Telekinesis is not Cheese


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Quote:

Sorry to intrude James, but on Telekinesis:

1) it uses the wizard's Int bonus to hit, which does a lot for overcoming the poor BAB
2) GMW on the weapons is usually +3 th/dmg or better. They are ammo, so you can do a bundle with one spell.
3) that's 60d6+180 damage potential for a 5th level spell (avg 400 pts). If half of them hit, that's 30d6 +90, or 200 damage. Not bad for a level 5 and level 3 slot.
4) An Item spell on your ammo takes care of all encumbrance issues.
5) the 4d6 per item is from using Colossal Javelins. Which are still ammunition.

As JJ noted, it's pure cheese.

In order to avoid derailing, I want to point this out. It's not pure cheese, and I find the implication that it deserves nerfing for the above reasons to be poorly thought out.

1] Yes, it uses the Wizard's Intelligence, but it's still using a BAB at half and has none of the weapon feats that an equivalent fighter is throwing down. A 15th level wizard is throwing down maybe +17.

2] Let's assume 'antics' for a +1 CL, and now we have a +4 from GMW. Javelins are not ammo, so we need to be using arrows, which lowers our damage to 3d6. If you notice, we're working at a +21 attack bonus, easily surpassed by the local archers.

3] I have no idea where you're getting the 180 number, because that's implying a [u]+12[/u](?!) damage bonus per arrow. A realistic damage potential is 45d6+60 (202 avg), with an average of 111 damage against a typical CR 15 monster's AC (half its HP).

4] We're already at a 5th level and 3rd level spell slot thrown into this combo. Throwing another 3rd level spell, especially if we're using familiars to ready them instead of doing something else, only reduces the efficiency. Efficiency is the key here, because at a certain point, it's more efficient to just throw

5] The javelin not being ammunition has been covered, so I was presuming bolts. If someone manages to find a workaround to get ammo a size category larger, then our average jumps to 140 damage.

Look at the final score here; our 15th level wizard of telekinesis is throwing down a damage that's comparable to archers in the DPR Olympics, except those guys are FIVE levels lower and have way more rounds of throwing down such attacks. Even if the AC was so terrible to permit a theoretical maximum of 255 average damage isn't all that mind-blowing at level 15 when you can throw down a suffocate, or have a draconic sorcerer's empowered fireball hit just 4 monsters.

If you look at lower levels, a level 9 is averaging about 65 damage with a single casting of one of their very few level 5 spells (and a GMW, and some gold for a porter to carry them around) against an equivalent monster. I'm not impressed there either, since that's about 50% greater than an empowered fireball which can hit an entire group of monsters.

It's like a poor man's disintegrate, statistically speaking. You just need a decent amount of preparation, additional magic to handle logistics, and does as well as a fighter...for a round.


Wait, someone called the Telekinesis spell cheesy?

....

Lol.


Artemis Moonstar wrote:

Wait, someone called the Telekinesis spell cheesy?

....

Lol.

I concur.


I once saw someone abuse this with Alchemist's Fire... on a messageboard though. Most DMs aren't going to let you carry that much AF, or if you do, you'll have to transport hundreds of pounds of that stuff with all the logistical costs.

I don't think the spell works very well. I think there should be a quick-and-easy version of the spell if you're going to throw a wave of pebbles at someone. (IMO, you should not be able to precisely throw a lot of javelins, daggers, or what not with the spell. I think it should be powerful but unsubtle wave. If you threw daggers with it, the victim should take a lot of bludgeoning damage from dagger hilts.)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Telekinesis is not Cheese All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion