So my life has gone to heck in a hand jar lately. I am losing almost everything, my health, my job, my car, my house, with a kid on the way, soon my sanity. I can no longer run as a DM so someone else in my group wants to take over. he wants to run an E6 campaign, which none of us have ever used before.
Can anyone correct my assumptions on this? I feel, based on his description, casters would be night useless. No good damage spells other then a fireball or two. Metamagics are nearly useless, raising spell levels the way they do.
I was going to make a warlock, til i realized i could never go over 3d6 damage. Other then skills, i see almost no reason a mage would be needed at all. Therefor, i and a friend, made twin Dragon Shaman orcs... Are my assumptions somewhat accurate? Any thoughts on E6?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am playing in an e6 game and our mages are critical to our success. Yes you dont ever go over 6th level, and no, casters dont get most of their super spells (kind of the point of E6 after all), but they still have tons to add to the party. There are lots of important and effective low level spells in every category:
1. Buff - enlarge person, energy resistance/protection from energy, bless, aid, [b]haste[/url], fly, shield. All of these make a big difference (particularly enlarge person and haste)
2. Control - Grease, Create pit, spiked pit, entangle, web, stinking cloud
3. Debuff - Glitterdust, color spray, ray of enfeeblement/exhaustion/etc, slow
4. healing/condition recovery - cure spells lesser restoration (a critical spell even at low levels), remove fear, remove blindness/deafness, remove curse
The only thing they are sort of weak on, which is always a weak option for casters is damage spells.
Edit:
There is a slightly different focus in caster given you know you arent going over 6th level, but that doesnt make them useless. My group has an oracle, magister (3rd party class that mixes divine and arcane casting) and an alchemist, to go with our ranger, rogue and monk.
And in regards to metamagic, dont forget nifty things like the magical lineage traits (or wayang spell hunter if it fits your theme), as you arent ever getting higher then 6, that 1st level spell you pick magical lineage with, stays relavent through the whole game.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are going in with a very negative attitude IMO. E6 is there to remove some of the higher level options of the game that slow down combat to a crawl and makes the caster/meleeist discrepancy really visible.
Casters are still great, especially since no spells are really lost due to either not scaling well or because the enemy hit points make them a horrible choice. A good magic missile is always a decent option. Even spells like color spray and sleep keep on trucking in E6. In a regular game you just remove all flavor from the lower level spells and simply replace them with mage armor/shield/XXXbuff/etc. E6 makes lower level magic work better. You don't need high damage spells when the whole world caps out at 6th level with only extremely rare instances of CR10 creatures.
Here is a link to a very well started E6/P6 ruleset(with a download to use!) and all the conversations about it and balance. I suggest you embrace it and show some support for the GM's wishes to try this....it is really fun and a good way to play the game and keep it fast and furious. Sounds like with life's curveballs hitting you, that you need to keep the game easier to track.
ALSO I would like to recommend for your group that you look into using Sean K Reynold's Alternate Advancement Rules: The Step System for breaking up and changing up how the group levels. It is really cool and breaks the 6 levels up into 3 parts each to make leveling into more of a learning experience than it currently is. I can't recommend this enough.
Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...Mage armor = armor that doesnt need charging/time. If shield and armor stacked with an armor and a shield, maybe... not seeing anything there, wearing a scale shirt and a buckler cant cover. Grease and webs limit you own parties maneuverability as well, never liked them. Magic missile = 2-5 damage, warlock eldritch blast 1-6 just a s viable, hvy weapon warrior 4-15 with cleave tree = more viable. Just not seeing the need for it yet.
Haste on the other hand = awesomesauce, but worth the entire class change? I dont feel it.
Never meant to challenge healers by the way, always need those.
*edited* and a side note, i never challenged him, and have supported him the entire way on his choice. DM is GOD of ewhatever game you play and makes the rules. He wants to try it, i will play and support, doesnt mean i have to like it :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*edited* and a side note, i never challenged him, and have supported him the entire way on his choice. DM is GOD of ewhatever game you play and makes the rules. He wants to try it, i will play and support, doesnt mean i have to like it :P
Doesn't mean you have to play it either.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...Mage armor = armor that doesnt need charging/time. If shield and armor stacked with an armor and a shield, maybe... not seeing anything there, wearing a scale shirt and a buckler cant cover. Grease and webs limit you own parties maneuverability as well, never liked them. Magic missile = 2-5 damage, warlock eldritch blast 1-6 just a s viable, hvy weapon warrior 4-15 with cleave tree = more viable. Just not seeing the need for it yet.
Haste on the other hand = awesomesauce, but worth the entire class change? I dont feel it.
Never meant to challenge healers by the way, always need those.
*edited* and a side note, i never challenged him, and have supported him the entire way on his choice. DM is GOD of ewhatever game you play and makes the rules. He wants to try it, i will play and support, doesnt mean i have to like it :P
GM as god metaphors lead to ego/power trips IMO. I prefer to think of myself as the weather: I attempt complete impartiality, bless no-one, and rain on everyone's parade.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...Mage armor = armor that doesnt need charging/time. If shield and armor stacked with an armor and a shield, maybe... not seeing anything there, wearing a scale shirt and a buckler cant cover. Grease and webs limit you own parties maneuverability as well, never liked them. Magic missile = 2-5 damage, warlock eldritch blast 1-6 just a s viable, hvy weapon warrior 4-15 with cleave tree = more viable. Just not seeing the need for it yet.
Haste on the other hand = awesomesauce, but worth the entire class change? I dont feel it.
Never meant to challenge healers by the way, always need those.
*edited* and a side note, i never challenged him, and have supported him the entire way on his choice. DM is GOD of ewhatever game you play and makes the rules. He wants to try it, i will play and support, doesnt mean i have to like it :P
You said you will play and support it. How? By making twin characters to game the new system and devalue his attempt? By looking at everything in the game as numbers and trying to figure out how to play at an arms race even in a game meant to not be an arms race? Yea, you are the very image of supportive.
You are going in with a negative attitude and that is going to show in the game and in your choices of playstyle.So people like trying new things, new challenges, new ideas. Some rail against it. You can choose who you are in this instance but right now you are looking at this through a munchkin lens and trying to find the work around in the classes instead of supporting the GM's idea and playing something else that could be fun.
Frankly, I hate the eX systems. Everyone's definition of fun is different - mine doesn't include eX.
That said, I highly recommend you putting more investment into things that boost hit points; without certain spells at later levels you'll find getting one shot by CR 1 barbarians at level 6, for example, very tiresome. I suggest high constitution, favored class bonus: hit points, and toughness if you go human.
Contrary to what you've been told thus far in this thread, melee are very strong at these levels. While arcane spell casters are not crippled in 3.x/pathfinder by resources as they were in previous editions, they still don't come into their own till a little later.
Honestly, I'd play some form of battle cleric over a wizard in one of these games. Cleric is already one of the more powerful options for any game; the ability to wear armor, carry a shield, cast spells, and melee will really make you shine. Want extra skills? Play human and take the skill point from favored class.
Hope that helps.
Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...Mage armor = armor that doesnt need charging/time. If shield and armor stacked with an armor and a shield, maybe... not seeing anything there, wearing a scale shirt and a buckler cant cover. Grease and webs limit you own parties maneuverability as well, never liked them. Magic missile = 2-5 damage, warlock eldritch blast 1-6 just a s viable, hvy weapon warrior 4-15 with cleave tree = more viable. Just not seeing the need for it yet.
Haste on the other hand = awesomesauce, but worth the entire class change? I dont feel it.
Well, cleave doenst work on swarms, and burning hands can also hit more creatures then a cleave can. Particularly since E6 is supposed to allow a gm to keep using just normal monsters like goblins and orgs. A 5d4 burning hands will almost certainly drop all of them. Magic missile serves a similar purpose but against hard to hit enemies. Is it going to do as much damage as a 2handed fighter? No, but it does serve a purpose. Sometimes you need to kill things from far away, or things that cant be hit with normal weapons (incoporeal things).
The shield spell is also not just a shield, its a +4 bonus, thats a +2 heavy magic shield, which you arent likely to see in an E6 game. And it allows you to keep your hands free so you can use a bow, 2handed weapon or fight with two weapons.
That said, sheild of faith, blur, mirror image are all low level defensive buffs that work along side armor and are quite useful.
And as for control spells, its all about where and how you place them. If you are facing 10 goblins, you probably dont have 10 fighters to take htem all on. Put a couple pits or webs, and suddenly the fighter cant get surrounded, and maybe you catch a goblin or two in the web.
I actually felt dragon shamans would be a better choice, not to "buck the system" but if resting is as hard as he says its going to be, and spells are so limited, would not a healing aura, energy resistance or DR be so much more helpful? furthermore, we are twins except our totem and auras chosen, while one adds melee damage the other can add dr, while one is healing the other can give energy resistances. Not seeing why Fake Healer, you are being so antagonistic against my current choice.
I want to roleplay, so one of my friends and i are going to be brothers, why does that make it less valued? As for the god metaphor, he is the DM not me, so i can think of him as a god, just like most native american sthought of the weather...neither can be argued against.
Hm some valid points are popping up whilst i was in last thread, posting comments, my understanding is we are going to be "facing a vast army, with little to no rest periods" I dont know if that is typical e6, or his storyline version, but we warned to "plan accordingly" Another reason i veered off the caster. Does this make either version seem more important?
Casters will not outdamage melee, or even come close to, in E6. Period. If you want to deal massive damage, casting won't be what you aim for. Now, you seem to be using 3pp stuff and/or 3.5 stuff, which might change balance a lot (we run pure pathfinder + a little bit of homebrew), but I can only write for how it works without that stuff.
However, most E6 campaigns I've seen (and DM'd) have also had a greater focus on mundane plot and fewer enemies have been powerful spellcasters, which means a caster will have little magical resistance.
In an E6 world, you might actually scare the peasants with that Minor Image of a dragon, while in Golarion they'd be more like "oh, you're nearly as good as Aunt Christie with that illusion!". The lack of powerful magic also means magical divination will have more chance to work - if the BBEG is 6th level rather than 13th they'll be much less likely to protect against Scrying.
Also, note that while there's plenty of magic item options for copying mage abilities in higher-level pathfinder, that will be much rarer in higher-level E6 - in pathfinder, a fighter will at some point have easy access to flying, but in E6, a fighter will never have that unless a friendly wizard helps her out.
Hm some valid points are popping up whilst i was in last thread, posting comments, my understanding is we are going to be "facing a vast army, with little to no rest periods" I dont know if that is typical e6, or his storyline version, but we warned to "plan accordingly" Another reason i veered off the caster. Does this make either version seem more important?
Well little to no rest is an issue for casters regardless of E6. That is simply something the dm has chosen to do and will likely reduce the value of casters in the campaign. But I would be equally worried about barbarians, paladins, and really everyone who relies on per day mechanics (which is everyone but the rogue and fighter).
Personally if no one else wanted to be a caster in this particular campaign, I might go summoner, or druid. Give the party access to magic when its needed, but make sure I can contribute over the long haul with my stompy pet, even if I cant always be casting spells.
|
|
I can't imagine why he would E6 this and have "facing a vast army, with little to no rest periods".... that seems odd. Makes me think of Red Hand of Doom from 3.5 by WotC. It's like a double hobbling.
Sorry if I came off as antagonistic. I probably made some assumptions from tone. Apologies, my bad.
Maybe go with Ranger or maybe a ranged focused Bard.
Treantmonks guide to Bards. You could do some damage, still have a few spells and possibly spell-completion items, and the bard bonus to the group is pretty nice.
The ranger could use wands of CLW and other ranger spells in addition to hitting some people pretty good....maybe since it's E6 the GM can give you suggestions for favored enemy so you don't waste a choice.
E6 is more than just hobbling player characters. If that was ALL your GM does to make your campaign E6, it'd very quickly head into a horrifying end.
If it helps, don't imagine this as playing D+D, imagine this as playing a different game altogether that just happens to have some D+D resemblances. That might help alleviate the prejudgment factor.
No, it's all about DM's that can't handle stuff like T-port hobbling the players.
And it's not playing D&D, you're right. Mind you I also agree that Low magic can be fun. I suggest Iron Heroes, designed from the ground up as low magic, instead of the boring kludge that is E-6.
It's exciting & fresh.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, it's all about DM's that can't handle stuff like T-port hobbling the players.E6 is more than just hobbling player characters. If that was ALL your GM does to make your campaign E6, it'd very quickly head into a horrifying end.
If it helps, don't imagine this as playing D+D, imagine this as playing a different game altogether that just happens to have some D+D resemblances. That might help alleviate the prejudgment factor.
Dr.D, you have to stop doing this.
Some people who like low magic like it for it's immersion element - as in, easier to get into. Sort of the difference between liking say the Punisher and a Punisher related plot line vs. a plot line from the Fantasitc 4 and the Silver Surfer. Just different personal tastes and not "hurr, hurr, hurr..can't handle running D&D!!!1!!!!!".
So please stop, you do this every time an eX thread pops up and it's unhelpful.
For some DMs it isn't a question of being able to handle T-port (and several other game powers), but wanting to handle them thematically, and a slew of other game inconsistancies, logic and game breaking mechanics (by game I mean world, not the rules).
Not everyone who runs eX does it for the same reasons. Some people don't like the scale and tracking required for higher level 3rd ed games, while for others its a question of immersion (for me in PF this breaks at 1st level/default rules). Other players and DMs like the sweet spot levels and would like to perpetuate that experience with the same characters adventure after adventure. There are several different reaons that make eWhatever appealing to different groups and it isn't because the DM in question is a moron (as you imply).
IMO - For me, personally I don't think 3rd ed/PF eWhatever does the trick of managing any of these various issues and I am going back to 2nd ed - because I think it's a better game (after some upgrades) than anything d20 tries to be. All my opinion of course. If people want an e6 game here, or advice on running and playing one I am not going to threadcrap on them and make them feel guilty, I am going to try to help them.
That being said, if his DM is going down this road the OP (who should be very grateful that someone is picking up the slack) should be helpful and constructive or just bow out of the game if he has issues.
As far as actual advice - if you are going to play: it sounds like your DM is going down the hardcore/simulationist road. My advice to you is to plan all your actions carefully, don't assume anything and conserve your resources like crazy. Jettison the d20 mindset and think survival until you get a better feel for his DM style. He probably doesn't go for the "I win/right spell solution" (he may, I don't know him) but instead require that each of your victories utilize thinking and planning. A caster works in facing off against a vast army/hard marches if you put yourself in the mindset to deal with the challenges:
- Do you have a reliable and reusuable attack?
- How many spells do you think you will need to get through most encounters (it should be 0)
- Are you prepared in other ways: Right skills, team support for you resting and not going on watch (so you can replensh spells). Gear: can you equip things that can help with encounters either attacking (flammable oil) or evading (caltrops).
I don't know your DM you do - you should ask him some questions on what would be ok skills, spells, equipment and tactics-wise before playing to see how he feels. If you take the time to inquire about what he is going for and get on the same page you may find that while he may be against many d20 conventions and playstyle components, but he may be up for other tactics, ideas and use of skills, spells and equipment.
Don't dread it too much, you might actually have some fun.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suggest talking to the DM. In a friendly manner. Ask how he plans to have the demographics (are 6th level characters as rare in his world as 6+ are in regular PF, or are they more like level 13+ characters in terms of how common they are?), how common magic will be, how common magic items will be (big thing!), if you'll have ready access to wands of CLW (if not, if he'll be putting in any house rules that makes healing more easy otherwise).
I run E7 and I can sure understand why the DM would want to run E6. Running E6 well isn't harder than running regular PF well (to me at least it's easier, requiring less mechanical setup, allowing me to put more time towards creating a story and world), however, in how you've described it I get the feeling that he might also be aiming to make the campaign more gritty and low-magic; this is something that new DMs should be careful with. It's very very easy to make the game nearly impossibly hard, forcing him to fudge/ad hoc change stuff.
If he's aiming for low-magic too, suggest some house rules like the Strain-Injury HP variant (basically, most hit points can be regained after a quick rest).
As for strategies for survival, if it's a low to medium magic, low level game with little time for rest, aim for martial characters, preferably that aren't completely unskilled either. Rangers are fantastic. If you find some barbarian archetype that makes it less reliant on low-duration Rage that'd be fantastic. Fighters will be very useful, though they can have issues out of combat. If he's going for large-scale stuff Cavaliers aren't bad because with less dungeon crawling and more open areas mounts are great. Rogues and monks have their issues but might not be bad for a campaign with limited rests. If the DM is paladin-friendly having one around can be great - though you can't heal on a regular basis, having access to healing when it's needed is crucial. Basically, you rarely want to heal, but when you do, you REALLY do.
I can't imagine why he would E6 this and have "facing a vast army, with little to no rest periods"....
Or something in the same vein of lord of the rings. Gandalf was a 5th level magic user and all that you know ;)
No, it's all about DM's that can't handle stuff like T-port hobbling the players.
This is just antagonistic derailing. Stop doing it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any thoughts on E6?
My thoughts is that it's the worst idea ever, and would be no fun at all.
My thoughts are that E6 is actually the best thing that ever happened to D&D/PF and the only thing that makes the game useable for long campaigns. (Though it doesn't matter in campaigns with slow advancement that wouldn't get to 8th level anyway.)
I on the other hand also think eX makes baby jesus cry....
I've spent 30 years leveling up wizards and I'll tell you the fun I have with them comes from both ends of the spectrum... cantrips and spell levels 5-9... Never from the parts in the middle.
Spells from levels 1-4 are the 'tools that make you useful' but not the things that make it fun.
Not for me anyway.
But hey there is no wrongbadfun, so game on and good luck! As always, play what you want to play and don't play what ya don't. Let the good times role.
My games never reach 8th level anyway. E6 is more a descision about setting design, not about character advancement.
|
Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...
Congratulations, you get the point of it....to keep the wizard and spellcasters in the same district of power with the martial characters. If you go in with the assumption that spellcasters should automatically be better, then yeah, E6 ain't for you. (Then again, I think a lot of the disparity even in a regular 1-20 level game comes from attitude...if the GM and players are convinced that casters are inherently better, then that's how the game will play out.)
Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...Congratulations, you get the point of it....to keep the wizard and spellcasters in the same district of power with the martial characters. If you go in with the assumption that spellcasters should automatically be better, then yeah, E6 ain't for you. (Then again, I think a lot of the disparity even in a regular 1-20 level game comes from attitude...if the GM and players are convinced that casters are inherently better, then that's how the game will play out.)
not better, i think they should be equal, minutes on a spell vs a constant peice of equiptment. % spells to cause damage (burning hands) versus the constant ability to cleave... Just cause they can cast the spells mimicing the melee does make them equal, as they are limited in uses.. so obviously, YOU missed MY point.
If the only spell a wizard could cast was burning hands I'd agree, but honestly, burning hands is among the weakest combat spells a wizard can cast and only one tool out of the whole toolbox.
not better, i think they should be equal, minutes on a spell vs a constant peice of equiptment. % spells to cause damage (burning hands) versus the constant ability to cleave... Just cause they can cast the spells mimicing the melee does make them equal, as they are limited in uses.. so obviously, YOU missed MY point.Hm.. flaming hands... wouldnt cleave on a fighter be just as effective? Sheild spell ois just a "shield" you could carry if you were a fighter...Congratulations, you get the point of it....to keep the wizard and spellcasters in the same district of power with the martial characters. If you go in with the assumption that spellcasters should automatically be better, then yeah, E6 ain't for you. (Then again, I think a lot of the disparity even in a regular 1-20 level game comes from attitude...if the GM and players are convinced that casters are inherently better, then that's how the game will play out.)
Ok, I may be missing your argument but you seem to be unhappy because a wizard in E6 might not deal as much damage with their damage dealing spells as a fighter with the right feat selection. If I am not mistaking you I would ask what about E6 is different in this regard from normal level 1-20 Pathfinder? It is my understanding that casting for direct damage is never going to stand up to the ability of an optimized fighter to deal direct damage. Evocation is usually considered less than optimal for a wizard because of how many ways there are to avoid spell damage (energy resistance, evasion, saving throws) and the fact that the fighter-type classes can pretty much handle dealing damage. E6 I would think would actually help a damage dealing wizard stay relevant. Your humanoid enemies don't go beyond level 6 (or whatever level the cap is) and most of the world is calibrated to where you aren't facing 5th level bog-standard guards or bandits at level 6. You won't face dozens of enemies with hundreds of hit points each who laugh off a 10d6 fireball or a 15d6 cone of cold (if they aren't immune to begin with).
You also might be missing the other side of things in an E6 game, that in an E6 game 90-95% of the world is constrained by the same E6 (or E/whatever) limits. Daze and Sleep (capped at 4HD) in an E6 world affects something like 90% of NPCs, Sleep Hex will never run into an NPC that has too many levels to be affected (it's capped at 10HD), Color Spray which Blinds and Stuns 3-4 HD creatures will be able to do that much longer, Protection from Arrows (gives DR/Magic) will likely always be effective (no 10th level mook guards who come stock with +2 bows and arrows), Flight is awesome (it's a lot harder to get loads of fly items when everyone is CL 6 or below), Scare (frightens less than 6HD) won't hit it's cap on most opponents, and the various [Animal] [Quality] spells like Bull's Strength will be much in demand in a world where there aren't lots of +6 belts and headbands being made.
There are loads of things a wizard is still awesome at in an E6 world, but they do stay limited by the number of spells and abilities they have access to in a given day. My favorite thing (as a player who likes rangers and rogues) is that skills stay relevant in E6. Spells like Fly, Spider Climb, or Invisibility are still around, sure, but it takes more resources for a wizard in E6 to bypass every skill with a spell when they have less spells available. All that said, if you don't like E6 don't feel you have to play it. It's a variant I and many others find fun to play and DM, but that's all it is. There is no one true way to play, and you aren't doing it wrong if you like different things. It's just a matter of taste and some people have different tastes.
If you are going to play an E6 game though I'd urge you to be sure you can go into it with the idea of having fun and making the game fun for everyone. If you can't get enthusiastic about it and go in knowing you are going to hate it then I'd suggest just telling your DM that you'll sit out this campaign, or maybe even work out a way to run a high level game yourself on alternating weeks or something like that. If you can't get your group to play high level there are loads of play by post options, or virtual tabletops like roll20 where you can meet with a group over the internet to run or play the type of game you like. Pathfinder is a fun hobby, don't go into a game which you hate with a bad attitude from the start and make things miserable for yourself and the others around you. There are enough things we have to do that aren't fun, don't torture yourself in a hobby that you want to do.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just so it's said: I'm primarily a player, and I'd love to play in some e6 games. I actually can't get a DM to run it for me. :)
Out of everything i have seen here, i seen very few spells that i feel would be useful, such as glitterdust and color spray, and maybe sleep depending on what you are fighting. I write off grease and web as they have little to no true usefulness, in any of the dozens of games i have played. They are too easily avoided, ignored, or cause problems to your own positioning. Ray of enffeblement is just weak, i'd rather have someone knocking my opponent down then giving him a -2 and still being attacked.
Maybe slow, and possibly glitterdust could be useful, but i dont see them being useful ENOUGH to trade off being some melee character, capable of dropping an opponent in one to two turns. Anything they cant drop if going to be rare, and unless the caster saved the debuffs specifically for this rare fight, I'd still rather have the melee fighting, especially since rare stronger monster is likely to have decent saves anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you'd rather play somebody who is dealing hp damage and knocking opponents down why not play a fighter-type character? Damage is what they do after all, the only thing they do most of the time, so it is to be expected that they will be better at it. That isn't E6 dependent though, if you want to just do the most hp damage to opponents in Pathfinder two-handed melee weapons or a dedicated archer is the way you'll want to go. If the only useful spells can can see in the entire wizard spell list are color spray (a strong contender for being one of the best 1st level spells in the game) and maybe glitterdust or slow I think you might have a too-high bar for useful.
Out of everything i have seen here, i seen very few spells that i feel would be useful, such as glitterdust and color spray, and maybe sleep depending on what you are fighting. I write off grease and web as they have little to no true usefulness, in any of the dozens of games i have played. They are too easily avoided, ignored, or cause problems to your own positioning. Ray of enffeblement is just weak, i'd rather have someone knocking my opponent down then giving him a -2 and still being attacked.
You don't choose a wizard for the same reasons as a fighter. A wizard has loads of stuff to bring to the table that the fighter can't, especially out of combat. A wizard SHOULD be weaker in combat than a fighter, because a fighter is very very limited out of combat while even the most combat-obsessed wizard will have at least like 6 skill points per level where the fighter will probably have one or two. And in E6, skill points matter a LOT.
And yes, a fighter is definately better at dealing damage. If it focuses on a combat maneuver it will also be better at that specific kind of debuffing.
The fighter is a sledgehammer. The wizard is a laptop. Using a laptop as a sledgehammer is really really bad and will mostly lead to a broken laptop, but your sledgehammer does not have wikipedia.
Consider: Which party will survive best through a normal campaign with a mix of combat and non-combat scenarios, the one with four fighters or the one with three fighters and a wizard?
Grease is probably the single most useful 1st level spell. I think grease eats up probably 50% of the first level slots in our E7 games all by itself. It lasts for a whole combat already at level one, and is a battlefield control spell that has an effect even against those who save, it is a quite powerful single-target debuff that targets an unusual debuffing save, and it's a powerful though circumstantial buff against grapplers.
Things it's often used for in our games:
- Preventing charge lanes or clogging up doorways and hallways; this is a good first-round opener against martial enemies. Getting charged by a tiger is harsh, but a grease outright stops that.
- As a low-level debuff against NPC's. This was only rarely used until maybe six months ago when I pitted our second level party against an ogre and it's goblin slave - the wizard cast grease on the ogres club and woops it was reduced to making unarmed strikes for the whole combat.
- At levels 5+ it's a good pre-combat buff to prevent all those swallow wholers and grapplers and engulfers. Though of course, mostly useful if you know what you're up against - but it's usefulness for blocking entrances never stops.
I don't care to go through all the spells listed, but they're all fairly powerful (except ray of enfeeblement - yes, that's a pretty weak spell in PF) and can do stuff fighters can't hope to replicate. Grease is just so frakkin' awesome though. I mean, if it was a second level spell it'd still be better than half that spell levels list.
A wizard can't replace the fighter in a party. But a party with a wizard and a fighter is better of than one with two fighters.
It can be a matter of tactics used and other group specific stuff though - if the enemies are usually heavily focused on preventing casters but not martial attacks (I kinda got this vibe from the "they'll probably have high saves" comment as it didn't seem to occur that enemies can have high AC as well) then of course casters will be less useful. If fights usually take place in clean dungeons where range isn't much of a benefit but there isn't much rubble to hassle the heavy armor types either then that will favor a fighter over a caster. If the party is low on teamwork that tends to benefit classes that can take care of themselves very well and isn't as reliant on other characters, which at low levels amounts to martials (minus rogue and monk) and divine casters. And so on.
If grease hasn't seemed useful to you in your games, it could be because your games are different in nature to for example most published AP's. It could also be that you, who have been DM'ing a lot, simply haven't noticed when it's useful or that the players simply haven't used it much enough to notice usefulness. Or that you've accidentally missed part of the rules. This is not meant as an attack - I do that to sometimes. But as DM's we get just one perspective of things and playing can really change that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Out of everything i have seen here, i seen very few spells that i feel would be useful, such as glitterdust and color spray, and maybe sleep depending on what you are fighting. I write off grease and web as they have little to no true usefulness, in any of the dozens of games i have played. They are too easily avoided, ignored, or cause problems to your own positioning. Ray of enffeblement is just weak, i'd rather have someone knocking my opponent down then giving him a -2 and still being attacked.
Maybe slow, and possibly glitterdust could be useful, but i dont see them being useful ENOUGH to trade off being some melee character, capable of dropping an opponent in one to two turns. Anything they cant drop if going to be rare, and unless the caster saved the debuffs specifically for this rare fight, I'd still rather have the melee fighting, especially since rare stronger monster is likely to have decent saves anyway.
If you want to play a melee character, play a melee character. Lots of people prefer them, thats fine. But it is factually untrue that casters are not useful, and have almost no useful spells at 6th level and bellow.
I think you under value battlefiled control and debuff spells, which are among the more useful things casters can do. I am currently playing in an E6 game, and have played in may games that were low level, and those spells you 'write off' have often been really really important. Unless you play the game against one or two opponents in wide open spaces all the time, web, grease, and the pit spells and other area spells are extremely useful, and not just for casting directly on the enemy, but by putting them in front of them, and forcing them towards your big fighter head on.
In a recent encounter with in the E6 game, we were facing a large force of kobolds (as part of a larger attack on our home city). The use of control spells and terrain was literally the only thing that kept of us from being overwhelmed, otherwise we would have all been individually surrounded.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I write off grease and web as they have little to no true usefulness, in any of the dozens of games i have played. They are too easily avoided, ignored, or cause problems to your own positioning.
I read these words, and I cannot make my brain understand them.
This little witch here nearly destroyed every encounter she was in with web. The only thing the GM threw at us that she couldn't immediately disable or at least slow down was a will-o-wisp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
