Snowball. It even imposes the staggered condition, IIRC.
But remember, kids, definitely no power creep. ;-)
Maximum 5d6.
Fortitude save on a level 1 spell.
Dat supar OP powercreep y'all.
Don't forget the spell doesn't allow spell resistance either.. it is one of those conjuration spells.
Plus remember that spell isn't exactly in a core rulebook either. I forget specifically where it is but it isn't in one of the main hardcovers.
Pathfinder Player Companion: People of the North
What is power creep meant to mean?Snowball. It even imposes the staggered condition, IIRC.
But remember, kids, definitely no power creep. ;-)
Generally power creep is a term often used in games (usually collectible ones) where the general power or strength of effects of various key parts of the game are becoming stronger to the point that it completely oversights the usefulness of older, similar things.
Why I say usually collectible games is typically most games, such as yugioh and the like, have to still keep on making sales, and what better way to make sales than to print more powerful cards than previous ones for those who do/did enjoy the game?
Naturally, power creep isn't as huge of an issue usually in games like D&D and PF since the GM can simply say a resounding "no".
I can absolutely say "No" in a house game, but in a PFS game, you have to say "Yes" if the players bring PCs built according to the accepted conventions of PFS, including supplements. The issue of creep is definitely alive in RPGs. I saw it unbalancing and complicate things way back in D&D 2.
I mostly play PFS, and a 1d6/lvl ranged touch attack that allows no save (on the damage portion), no SR, AND carries a status rider is simply far better than any existing 1st level spell (and many 2nd level ones!). What's particularly disappointing is that WotC made exactly the same mistake in the 3.5 era (made direct-damage conjuration spells that did not allow SR, and therefore overshadowed evocation).
Maximum 5d6.
Fortitude save on a level 1 spell.
Dat supar OP powercreep y'all.
I'm not sure how to interpret this, except to assume it is sarcasm.
If you actually read the spell, you'll see it is better than most 2nd -- let alone 1st -- level spells. If that's not power creep, I'm not sure what is.
IMO, they should reduce the damage and/or drop the status effect, or make the spell 2nd level.
It's not better than most 2nd level spells.
Either in terms of damage, or utility.
I'm not sure where you got that impression, to be quite honest.
It's not better than most 2nd level spells.
Either in terms of damage, or utility.
I'm not sure where you got that impression, to be quite honest.
First of all, I didn't say most, I said many.
Second, I got that impression by reading the spells in question.
Take, for example, acid arrow for a 4th or 5th level caster. Snowball does more damage, more quickly, AND adds a status effect. I say snowball is at least on par, and likely better -- despite being 1st level.
Or scorching ray, generally considered to be the benchmark for 2nd level direct damage. Sometimes snowball does less (3rd level), sometimes it does the same amount (4th level), sometimes it does more (5th level), but snowball adds a status effect, and far more importantly, it ignores spell resistance. Again, snowball (1st level) is at least on par with scorching ray (2nd level).
Also, staggered can be fantastic, in some cases completely overshadowing the damage. If you can make this stick, you're sometimes cutting enemy damage output by 50% (or more). And you can do it round after round, with no hit die limitations.
|
I agree Bugley, and I had hoped that we were out of the "conjuration is better at evocations than evocation is" state that we were in during 3.5's reign. I was sick of watching people juicing up conjuration, summoning a bunch of critters then sitting back tossing Orb spells at the foes, all with no SR and doing more consistent damage than an evoker usually did. Paizo is stupid for allowing this spell to happen....unless they want to break the system to justify the soon-to-be-announced P2 game system.
I think evocation is rather underpowered in Pathfinder...but that's a whole different topic. :)
|
I find it hard to think that ignoring spell resistance on a first level spell is somehow gamebreaking or incredibly powerful. It could be that all the games/AP I play in and run are outliers but SR hardly ever comes up at lower levels, making it a non issue there, and at higher (10th+ for example) levels you generally have far, FAR better things to do and more effective spells to cast versus enemies that matter than a first level spell for 5d6 damage and what is almost certainly a guaranteed saving throw.
Of note, it also only has 'Close' range so you're going to be exceptionally near to your enemies to use it, that's certainly considered part of the spells balance.
I find it hard to think that ignoring spell resistance on a first level spell is somehow gamebreaking or incredibly powerful. It could be that all the games/AP I play in and run are outliers but SR hardly ever comes up at lower levels, making it a non issue there, and at higher (10th+ for example) levels you generally have far, FAR better things to do and more effective spells to cast versus enemies that matter than a first level spell for 5d6 damage and what is almost certainly a guaranteed saving throw.
Of note, it also only has 'Close' range so you're going to be exceptionally near to your enemies to use it, that's certainly considered part of the spells balance.
I had not considered range -- that is a good point.
I do, however, want to reiterate that the save doesn't mitigate the damage. Even if it did, at higher levels the lack of SR is arguably a bigger deal.
As for the action economy -- A high-level spell caster should nearly always have something better to do than cast a 1st level spell. I don't see how that changes the fact that is spell is just better than any other 1st level spell. Don't believe me? Run the numbers -- the math doesn't lie. In its present form, this spell should absolutely be 2nd level.
That said, people are free to believe whatever they like. Me? I'm going to go on hoping that Paizo wises up and Nerfs snowball. :)
No, it doesn't mitigate the damage. The damage is already meh.
The Fort save (a common strong save) is for the Staggered condition you were lauding as one of its upsides.
On Scorching Ray, you ignore that Scorching Ray gets an upgrade past 5th level, pushing it firmly over Snowball again by seventh (assuming you hit the same target twice).
Might be better than Acid Arrow. Never been particularly enamored of that spell.
But it's definitely not better than any of the decent or good 2nd level spells. Burning Arc (one of my personal favorites) beats it in damage at all times. By 10th it can do so to two targets (though yeah it allows spell resistance and a save for half).
Then there's ye Invisibility, Create Pit, Glitterdust, and so forth.
Fact of the matter is, it doesn't scale well.
I'll grant you it's a good 1st level spell. Maybe even the best 1st level damage spell.
But it's not good enough to warrant being 2nd level. It'd end up as one of those spells nobody'd really take because there's other, better options at that level.
Even if you remove the status effect, snowball is still better than scorching ray or acid arrow before 7th level. And it ignores spell resistance. Making snowball a first level damage spell that beats the core second level damage spells.
Power creep.
But I've not made my point by now, I'm not going to. :)
But it isn't.
You've made no point. You've just said "it is", as if you were stating a fact.
Scorching Ray scales better in damage.
So does Acid Arrow for that matter, though over time.
Burning Arc as I mentioned does so a LOT better.
The only thing it has going for it is not being affected by Spell Resistance, and the amount of things with Spell Resistance that would be more than mildly inconvenienced by 5d6 cold damage is a pretty small list.
Like I said, it's probably the best 1st level spell for direct damage, ignoring all other factors (such as being able to hit multiple targets or a longer range). That doesn't make it a better spell.
Edit: Yes, Metamagic can do fun things. But that's what Metamagic does. Not the spell itself.
Burning arc isn't core. My point is that snowball is better than core. That's what power creep means.
You're free to disagree with my point Rynjin, but the idea that I've not supported it is demonstrably untrue.
Acid arrow does not scale better. 1d6/lvl is better than 2d4/3 levels. Seems kinda obvious.
10d4 is better than 5d6. Seems kinda obvious.
Scales better does not mean it's better at all levels, it just means it ends up better because it continues scaling.
At 20 Arrow does 14d4 over 7 rounds, vs snowballs 10d6 up front. Snowball wins, it's not even close.
If it's doing 10d6 it's a second level spell, matching other 2nd level spells. The argument that "it's a 1st level spell that beats 2nd level spells!" is kinda moot in that case.
And I already mentioned the over time caveat.
Burning arc does not do a LOT better. It does slightly better in very specific situations. Vs a single baddy, snowball is better, period.
Vs a single target, Burning arc still does 10d6. It does just as well vs a single target, and has multi-target capability.
Edit: Pretending metamagic doesn't exist is not a terribly relevant way to gauge spells (or design them). It's only 'what metamagic does' because of the spell's mechanics.
The reason I don't judge metamagic'd spells should be pretty obvious. Metamagic changes the way all spells work, making them better.
Saying Snowball is OP because an Intensified Snowball is better than Scorching Ray is like saying Fireball is OP because an intensified Fireball does more damage than Ball Lightning.
It's what Metamagic DOES. It makes things better than the norm. It also raises the level up to the point of the spells it's surpassing.
Burning arc isn't core. My point is that snowball is better than core. That's what power creep means.
You're free to disagree with my point Rynjin, but the idea that I've not supported it is demonstrably untrue.
The Intensify Spell metamagic everyone is lauding that makes Snowball so much better than everything (even though it doesn't) is non-Core as well.
The Intensify Spell metamagic everyone is lauding that makes Snowball so much better than everything (even though it doesn't) is non-Core as well.
"Everyone" doesn't include me. I believe (and have been arguing) that snowball is too good all on its own.
But clearly you don't agree, so let's leave it at that. :)
Vs a single target, Burning arc still does 10d6. It does just as well vs a single target, and has multi-target capability.On average, burning arc will not do 10d6 vs a single target, even ignoring SR or fire resist (which is more common than cold resist).
How so? Most things don't have a stellar Reflex save in my experience.
No, it's not like saying that at all. Because in that case you'd be wrong. Intensified fireball does not do anywhere near the damage of ball lighting.
On a single hit if you direct them all at one target it does, unless I'm mistaken. Is it 5 globes maximum or 5 ADDITIONAL globes?
Perhaps a better example would be Detonate.
You actually illustrate how out of whack this spell is. With a feat and a trait you get a 1st level spell slot that does 10d6, no save, no sr. Or, in a 5th level slot you get one quickened. The spell is so grossly out of balance with the rest of the direct damage spells, it boggles my mind that you can claim it's not.
All this speaks to me is that Metamagic and Magical Lineage throws things out of whack.
Though still, 10d6 as a Swift action is basically Cold ice Strike (which goes up to 15d6 and attacks a line). Without the trait it'd be the same level, too.
The reason I claim it's not grossly out of balance with other direct damage spells is because it isn't without Metamagic, and I'm still not convinced it is even with it.
|
Speaking as my admixture wizard the only reasons I got it was that I wanted a few more fort based saves for the evasion types I run into.
To me
Pros...
-fort save
-condition is a nice plus
-SR, though I have a good penetration ability AND a lssr rod of piercing
-I can Rime spell it with my rod
-Close in friendly, I don't blow up my buddies.
Cons
-I can't alter it's elemental form with my admixture ability
-ranged touch, rotten luck with RT spells
-Conjuration so I don't get intense spell bonus damage or the level bump from my tattoo
So I like it, it fills a need I have though I wish there were more no SR evocation spells.
You know it occurs to me looking through the spell list again, it's very hard to find a Core direct damage spell at ALL, much less a good one.
But it isn't.
You've made no point. You've just said "it is", as if you were stating a fact.
Scorching Ray scales better in damage.
So does Acid Arrow for that matter, though over time.
Burning Arc as I mentioned does so a LOT better.
The only thing it has going for it is not being affected by Spell Resistance, and the amount of things with Spell Resistance that would be more than mildly inconvenienced by 5d6 cold damage is a pretty small list.
Like I said, it's probably the best 1st level spell for direct damage, ignoring all other factors (such as being able to hit multiple targets or a longer range). That doesn't make it a better spell.
Edit: Yes, Metamagic can do fun things. But that's what Metamagic does. Not the spell itself.
Burning Arc is not 'that' much better, 10d6 vs a single target with a save vs half, the secondary bolts are not great 5d6 and then 2d6 with saves for half with a +2 bonus.
Fact remains that at 3rd level, it is better or equal to any 2nd level spell in dealing damage, likewise at 4th and 5th level.
It is a ranged touch attack vs a reflex save for half, about equal in my opinion.
Burning Arc deals (a little damage) to secondary targets, snowball has the ability to stagger a foe for 1 round on a failed save.
Cold damage is slightly superior to fire damage in my opinion, but we can call that a wash.
On those levels we could consider them equal except for the fact that snowball ignores SR and is a 1st level spell... so it compares quite well versus the best 2nd level damage dealing spell ?
After 5th burning arc starts to catch up, agreed, still it is going to be a good spell for a while longer because of it's advantage of costing a 1st level spell slot (thus allowing metamagic to improve it) and still completely ignores SR which will gain in importance at higher levels.
Slight powercreep in my opinion, but the ignore SR part bothers me most of all, along with the fact that it should be evocation.
Yeah... direct damage has always sucked in 3.X. Somebody publishes a decent one and everybody throws a hissy fit.
*Looks around* I don't see anyone throwing a "hissy fit." Also, isn't that a touch passive-aggressive?
While I'll agree, it's bad that snowball kind of outs evocation, evocation should have never been in a position for snowball to out it in the first place. Direct Damage is the WORST type of spell to have spell resistance apply against.
No argument here -- evocation sucks. To the point of being a trap, even. But the answer is improving evocation, not conjuration. And as I wrote earlier, that's really a whole other issue.