Convince me Magic Missle isn't useless?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 278 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

That's like the drdeth specialty, at least this time he didn't reference design from 30 years ago.


FuelDrop wrote:
Crossbows are perfectly good alpha strike weapons and are good if you have to arm peasants or other people without martial weapon training.

i guess you can consider crossbows okay if you are like equipping a militia of weak conscripted peasants to fight off a group of low level brigands in your absence and don't have time to teach them how to use a longbow.

but, by the time they take rapid reload, they are better off with Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longbow) and well, only fools use crossbows when they could train in longbows or even firearms.


BigDTBone wrote:
FuelDrop wrote:
Crossbows are perfectly good alpha strike weapons and are good if you have to arm peasants or other people without martial weapon training.
Definitely a perfectly valid NPC option.

for NPCs whom aren't intended to be martial damage machines and generally for low level NPCs that are intended to die quickly.


and for a caster who doesn't want to waste his spells on a friggin rat...

and for just about any melee character that needs at least something to go ranged while closing in, or is suddonly facing flying targets.

crosbows have better range, are cheaper, and a better threat range, so for a non-range dedicated character, they're the better choise.

Shadow Lodge

Neo2515 wrote:
It's actually more like, "comparable to a low-damage melee weapon wielded by a character who devoted almost nothing to melee damage."
I'd say it is comparable to what you might expect from a commoner defending his home from intruders with a dagger. Do you rob commoners because they "tickle" you?
LazarX wrote:

Like hell there isn't. Magic requires special circumstances, blessings, or training to operate and it's results tend to be idiosyncratic.

Technology is consistent, repeatable, and can be operated by any idiot who can flip a switch.

So, can said idiot who can flip a light switch operate a Nuclear Power Plant? Magic is [IMO] merely highly complex and intricate technology. Some people[sorcerers] are born with a talent for it, some people study it, and some learn it as part of their religion[clerics]. Its not as simple as turning on a light switch[A move action at best], but more its as complex as trying to find the right light switch on a wall full of light switches that are invisible, and each do a separate thing, relying on instinct, or instruction to guide you to it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
EvilPaladin wrote:
Neo2515 wrote:
It's actually more like, "comparable to a low-damage melee weapon wielded by a character who devoted almost nothing to melee damage."
I'd say it is comparable to what you might expect from a commoner defending his home from intruders with a dagger. Do you rob commoners because they "tickle" you?
LazarX wrote:

Like hell there isn't. Magic requires special circumstances, blessings, or training to operate and it's results tend to be idiosyncratic.

Technology is consistent, repeatable, and can be operated by any idiot who can flip a switch.

So, can said idiot who can flip a light switch operate a Nuclear Power Plant? Magic is [IMO] merely highly complex and intricate technology. Some people[sorcerers] are born with a talent for it, some people study it, and some learn it as part of their religion[clerics]. Its not as simple as turning on a light switch[A move action at best], but more its as complex as trying to find the right light switch on a wall full of light switches that are invisible, and each do a separate thing, relying on instinct, or instruction to guide you to it.

Also, the light switch is more aken to a command word or use activated wondrous item. Any idiot can use it. The system in place behind that item to get it in working order into the hands of that idiot is quite complex, similarly to the light switch.


Diego Rossi wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Ughbash wrote:
thebigragu wrote:
So, with three Smites up, using MM against multiple targets, only one of those MMs deals Smite damage?
Point 1 changing the goal posts since the orignal perosn saying smite and MM was good for one shotting an evil outsider cause each MM did smite damage to the outsider.

It isn't moving goal posts, it is challenging an assumption of smite damage is "once per spell" instead of "once per damage roll." Generally, abilities that work only once per spell say exactly that. This is definitely a corner case because it is doubtful the smite ability was written with spells in mind.

For what it's worth, I agree that it probably only works once per spell (even with multiple smites up and firing at multiple targets,) but it is ambiguous enough to warrant further discussion. The line of questioning though is completely apropos and doesn't move the goal post at all.

It is moving the goal as it require 3 different smites against 3 different targets. Each smite is applied once, to the attacks against the appropriate target.

Says what where?


Each damage roll, not each attack. Important difference. Probably not legal though, because the devs probably never intended MM to be used creatively, like Vital Strike. If you find a way to make it great, it must be a mistake.

The Exchange

thebigragu wrote:
Each damage roll, not each attack. Important difference. Probably not legal though, because the devs probably never intended MM to be used creatively, like Vital Strike. If you find a way to make it great, it must be a mistake.

smite and magic missile are already great. Vital strike though...maybe if you are a huge hippo.


GeneticDrift wrote:
thebigragu wrote:
Each damage roll, not each attack. Important difference. Probably not legal though, because the devs probably never intended MM to be used creatively, like Vital Strike. If you find a way to make it great, it must be a mistake.
smite and magic missile are already great. Vital strike though...maybe if you are a huge hippo.

Of if you are a Cave Druid who routinely shapechanges into a Carnivorous Crystal Ooze and has dips into barbarian and monk and abuses the crap out of Strongjaw and INA....

Or a Gunslinger 5/Ninja X who likes to abuse a double hackabut in close range with invisibility... Just syaing 2d12x(how ever far you are in vital strike tree)+PBS+Dex+Sneak Attack+Enchant+whatever else vs Flat Footed Touch AC (so pretty much just about auto hit) is mean.... jsut saying...

The Exchange

If it were intended for a tickle fight, Magic Missile would have originated from BoEF and have significantly different text.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There's 211 posts to convince someone a spell that never misses, for a level one spell slot isn't useless?

THE WORLD IS MAD!


I already took back "useless." Jeez, read more. ;)

But, I mean, c'mon. It's useful in much the same way that Ray of Frost is useful.


Ray of Frost does 1d3+1 damage where, at 9th level, magic missile does 5d4+5. Significant difference when you are trying to force a concentration check.


Neo2151 wrote:

It feels like a lot of theorycraft in here. I still don't see any reason to prepare it past level 1, tbh, and really not even then.

Level 1: Color Spray and/or Sleep wins the game. Why bother with MM at all?

Because it affects everything at a range of 110ft. Doesn't really matter what you go up against, this spell pretty much works at this level. Orcs, goblins, zombies, ghouls, homunculi, elementals, animals, elves, tieflings, vermin. Even boss-ish enemies like imps, dretches, and shadows can be harmed by it. It has the best range of a 1st level spell making it easy to zone with by offering a long-range safe poke.

Quote:
Level 2: The above remains true, and Burning Hands suddenly becomes better DPS.

*ahem*

Burning Hands wrote:

School evocation [fire]; Level sorcerer/wizard 1

Range 15 ft.
Area cone-shaped burst
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Reflex half; Spell Resistance yes

The average damage of 1d4+1 is 3.5. Burning hands at 2nd level has an average damage of 5 on a failed save and 2.5 on a successful save. It also allows for fire resistance, can be evaded with evasion, and requires you to be within 15 ft. of your target. Burning hands has traditionally been viewed by our group as one of the worst 1st level spells in the bunch, barring certain character builds that buff its damage somehow.

Meanwhile, Magic Missile is still doing similar damage, from up to 120 ft. away (notice that +10 ft. since last level) and it's doing it reliably.

Quote:
Level 3: Scorching Ray becomes available, and both it and Burning Hands do superior DPS.

Scorching Ray is a 2nd level spell and represents a much greater investment of your overall power at this level. However, even here, Magic Missile shines in some amusing ways. Again it crushes at range (130 ft. vs 30 ft.), doesn't allow energy resistances (scorching ray does), and doesn't require an attack roll. I've seen many a scorching ray miss in my time. Touch or not, when you're dealing with a 1/2 BAB class, you have a good chance of just wasting your spell slot on a poor roll. It's even worse if your foe has cover (+4 vs the attack), is in melee (-4 to your attack), or has concealment (% chance to simply fail). It also deals 50% less damage vs incorporeal creatures like shadows. It deals an average of 14 damage this level.

Burning hands? That spell looks bad this level. It's up to 3d4 or 7.5 damage on a failed save with a save for half that requires you to be dancing the tango with your enemy. >_>

Magic missile? Well, like I said, 130 ft. range, can't miss, ignores energy resistances, gives saving throws the finger, ignores incorporeality, is less of an investment, and also happens to deal an average of 7 damage this level (so roughly 2 magic missiles are worth a hit with scorching ray at this level). Also, at this point the damage from magic missile is beginning to look like a good deal as a spell-disruptor. It's no-miss and long range coupled with a solid minimum damage (4) make this spell ideal for wrecking enemy casters who don't have shield active. Since the DC is 10 + damage taken + spell level * 2, you can very easily trade your 1st level spell slot for interrupting their 2nd or 3rd level slots while dealing some damage to boot.

Quote:
Level 4: Probably the last level that Color Spray or Sleep are auto-win (they're still good though), and Scorching Ray/Burning Hands is still doing better DPS.

Burning hands still sucks. Scorching Ray is still a 2nd level spell with a larger risk/reward. Sleep is still a 1-round cast time spell that no longer risks taking out entire teams of enemies, and colorspray is getting much weaker with the increased HD and saves of your enemies. :P

Also MM increases to 140 ft. range.

Quote:
Level 5: Scorching Ray stops being obviously better for a bit here, but it's technically still superior and Burning Hands is still in the lead.

The fact that magic missile is competing with scorching ray is funny and a good argument for it in its own right. The idea that burning hands is in the lead s laughable. At this level magic missile deals 3d4+3 or 10.5 average damage vs 12.5 on a failed save or 6.25 on a successful save. Now at 5th level, you're seriously getting pretty likely to run into more energy resistant things too (resist energy potions are cheapsauce, resist energy is available to every class that can cast it, things like imps, quasits, lemures, and so forth are all significantly below your level and well into mook territory.

Also you're setting the bar for concentration checks at 16-25 + (SpLvl*2). OUCH.

Quote:
Level 6: Ditto level 5.

Ditto level 5, plus 160 ft. Range.

Quote:
Level 7: Magic Missile finally overtakes Burning Hands again! Wait, no it doesn't: 5d6 > 4d4+4.

Actually, no, 5d6 is not greater than 4d4+4. That 5-30 with a save for half vs 8-20 with no save. But since burning hands is 5dFOUR, it capped out back at 5th level with 5-20 damage on a failed save, and is now firmly in the gutter.

Quote:
Also, now you get your second ray for Scorching Ray, and from here on out, it's always better single-target DPS. (edit - Wrong dps for BH. Technically MM wins at this level, but still loses to Scorching Ray.)

Nice catch. Scorching ray is still situationally hindered and more easily defended against. Fire is a commonly resisted element and resistance applies to each ray individually. Thus if an enemy drinks a potion of resist energy you get two rolls of 4d6-10 or an average of 8 damage if both hit. Also, the hitting thing. And the range. 'Cause those are things y'know.

170 ft. Range.

Quote:

Level 8+: Are you really using 1st level slots for offense anymore? Honestly?

(A note on Shocking Grasp: The only class I ever see bother with this spell is Magi who abuse metamagic tricks/traits in order to make it better than 5d6. Otherwise, I just don't see people using it, so I didn't bother to include it.)

Nope. I don't tend to use them for primary offense. However at this level, 1st level spells are cheeeap, and that magic missile? Well it's bringing ruin and lamentation to enemy spellcasters. At 4d4+4 (and 5d4+5 next level) it sets the Concentration DC of any caster pelted by it at 18-30 + (SpLvl*2) or 20-35 + (SpLvl*2) at 9th level. That's vicious. It's so easy and costs me very little in terms of resources. It's pointless to use all my big guns in every battle, but it's easy for poking at enemies or shutting down an enemy caster who's going to be a problem.

With expanded content, it's even cooler. With a Book of Harms, you can maximize an evocation spell 1/day when you cast it by eating 1d4 x spell level damage. Trading 2.5 HP for 25 auto-damage is pretty shway. Especially when you made your spellcraft check and know that a fear spell is about to scatter your party like dustbunnies in totoro-land.


Also, on NPCs, magic missile is terrifying. Just to point out, a group of 5 1st level sorcerers with magic missile are only CR 3.5. Yet that's 5d5+5 points of incoming damage to somebody every round that you can't stop them from casting. My brother felt this the hard way on his 6th level Paladin, and if he had of been anything other than a Paladin, he would have been dead.

Naturally, it wasn't just the spellcasters. They had other guys running defense as well. But when you can run around and chill in the back ranks while enjoying your nice cover bonuses and bonuses to AC from crouching or lying prone while blasting the snot out of literally any target on the map, you feel pretty baller for a minion.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Ashiel wrote:
Also you're setting the bar for concentration checks at 16-25 + (SpLvl*2). OUCH.

You don't double the spell level when calculating the concentration DC for injured while casting.


Why is the obvious benefit of Burning Hands always getting ignored in these comparisons?

3 enemies in front of you, and you're 5th level. BH or MM?
1d4+1 per enemy, or 5d4 to all enemies, even if it's Fire and they get a save.

Yes, vs a single target, MM is better than BH. When's the last time a single target was worth throwing any spell at all? (ie: Either you've already won the fight and it's "cleanup" round, or your GM is a masochist who likes to watch the party insta-destroy his encounter.)


Simple, burning hands requires that you be within 15' of the target (if not closer). That is a very unpleasant place to be if you are a squishy wizard/sorcerer.

So, you can either do 5d4 (average 12.5 save for half is 6) to those three enemies and risk getting killed or you can do 10.5 to one of them and be safe.

Typically, I opt for the safe route unless I have specifically built my wizard/sorcerer to be "up front".

Then again, typically I would save a MM for something more important, like an enemy spellcaster.


Gauss wrote:

Simple, burning hands requires that you be within 15' of the target (if not closer). That is a very unpleasant place to be if you are a squishy wizard/sorcerer.

So, you can either do 5d4 (average 12.5 save for half is 6) to those three enemies and risk getting killed or you can do 10.5 to one of them and be safe.

Typically, I opt for the safe route unless I have specifically built my wizard/sorcerer to be "up front".

Then again, typically I would save a MM for something more important, like an enemy spellcaster.

Pretty much this. The more enemies are within the 15 ft. cone from you, the more reason there is to be anywhere but in range for burning hands, unless you have a very specific build of wizard that pushes the damage of burning hands in big, big ways.


Yes, in a perfect world where everything goes just how you want it to...

For what it's worth, I don't see many games where combat takes place over 50ft. 100ft+10ft/CL doesn't ever seem to mean much.

Edit - I also disagree with the idea that a party Wizard is holding action just to screw with the enemy caster. Early combat you're either blasting or battlefield controlling, and late battle the melee has already closed distance so you "counter-spelling" really doesn't make a ton of difference.
It's absolutely great, in theory. I just doubt it comes up much in practice.


It depends on the terrain. If you adventure outdoors the distances can exceed even magic missile's range.

Of course, indoors I would much rather have a fighter type between me and the bad guys rather than me up front using burning hands.

TBH, it is burning hands I find to be the spell that is even more situational (and less useful) than MM. As Ashiel said, you would need to push the damage up in very big ways for it to be worth the risk.

Alternately, I could see a Teleportation (subschool) specialist making use of it. Walk up, cast Burning Hands, Shift to get back behind the fighter.

Edit: Really? Interesting, I can think of at least 4 situations in the last year where the judicious use of Magic Missile stopped an enemy spellcaster from royally screwing the party or escaping.

After a wizard has altered the battle (first and maybe second spell) there is really no need for him to waste his good spells. That is when he readies an action to stop the enemy spell caster from...whatever. It has really saved us a time or two.


Gauss wrote:

Wow, I missed the wolves special ability to detect class. Is it an extraordinary or supernatural ability? /humor

(Seriously, I am joking, I couldn't pass that one up.)

What one? I was just saying wolves go after the weakest member, then pointing out that rogues and wizards might be weak. Honestly, I don't see much room for a joke. But I'm tired, so I guess my sense of humor's not very quick right now. Always am the last one to get these things.

It's nothing to do with armor. It's to do with how big and healthy-looking the target is.

Also, I have a bit of trouble believing wolves will go after herds of dangerous bison but stay away from humans. Maybe that's how things go nowadays, since it's now a pretty urbanized country with a scarce number of 'em, but I can't imagine a pack of twelve wolves would be so afraid of four scruffy men with ten-foot poles.

Wikipedia wrote:
Wolf attacks were an occasional but widespread feature of life in pre-20th-century Europe. In France alone, historical records indicate that in the period 1580–1830, 3,069 people were killed by wolves, of whom 1,857 were killed by non-rabid wolves.

This makes it about seven people killed by non-rabid wolves (i.e. wolf packs) per year. So, yeah. Wolf attacks weren't common, but in the medieval era, they totally did happen. Fortunately, most people had the sense to stay close to the village after dark. Except...murderhobos! ;D

Deadmanwalking wrote:
The two stack, which, IMO, makes it worth having both since +8 AC is quite a bit better than +4.

For two spell slots, though? I guess at higher levels.


Kobold Cleaver, how many of those were people alone or young? Probably the majority. That is different from an adventuring party.

Note: A Wizard or Rogue are not usually "weak" by average human standards. Rogues typically have at least a 10 which is average while a Wizard usually has an 8 or so. However, if we consider weak to be sickly, young, old, etc then an 8 is not that bad.

In any case, I doubt that any natural (non-game) wolf or pack of wolves is going to approach a group of humans making a lot of noise. As I mentioned earlier, it was probably picking off a single people, children, etc. Ie: easy targets.

BTW, what is the link to the wiki? Wiki is not a reputable citation and I am curious what the citation behind that data is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Y'wanna know another word for subpar strength? Weakness. ;D

Also, it's not that uncommon to see Strength 7 wizards. Regardless, an 8 would be enough. Wolves aren't looking for cripples (though cripples are nice), they're looking for a weak link.

God, I'd hate to be a bloatmage traveling through an old forest after dark.

Again, though, wolves already love to attack creatures that make lots of noise and are numerous. They're called sheep, and trust me, they deserve it. And is that shepherd enough to drive a pack of wolves away? Definitely not.

Ugh. Are we doing the "Wikipedia can't be trusted" cliche? That's just a timewaster and we both know it. Go to the Wikipedia page for wolf, look under wolf attacks. And iIf I have to cite my sources, howzabout you cite yours? :P

Gauss wrote:
Probably the majority.

Bingo. The majority. That means there's a minority of adventurers getting wolfnommed. Which is quite possibly partially because adventurers are kinda a minority in and of themselves.

All in all, no, it's not common. But it's not unrealistic for it to happen, either. :)


Yes, wolves are looking for a weak link, but that does not mean they are going to attack a party of humans. Will they attack loners? Yes, but wizards are not typically alone in the wild.


What makes humans so special? Fifty cows with sharp horns and more mussels muscles than a rock in the ocean? Awesome. Three tiny dudes with pointy sticks? Eek!

Also, see my edit.


Anyways, I'm gonna stop derailing this thread and head to bed.

There's not really an easy way to stop—if I stop after posting an argument, I'm just trying to get the last word in, but if I let you post your rebuttal before dropping out, I just don't have a comeback. It's kinda a flaw in the system.

Anyways, g'night! Or good morning, now. I have a really messed up sleep schedule.


Humans are special because we resemble bears. Wolves avoid bears (see wiki link below regarding wolf attacks). We are not down on all fours like prey.

Also found in the wiki are indications that non-rabid attacks ARE singling out lone prey (ie: not an adventuring party). In descriptions of the modern attacks they attacked children or lone people. In descriptions of the type of attacks it also provides examples of the variety of targets. All of them are either loner type targets or children. In fact, 90% of the targets were children.

Finally, one other note on "hunting the weak". Do you know what makes them hunted? They cannot keep up with the group, thus becoming lone targets.

In herd behavior when threatened by a predator the hear will try to escape. A weak herd member will be unable to keep up thus becoming the target.

That is not a situation which will typically happen to armed humans, you know, because we have intelligence and all. :)

Note: none of the above applies in the case of a rabid animal. In that case all behavioral norms are out the window.

Link

Liberty's Edge

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
The two stack, which, IMO, makes it worth having both since +8 AC is quite a bit better than +4.
For two spell slots, though? I guess at higher levels.

Really, any level after you've got Mage Armor and a Lesser Rod of Extend (so, starting somewhere between 5th and 7th level). That means you've got it up all day for one spell slot, and then for hard fights you pull out Shield as an additional defense if you have prep time. By that point a 1st level spell for another +4 AC is starting to look pretty good, and I'd hardly call that 'high level'.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hrothdane wrote:

Magic Missile is a wizard's best friend against incorporeal things. I know of at least 2 intro modules with Shadows, exactly at the one point where you can't count on your martials having magic weapons. At higher levels, a greater shadow can instant kill an arcane caster with dumped strength with one touch (he can even get a 5 strength one on an average roll).

Please, get close enough to blast him with your Burning Hands.

Incorporeal monsters are not exactly rare threats either, especially in PFS. My level 6.33 magus has fought incorporeal things in roughly half the scenarios/modules he's played. Incorporeal is right up there with ghouls, swarms, darkness, invisibility, and alchemists as the standard adventure fare.

One day, someone will manage to write a scenario with an invisible incorporeal ghoul swarm with alchemist levels, see in darkness, and deeper darkness at will.

Ok, so let's say you're level 3, nobody has a magic weapon, and you encounter a shadow.

Round 1:
* you have initiative, because you're a wizard and you always have initiative. You cast magic missile for 7 damages.
* the shadow is very confuse, because it's the very first time it takes damages.
Round 2:
* you use your pearl of power to get your magice missile back.
* the shadow asks itself what to do.
Round 3:
* you cast magic missile again for 7 damages.
* the shadow sit and cries.
Round 4 to 153:
* you read your spell book to put magic missile in a free slot.
* the shadow cries.
Round 154:
* you cast magic missile and the shadow cries.

Yay! magic missile saved the day!

... Alternatively, you cast magic weapon on the fighter.

DrDeth wrote:
Toughness isn't the VERY VERY best feat evar, so it's useless.

It's useless because there are enough better options available not to take it, therefore nobody take it. An option is useful only if some people use it.

Your character has only 2 traits. There are a dozen of powerful traits and a few dozen of useful trait. Hence, you will never come to a situation where a trait marginally useful in some narrow situation, like Hill Figther, is appealing; I'm quite certain you didn't even know that trait existed. Hence, you will never take Hill Figther, and nobody will ever take it: it is just a useless waste of space.

It's the same with magic missile, you have limited slots, and you have almost always something better to do than "I use my action to hit some random mook for 20% of his max HP". Since you don't even know if such a situation will come into play, you don't even prepare it. Therefore the spell is useless for prepared casters (but I admit it may be useful for spontaneous caster, when you know enough useful level 1 spells).


I've had characters use toughness. Just saying.


I've never seen this many people I care for and deeply respect trolled so expertly before.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

very common feat for NPC's, and, I believe, in PFS, where you can't train up hit points.

==Aelryinth

Liberty's Edge

Aelryinth wrote:

very common feat for NPC's, and, I believe, in PFS, where you can't train up hit points.

==Aelryinth

I've seen it taken a few times too.

But then, I don't let players train up HP either...


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

very common feat for NPC's, and, I believe, in PFS, where you can't train up hit points.

==Aelryinth

I've seen it taken a few times too.

But then, I don't let players train up HP either...

I could see taking Toughness if you are using 15PB but with 20PB it isn't hard for anyone to start with a 14 Con which is generally more than enough.

Silver Crusade

Neo2151 wrote:

I mean, yeah, it works on incorporeal creatures, but c'mon...

Even at it's most powerful, we're talking about 5d4+5 damage at level 9.

How has this spell survived sooo long when it's so terrible?

I've toyed with the following idea. That trait, Magical lineage I think, that allows you to take one spell and apply meta magic at 1 lvl lower.

At lvl 1 take metamagic toppling so you can auto prone someone. Other metamagics for status effects would be fun too.


Toppling does not automatically knock prone. It requires a check which you will often fail as CMD scales faster than your bonus.


This spell isn't useless, but I would agree that it is less useful. In the shadow example above, you're correct; a magic weapon spell would do the trick. However you can't refute the fact that Magic Missile would have SOME effect there, so it isn't useless, just less useful.

Not every spell is a win button. Heck; a lot of them are not. However one thing I (along with Dr Deth apparently) get frustrated with is folks saying less useful = useless. It was demonstrated upthread that MM is more useful than Burning Hands long term if you factor in saves, energy resistance and range. However this does not obsolete Burning Hands by any means as the spell has its own merits that it is a cone shape and that it ignites flammables in the area of effect. Just as MM is situational, I could see Burning Hands' extras coming in handy in certain situations; say a bar fight. One spell and suddenly there's a 15' cone shape of the bar, liquor, and folks' alcohol-stained clothing on fire, reducing the action economy of anyone in that vicinity and potentially causing the place to empty.

All I'm saying is that no option in the game is fully useless. It wouldn't be added if it didn't add SOMETHING to the potential success of the PCs. However I agree that some choices are superior to others in terms of their value add. Magic Missile, as it stands without any special build or mechanics added, is one of those lesser options. In a pinch however it can be utilized to contribute reliably, albeit miniscule, amounts of damage toward ending a threat to the party.

Just remember: part of the formula for DPR is chance to hit. MM hits, every time. Not much actual damage, but it's a 100% chance of success. That's not too shabby.

Liberty's Edge

andreww wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

very common feat for NPC's, and, I believe, in PFS, where you can't train up hit points.

==Aelryinth

I've seen it taken a few times too.

But then, I don't let players train up HP either...

I could see taking Toughness if you are using 15PB but with 20PB it isn't hard for anyone to start with a 14 Con which is generally more than enough.

I actually give 25 point-buy (with a max of 16, and a max of one stat below 10, and that no lower than 8, all before racial mods). Still had characters with Con 10, characters who didn't put their Favored Class bonuses into HP (actually, most don't), and characters with Toughness (though it's less common than the other two examples).

Toughness can be really handy.


Dungeon Master Zack wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I can't agree with that. Getting stabbed hurts, regardless of how many hitpoints you lose. I don't know anyone that enjoys getting stabbed, and neither does my character.
Remember hp loss does not always indicate a solid hit, it can sometimes be a glancing blow or near miss. But getting stabbed definitely does hurt.

While I have yet to receive a severe stab wound I do have some experience with minor ones:

I slipped with a knife and stabbed my leg about 2 inches deep, wound was 1/2 wide (narrow blade). Didn't really hurt, didn't require stitches, didn't do anything other than hide the fact i cut myself that badly (I was 12 and didn't want to lose my knife privileges). Some gauze and being easy on that leg was all that was needed.

Cut my hand 3 inches with a seam ripper, 3 inch long slice through all layers, could see a blue vein completely exposed. Didn't really bleed for 5 minutes, required a couple of butterfly sutures, no pain.

Had 3 once inch circles removed from my back, down to fatty tissue. No stitches, had local for it, but it wore off pretty much after 30 minutes, itched like crazy but didn't hurt really.

Sliced a 1/2 wide 3 inch long spot on my ankle bone on a bolt as a kid. Didnt' really hurt, saw the white fatty layer and a blue vein exposed. Almost no blood loss.

Got attacked by a dobberman when i was 7, bite leg pretty bad, 5 inch wide affected cicle. The bruise hurt, as did the bone bruising, but the cuts were not that bad.

Now none of those events really created any major damage, and I only have a few scars from them (time and proper wound care), but I never really felt much pain at the time on them, either from shock or adrenalin... but even the pain after it wasn't much. Me and my father are both pretty resistant to pain, I've seen him pull a nail that he shot into his hand out the wrong way (all the way through), put a band-aid on the spot and keep working. His shots were current so he didn't' even see a doctor.

I guess what I'm saying is minor wounds (as in the non solid hits you often receive in combat) don't really hurt all that much when the adrenalin is flowing, and not everybody feels the same amount of pain either. one persons 8/10 pain scale is another's 3.


andreww wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

very common feat for NPC's, and, I believe, in PFS, where you can't train up hit points.

==Aelryinth

I've seen it taken a few times too.

But then, I don't let players train up HP either...

I could see taking Toughness if you are using 15PB but with 20PB it isn't hard for anyone to start with a 14 Con which is generally more than enough.

Considering that the game was built for balance around ... a fifteen point buy?


With all the other spells people are comparing it to, why not mention Snapdragon Fireworks? It's much longer range, also auto hits, does (admittedly small amounts of) fire damage, and runs a chance of Dazzling the target. not only that, you can keep firing it off, since it's 1rnd/lvl, and a move action to launch one (not a fan of the once per round limitation). I love spamming it at long range.

I love that it targets a square, not a creature. I alos love having 2 active at once, each one firing every turn, for 2 attacks a round at very long range.


FuelDrop wrote:
I've had characters use toughness. Just saying.

So do I.


RDM42 wrote:
andreww wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

very common feat for NPC's, and, I believe, in PFS, where you can't train up hit points.

==Aelryinth

I've seen it taken a few times too.

But then, I don't let players train up HP either...

I could see taking Toughness if you are using 15PB but with 20PB it isn't hard for anyone to start with a 14 Con which is generally more than enough.
Considering that the game was built for balance around ... a fifteen point buy?

My pets nearly always take Toughness to mitigate glass cannon syndrome. I've taken it on a few other characters, again to avoid glass cannon syndrome (melee squishes come to mind).

And sometimes I'll even take it on a barbarian just to see how high I can push his HP total. The more hits you can take, the more overall benefit you see from DR.


GâtFromKI wrote:


Ok, so let's say you're level 3, nobody has a magic weapon, and you encounter a shadow.

Round 1:
* you have initiative, because you're a wizard and you always have initiative. You cast magic missile for 7 damages.
* the shadow is very confuse, because it's the very first time it takes damages.
Round 2:
* you use your pearl of power to get your magice missile back.
* the shadow asks itself what to do.
Round 3:
* you cast magic missile again for 7 damages.

The shadow dies, having only 19 hp and you have done 21.

Or, the battle goes.
R1 Cast Magic weapon. the fighter misses (50% miss) and takes 3 str damage.
R2 The fighter hits, half damage is 10 pt, and takes 4 str damge.
R3. The fighter misses, and takes 3 str damage.
r4 the fighter misses due to poor str. the shadow misses
r.5 the fighter hits, but does only 5 pts, and takes 4 str damg
r.6 the fighter misses due to poor str. the shadow misses
R7 The fighter misses, and takes 3 str damage.
R8 the fighter misses due to poor str. the shadow misses
R9 the fighter misses due to poor str and takes 4 str damage, and is now a shadow.

But actually the best version is
R1- cast magic weapon
r2-3. cast magic missile


No - in round 2 he was using a standard action to interact with the pearl of power, not to cast magic missile. So that was only 14 damage. (Using a bonded item at this point might help. Or having at least one ally who was capable of contributing.)

Sczarni

I approve of this wonderful thread.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm still not convinced that wolves aren't useless.

Grand Lodge

Matthew Downie wrote:
I'm still not convinced that wolves aren't useless.

LOL

201 to 250 of 278 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Convince me Magic Missle isn't useless? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.