my mind. Just with the core cantrips + 6 1st level spells I'm already 16/100 pages in my starting spellbook. I also know that before 7th level I want to get a spare spellbook and scribe certain spells from my main to my secondary to use as a traveling or spare spellbook.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hogwash. Say we are exploring some cave, and because of the tight confines I've prepared short range, high damage or incapacitation spells. Suddenly the cave opens up into a huge room, with plenty of ceiling space, and we are attacked by some flying monster.
Am I to blame for having prepared short range spells? Nope. I couldn't have predicted what the environment was about to do. I am not the DM.
Lemme ask you, is your ego so huge that you actually expect yourself to be psychic? That's impossible. Existence doesn't work that way.
First, the spells you're talking about don't really exist. Spell ranges are kind of all over the place and seemingly random, so there's no "short range but powerful" spells as opposed to "long range but weak" spells.
Second, I could just fly to get to them. Every caster has flight by mid level.
Third, our group could retreat back to the narrow corridors to use them to our advantage, and if the flying creature doesn't want to risk coming after us, I can prepare the proper spells in the slots I left open for that sort of occasion.
Fourth, I could have sent a spy forward to see there would be an open cavern ahead--familiar, summoned earth elemental, prying eyes, etc.
Fifth, I could use a high knowledge check to know there are likely to be large chambers in this cave.
You absolutely don't have to be psychic to have the right spell for the job, and it's absurd to think I'm talking about literally seeing the future or mind reading.
Edit: If you used all your slots on short range spells (and didn't leave any open), and you refused to send a scout/scry ahead, and you didn't take any knowledges, and you refused to retreat back to favorable terrain, then yes, you are absolutely to blame.
Edit 2: Can I expand and ask how the fighter is supposed to deal with this predicament and why he's better off in the cavern than a spellcaster?
Don't get me wrong though. I agree spells aren't going to be all that expensive. I already checked with my GM and I'll be grabbing lots of spells but not that many. Making backup spellbooks, and most of my money is going to be going into consumables and pearls (a bandolier's worth of pearls man) as well as stuff to pad my defenses (mage armor will be fine for a while as far as armor goes, as will shield when my caster level is more respectable) like amulets of natural armor, ring of protection, cloak of resistance, etc.
Of course, something that's probably worth mentioning is that beyond +X Intelligence items, there's not really a lot that's going to improve my offensive capabilities. Most of my money will be going to extending my usefulness and buffing the martials. Greater magic weapon is a lot cheaper than large enhancement bonuses and lasts all day, so you can expect that I'll probably be converting a lot of my spell slots directly into martial power. Being able to go "Okay fighter, you're +1 flaming sword is now a +3 flaming sword for the rest of the day" or "Your masterwork composite longbow is now a +2 composite longbow for the rest of the day" is pretty beneficial.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't actually read most of the above long-ass posts, but I'm going to TL:DR it anyway: People assuming that because the other person is wrong about element A and/or B that they are obviously wrong about everything else, including elements that the other person didn't mention. Also, everyone plays exactly the same way, so obviously any difference in play styles seen by others are complete fabrications that deserve no attention or, quite possibly, deserve outright ridicule. Lastly, the phrase "Try Again." seem to be the condescending "f!*& off" phrase of the week.
DISCLAIMER: The notes expressed above do not apply equally to all participants. If you find yourself suffering from 2 or more of the above symptoms, please see a doctor. You may be experiencing a rare side effect.
(Real Message: Calm the heck down already, people. No-one even seems to know what they're trying to argue here. Sit down, shut up, and think for a minute about exactly what point you're trying to make. Oh, and when you make that point, tell people exactly what it is your trying to prove, don't just let them assume. If you have a problem with someone else's statements, ask them to define their argument instead of pulling something out of your rear so that you have something to fight against that isn't an assumption. If at any point you feel that someone has not articulated their desired point sufficiently, just ask.)
Hmm... I'd say that my ninth level druid casts just under two spells per encounter, if you ignore boss fights where she might cast five or six...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the spellcaster can't prep his spell repertoire for every possible situation and encounter. Whats wrong with that? As for the option of leaving spell slots open, how many do you leave open? If you don't leave any open and memorise it all for the day, then you have trouble filling in spells to adapt to the current dungeon crawl and situations you suspect will arise in the near future. If you leave some of them open, there is the risk of the situation not giving you the 15+ minutes to fill in spells after the current encounter. Which in an intense encounter, could leave you on little to no spells. It depends on the situation. How much noise do you make, how much attention does the party attract, how subtle were their actions.......etc. I'm not saying that the caster will definitely not have the time to fill in their open spell slots but at the same time, its not a given that they definitely will unless you have a dm who is very generous towards pc casters. As for the option of "withdrawing to come back later with the right spells",it may not always be the best idea. Foes may not necessarily let you do so. The game doesn't exist in a vacuum where certain situational factors will always be a constant. A dm who varies opponents across different environments and situations can throw a party well off guard and that is part of the fun. Having to improvise and think on your feet in order to defeat your foe or to just survive.
Or the really sad situation of you can leave whatever spell slots open you want, you don't have what would be perfect in your list, e.g. cold spells for cold vulnerable creatures, or can't cast enough of them because you already have 2 level 3s chosen, 1 level 4 etc.
Not in a vacuum, not always ready with the perfect spell list.
Need 15 minutes to fill up on fire spells? Alas the mummies find you in 10, which is a whole lot of rounds of searching. Who would have thought these underground ruins were home to a mummy cult, there isn't a pyramid to be seen! Lol, perhaps Irish bog mummies, ha ha.
Note: 15 minutes is the MAXIMUM preparation time. I.E. you can prepare ALL of your spell slots within 15 minutes instead of an hour.
So 10 minutes, at the very least, should be enough to prepare 2-3 spells.
|
Note: 15 minutes is the MAXIMUM preparation time. I.E. you can prepare ALL of your spell slots within 15 minutes instead of an hour.
So 10 minutes, at the very least, should be enough to prepare 2-3 spells.
No.
You should go back and read it again. To memorize all of your spells you need 1 hour. To memorize part of your spells you need a minimum of 15 minutes. If you wish to memorize more than one quarter then it takes longer than 15 minutes.
This is another problem I see with Wizards at times, their players don't fully know the rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are still wizards who don't take Fast Study at fifth level and never look back?
There are still wizards who don't take Fast Study at fifth level and never look back?You know that's a discovery don't you?
Yes, but that's where the 15 minutes to prepare thing came from.
Seriously, why WOULDN'T you take that?
|
|
There are still wizards who don't take Fast Study at fifth level and never look back?You know that's a discovery don't you?Yes, but that's where the 15 minutes to prepare thing came from.
Seriously, why WOULDN'T you take that?
Because you have to multi class and adjust your stats a bit.
Now if you are already going to multi class then fair enough but it's not worth taking levels in another class to get.
Because you have to multi class and adjust your stats a bit.
Now if you are already going to multi class then fair enough but it's not worth taking levels in another class to get.
What? You don't need to multiclass for that.
It's an Arcane Discovery, you can take it in place of one of your Bonus Feats.
|
|
Because you have to multi class and adjust your stats a bit.
Now if you are already going to multi class then fair enough but it's not worth taking levels in another class to get.
What? You don't need to multiclass for that.
It's an Arcane Discovery, you can take it in place of one of your Bonus Feats.
Oh yeah, I was thinking of the other discoveries.
Oh well, if you want to spend the feat then go for it but I don't think it's worth it, unless you are human and you use your human bonus feat to take it.
Can't take it with the Human Feat. Have to take it when you'd otherwise get that free Metamagic/Item Crafting Feat you qualify for. The one's that pop up at 5/10/15/20.
|
|
Can't take it with the Human Feat. Have to take it when you'd otherwise get that free Metamagic/Item Crafting Feat you qualify for. The one's that pop up at 5/10/15/20.
Actually it says you can take it using one of your regular feats. Not really sure then if your bonus feat counts as a regular feat.
Since it's locked until you're a level 5 Wizard, I get the feeling the Human Bonus feat's not quite gonna work, regardless.
Well, just incidentally, I'd consider the human bonus feat to be, in pretty much all aspects, the same as a regular feat. I can't really see any reasoning to say otherwise.
Contrasting, for example, the Fighter, Monk, or actually even the Wizard bonus feats, all of which have specific restrictions on what you can take with them. Comparatively, I'd consider the Human Bonus feat to just be the same as a feat gained through leveling. At least, that's how I'd view it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You all are missing the real problem.
The two 15th level fighters in my Saturday game did over 700 damage last session in a single round against a single ECL 4+ opponent.
Clearly its the fighters who are borked, based on my limited game experience. I demand a nerf.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
see what you did, peter stewart?
they are taking you seriously
you think long and hard about what you have done here, mister
see what you did, peter stewart?they are taking you seriously
you think long and hard about what you have done here, mister
;)
Honestly, my conclusion is that it is almost always more efficient to buff the fighters than to do anything else (save or lose included) in terms of resource use. In the fight in question the fighters were swinging with attack routines including power attack that were all beating ACs of over 40 (on all four attacks). They were dealing upwards of 50 damage a swing. I think one was sitting on +10 to hit above norm, and another at +13 or +14. They also had significant damage bonuses.
The power of the casters may be versatility, but in terms of raw ability and power there is nothing that matches martial, because martial characters can be buffed to the gills and made to punch way above their weight class. In contrast, the casters in this fight can expand their defenses, but cannot meaningfully increase their raw offensive numbers. Caster level is fairly static. Save DCs likewise. Damage can swing a little bit based on items and preparations, but generally speaking not meaningfully.
If the fight in question were between a party of all casters and the present foe the casters would be completely ineffectual at damaging the opponent. Perhaps they could make themselves invulnerable to him through vast use of defensive buffs like mirror image, displacement, flight, ect. But it wouldn't be a win. The best they can ever hope for is a draw.
I believe casters are not so overwhelming powerful before 13th level or so...
But once they get those 7th level spells, the gap starts to grow somewhat quickly, assuming the wizard and fighter players have about the same skill.
But, back to the point, my problem is not so much that casters have too many options (they do, though), but that martials have so few.
They most often can't move 10ft without sucking balls, have to grab 1~3 sucky feats just to get the cool/useful/interesting ones and/or have to grab the "same" feat over and over again for it to stay relevant (weapon focus, TWF, Vital Strike, Improved Trip, etc...).
It feels like the game system activelly punishes martial classes for no reason at all.
Compare it to casters, specially the prepared ones, who can move at will before raping reality and usually grab feats that have no prerequisite other than being a caster and usually improve with caster level or HD.
And of course, there's always the gold disparity, as casters usually need a much lower amount of cash to do their job effectivelly. Really, all they need is some Int/Wis/Cha booster, all the rest is delicious gravy.
I believe casters are not so overwhelming powerful before 13th level or so...
But once they get those 7th level spells, the gap starts to grow somewhat quickly, assuming the wizard and fighter players have about the same skill.
This has not been my experience. In a game with three full casters (cleric, sorcerer, wizard), a bard, and two fighters now at 15th level the fighters have consistently been the dominate force on the battlefield. They are consistently capable of overcoming opponents far out of the reach of the casters powers, because as noted they can easily punch well above their weight class, while casters personally find themselves if not helpless, certainly tremendously ineffective against any opponent of higher ECL that is properly constructed.
They most often can't move 10ft without sucking balls, have to grab 1~3 sucky feats just to get the cool/useful/interesting ones and/or have to grab the "same" feat over and over again for it to stay relevant (weapon focus, TWF, Vital Strike, Improved Trip, etc...).
The feat chains and movement damage issues can be problematic, but it is a problem often solved by patience. Opponents must also often close, and if the fighter delays he can often accept an opponents charge in return for a devastating full attack.
And let me again emphasize how devastating that full attack is. Virtually nothing within ECL +3 can survive two full attacks from a well built fighter at higher levels. Many cannot survive one.
It feels like the game system activelly punishes martial classes for no reason at all.
Don't agree. They are mitigated by the fact that they obliterate things they full attack. Full attack is not expected every round. And lets not forget there are means others can use to set up a full attack. Who gets credit for the 250 damage the fighter did this round when the wizard dimension doored him right on top of an opponent to deliver a full attack? You'd probably say the wizard, while I would disagree.
Ultimately the game is collaborative, and this is never so much born out as when one examines many spells that provide marginal benefits to casters but enormous ones to martial characters. Fly is great on a wizard if it lets him keep out of trouble, but a better option is probably casting fly on the fighter so he can fly up and murder face the flying opponent. Dimension door is a great get out of jail free card, but a better "rape face" card. Heroism, greater heroism, and so forth are good buffs for casters, but better on martial characters. Similarly with defensive buffs. Displacement is great on a wizard, because it turns an auto-hit from opponents into a 50/50. Better on the fighter though who turns a 50/50 in to a 75/25.
Compare it to casters, specially the prepared ones, who can move at will before raping reality and usually grab feats that have no prerequisite other than being a caster and usually improve with caster level or HD.
"raping reality" is a rather broad description of what happens, and one that seems designed to generate strong feelings rather than rational discussion. Things are rarely so simple as "the wizard moves, casts hold monster, game over," at least in my experience.
And of course, there's always the gold disparity, as casters usually need a much lower amount of cash to do their job effectivelly. Really, all they need is some Int/Wis/Cha booster, all the rest is delicious gravy.
Here again we disagree. I certainly agree the caster has one primary thing to spend money on to effectively improve his offense (ability booster). You could lump rods in here too, but the meaningful ones are often quite expensive, so instead what they often do is extend your offensive ability (e.g. lesser persist rod when you have access to 5th / 6th level spells).
Fighters and others often have many things they can spend that money on, which I view not as a liability, but as an advantage. Given plenty of cash martial characters can become tremendously more powerful both offensively and defensively. Between weapons, armor, ability bonuses, luckstones, ioun stones, dueling gloves, and so on, the potential to increase to hit and damage are enormous. Not so for a caster.
Honestly, my conclusion is that it is almost always more efficient to buff the fighters than to do anything else (save or lose included) in terms of resource use. In the fight in question the fighters were swinging with attack routines including power attack that were all beating ACs of over 40 (on all four attacks). They were dealing upwards of 50 damage a swing. I think one was sitting on +10 to hit above norm, and another at +13 or +14. They also had significant damage bonuses.The power of the casters may be versatility, but in terms of raw ability and power there is nothing that matches martial, because martial characters can be buffed to the gills and made to punch way above their weight class. In contrast, the casters in this fight can expand their defenses, but cannot meaningfully increase their raw offensive numbers. Caster level is fairly static. Save DCs likewise. Damage can swing a little bit based on items and preparations, but generally speaking not meaningfully.
This is some hardcore World of Warcraft logic right here. That is to say it's damn good logic. In WoW PvP (which is actually very much like D&D battles due to mind to mind conflict), Warriors are pretty good if you know how to use them properly, but if you buff the hell out of them LOOKOUT! When you have a warrior rushing towards you with Blessing of Kings (+10% stats), Blessing of Might (+tons of attack power), Blessing of Sanctuary (reduces incoming damage and gives him more rage when he avoids your attacks), Power Word: Fortitude (+tons of HP), and Shadow Protection...get the hell out of that guy's way! He is going to mow you down like a panzer over a poodle! D:
In D&D it's pretty much like that too. Classes like Barbarian, Ranger, Paladin, and Fighter are a great chassis to start putting all your cool spell mods on. "Pimp my Fightah" is the name of the game here. In terms of resource expenditure it's king.
But, back to the point, my problem is not so much that casters have too many options (they do, though), but that martials have so few.
All my +1s are belong to this.
The "pimp my fightah" approach is by far the best expenditure of magic resources when pure damage is the best approach to the problem.
Sometimes it's not.
That's when the difference between martial and casters becomes really apparent.
but I mean I could throw out like a Heavens Oracle / Void Wizard / Witch combo
They are all going to synergize and just go buck wild
isn't that the same thing?
hold on I think I just forgot what I was talking about