| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OP, generally spell casters become stronger and stronger as the game progresses (you'll sometimes see the term "quadratic wizard" thrown around to describe this power growth); however, it's dependent on the build you're using and the spells you're preparing / casting. You may need to do a bit of research to improve the build you're using, since you should be coming into your own at 8th level, rather than tailing off.
Generally if you want to be an offensive caster you want spells that can target every save and even ranged touch attacks at later levels. You also want knowledge skills in your party to identify monster's weaknesses.
You can also go the way Rub-Eta talked about but from your post you seem to want to be an evocation specialist.
You meet an enemy that has high Reflex, you cast a Will or Fort based spell. Same with the other saves.
Only one class in the game, and no monster types get all Good saves.
You meet an enemy that has high Reflex, you cast a Will or Fort based spell. Same with the other saves.
Only one class in the game, and no monster types get all Good saves.
While the basic point is completely correct, this is not technically accurate. Dragons get all good saves. Larger dragons have very low Dex scores making Reflex their effective low save, but their Base Saves all follow the 'High Save' progression.
Huh, cool, I did not know that.
Though yeah, having a 5 Dex shafts that pretty hard anyway. =)
In addition to the points about knowledge skills and spells for every save, some spells get an area. At 8th level, you can be tossing around Black Tentacles or Wall of Fire. Those are great for controlling where the opponent goes on the battlefield.
At second level, you have Glitterdust and Stone Call from APG that are very effective.
Look at the spells that don't do direct damage. Once you figure out how to use them they will likely take over most of your spell list.
Well, the OP is right in that monsters save better and better the higher it gets. We had recently a couple with +23 bonuses (demons), which made it virtually safe. That they have lower reflex saves is nice, but the spells targeting reflex are typically damage spells, while the control spells are not. So yes, spells which work or fail on a save are getting weaker over time, because the saves rise faster than the DC (and many DMs buff their mobs...our demons have Protection from Good, so they used it and had +2 extra against me).
There are also not that many spells without a save (used to 46 at some point?), and many of those are themselves weak or not usable in a given situation, since you get seldom attacked on an open football field and don't want to get your own medicine. But that is a legitimate tactic at high level, too...like playing Black in MtG: yes, it hurts me, but it will hurt you more ;)
The reason - to me - why higher spellcasters are stronger is a multiple one:
- they have more spells and can try more often, which includes burning down everything with damage spells - half damage is still half damage
- they can apply more meta-feats to improve the situation (like Persistent Spell)
- they have a larger palette to choose from, which allows to pick other solutions (summons, buffs, environmental spells), which are not available at low level; the traditional casters can also pick up very specialized spells no sane sorcerer would learn, but which are beneficial in a given situation
- and finally they have better system knowledge, if they actually played their way up under several DMs, and know what works and what won't go down so well
Anyway, all the cool save-or-fail spells become more and more unreliable the higher it gets, but at 8th level they are still OK.
If you are just going for the SoS spells (where if the victim doesn't save they are out of the fight), that is somewhat true.
If you have a caster that is going to specialize in that type of spell, you want to drive your casting attribute as high as possible, invest in Spell Focus and possibly Greater Spell Focus for the type of SoS spells you do, and use your top level spells. The base DC for good saves keeps pace with your top level spells, but there are other things that drive it higher.
That said, there are also ways to improve the chances of the spell working. Intimidate (to demoralize) is just one simple example of ways to do this.
Or you could go for spells that have an effect even if they make their save.
Yes enemy's saves go up. But your spells go up too, and those higher spells gives you higher DCs and your int can go up giving you higher DCs and you can take feats to give you higher DCs.
Much the same way a weapon user has to beat AC, and enemy's AC gets higher as you level so you need to make sure your attack bonus keeps going up too or you'll fall behind.
If all your foes are making their saves, then the GM is tired of dealing with the growing threat you represent, and has started fudging dice rolls.
I once played a sorcerer with save DCs in the mid-30s. Almost no one ever failed due to GM cheating. She was quickly considered the weakest member in the party as a result of too many wasted turns attempting save or die spells.
I had that happen, had a wizard lv13 with high save DCs against dragons. The GM didn't like that I was causing his dragons to fail 1/2 the time for the first two fights, I was primarily a damage caster. Next fight the dragon's lowest save was 3 higher than my highest DC and had evasion... And I left the campaign.
Fudging die rolls is bad show. I can't count how many times I felt robbed of an experience after finding out the GM fudged things one way or another.
Cheating is a strong word for it, but I definitely consider it a bad habit.
Can we not rehash this same tired f@!@ing argument for the billionth time? Some people think it's okay to cheat, most people don't, leave it be.
|
You can't cheat if the books allow it and in fact tell you to do it.
You can be a jerk though - which making it so that all monsters pass all saves is.
I mean - technically figure skating judges can't cheat, but when the Russian judge gives the Russian scatters far higher points than any other judge, and then proceeds to lowball all of their close competition, most would still define it as cheating.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fudging die rolls is bad show. I can't count how many times I felt robbed of an experience after finding out the GM fudged things one way or another.
Cheating is a strong word for it, but I definitely consider it a bad habit.
You're entitled to not like it, but it's been part of the GMs job and toolbox since day 1.
It's why we have GM screens
It's why you have a GM screen.
Putting it more generally, if you are behaving in a way that a pretty big fraction of players would consider prohibited by the social contract due to being immoral and dishonest, and you are going to lengths to conceal you behavior from your players because you think that they are a part of this fraction, then that makes you an &$^hole, regardless of what page twenty-whatever of the Dungeonfinder Game Masters Guide says.
Or as I like to put it, Wheaton's Law trumps Rule 0 every day of the week.
Fudging die rolls is bad show. I can't count how many times I felt robbed of an experience after finding out the GM fudged things one way or another.
Cheating is a strong word for it, but I definitely consider it a bad habit.
You're entitled to not like it, but it's been part of the GMs job and toolbox since day 1.
It's why we have GM screens
It's why you have a GM screen.
Putting it more generally, if you are behaving in a way that a pretty big fraction of players would consider prohibited by the social contract due to being immoral and dishonest, and you are going to lengths to conceal you behavior from your players because you think that they are a part of this fraction, then that makes you an &$^hole, regardless of what page twenty-whatever of the Dungeonfinder Game Masters Guide says.
Or as I like to put it, Wheaton's Law trumps Rule 0 every day of the week.
But the law of Guilt By Accusation is in full force. We have no way of knowing whether the GM IS fudging dice rolls, whether he has a lethal streak of luck, or whether the player is overstating his issues because he's not dominating every game session the way he expects because he's playing a wizard.
...
But the law of Guilt By Accusation is in full force. We have no way of knowing whether the GM IS fudging dice rolls, whether he has a lethal streak of luck, or whether the player is overstating his issues because he's not dominating every game session the way he expects because he's playing a wizard.
Oh, I don't particularly think that the OP's GM is fudging. It is certainly possible, but going by the OP's language the evidence to support fudging is almost non-existent. It is still worth pointing out that if the GM is fudging then that isn't automatically OK because the GM is the GM and their merest whim is more important than their players enjoyment.
Honestly, that's why I ditched the screen. I roll everything front and center in clear view to everyone. That way, everyone can see and live with the result of the die cast, good or bad. Funnily enough, I started doing that because some Game Science dice I had bought were rolling high consistently. I was accused of fudging, so I rolled it in front of everyone for the rest of the night. Kept rolling 19s and 20s. But it stuck and I honestly prefer the transparency. Every player I've encountered has too.
GM Screens are meant to hide when and what the GM is rolling and whether they get high or low on checks that the PCs aren't supposed to know about or know the result of (some things even encourage rolling in secret for certain specific rolls). The roll could be a hidden enemy making a check, a random encounter chance, a chance for the party to notice a trap, anything. They also can hide a GM's material that the party isn't supposed to see, like fully uncovered maps, monster references, etc. and also double as a place for quick rules reference.
Notes and such I keep to the side. As for secret rolls, I rarely roll them.
|
Fudging rolls as a GM without informing your players that you do so is, in fact, cheating. And generally super inappropriate behavior.
This is not to say you need to mention every time you do it, but you definitely need to note whether that's a thing you do at some point when talking about your general game policies and House Rules.
Doing anything else is straight-up lying to your players. Which is just seriously bad form.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fudging die rolls is bad show. I can't count how many times I felt robbed of an experience after finding out the GM fudged things one way or another.
Cheating is a strong word for it, but I definitely consider it a bad habit.
You're entitled to not like it, but it's been part of the GMs job and toolbox since day 1.
It's why we have GM screens
You and I have very different ideas of what the GMs job is. GMs also have unrestricted access to character sheets and monster statistics, too, but they shouldn't meta-game, even if it's allowed or could somehow improve the story.
For secret rolls, I usually have the players give me 20 or so checks at the start of session. Then, I pick a spot on the list of rolls and go down form there.
That sounds time consuming and I think a lot of players would get annoyed having to do that each session. If that works for your group, that's fine, but I don't think most players would like that.
You and I have very different ideas of what the GMs job is. GMs also have unrestricted access to character sheets and monster statistics, too, but they shouldn't meta-game, even if it's allowed or could somehow improve the story.
The bit about improving the story is debatable, but you point is solid. It should NEVER be done to cheat the players just because they didn't follow your script or because you don't like what they're doing. Otherwise, whether it happens absolutely not at all or just rarely-if-ever depends on where you and your group fall on the mechanics vs. storytelling scale.
To get back on topic, wizards can be blasters, but they are better at battlefield control. You can help the party out much better than you can deal damage. You can keep the enemy from doing thigs. You have more control over what's happening. I would suggest looking beyond damage. Look at "save or die" or "save or suck" spells. Look at spells that don't care about spell resistance. If you really need to, you can focus on a school and take appropriate feats to improve those spells.
If all your foes are making their saves...
then cast spells that don't require saves (<== I like this one better)
I only know msgic missile.If all your foes are making their saves...then cast spells that don't require saves (<== I like this one better)
Wall spells, summoning, and buffs don't need saving throws, and they all tend to be pretty effective. I mean, unless your buddy's fighter decides that he wants to make a saving throw against haste for some reason.
I think they meant that the only spell they have with no saving throw is Magic Missile.
So, what other spells do you have in your spellbook? Will your GM allow you to scribe more spells from NPCs?