Non-symetrical energy damage spell selection?


Rules Questions


I was playing with some character builds when I decided to give the mage a staff of fire. I figured I would also add a staff of frost, acid, and lightning so the character would be fair and balanced among all energy types (I'm skipping sonic for reasons). But I found there is anything but balance. There is no staves of acid or lightning (at least not in the core rulebook). So I prepared myself to make my own, but there doesn't appear to be much of selection of spells for energy types either. Acid has the least.

I also found that fireball was a level 3 spell, cone of cold level 5, chain lightning level 6. It seems that I can't switch energy types either. What I mean is, cone of cold and chain lightning aren't the same level as fireball. I can't one day to decide I want to prepare a cone of cold instead of fireball; they aren't the same level.

So am I crazy for expecting some fair and balanced spell selection? Does this game even try?


yes.

fireball is crazy powerful for it's level, but is grandfathered in, but also fire resistance/immunity are the most common types of that. This is also why acid spells and especially sonic spells do so little damage comparatively or are much higher level, because those resistances and immunities are much much rarer to encounter.

the area of fireball is also much more limiting than a cone, or an arcing line, thus also making it suitable for lower levels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd say a cone is more limiting than a spread, actually. Cold spells usually get worse areas than other elements. Though the arcing of chain lightning is better than either, it's also a higher level spell.

Generally fire spells get the best range, area and damage, but face the most resistance and immunity. Cold spells get the worst of those first three but often have debuffs attached or even focus on those; they face quite a bit of resistance/immunity. Acid spells do damage slowly but face much less resistance/immunity. They usually have decent range. Electricity is about the baseline on all counts. Sonic is plain terrible, but faces almost no resistance or immunity.

So no, the elements aren't equal in any single factor.

Liberty's Edge

You can add that a good number of acid-based spells are conjuration and don't care about spell resistance, while most fire, cold, and electricity spells are evocations and are hindered by SR.
So, spells aren't symmetrical at all.

That said, custom staves can have spells modified by metamagic feats, so there are ways to get altered versions of elemental spells. You don't get to change the element, but you can approximate the effects of spells of other elements.


OmniMage wrote:
So am I crazy for expecting some fair and balanced spell selection? Does this game even try?

The game tries something else: Offering nontrivial choices between elements. To illustrate this with an extreme example: If acid, cold, electricity and fire would be mechanically identical, then picking an element would be a pure flavor decision - that would be quite shallow and get old soon.

But the game also offers options for people who want to streamline these four elements, like the admixture subschool for wizard and the Elemental Spell feats / rods.


OK. Thanks! Its not what I'm used to seeing. Maybe this means I have to research a few spells, or expand my spell selection beyond the core rulebook.


avr wrote:

I'd say a cone is more limiting than a spread, actually. Cold spells usually get worse areas than other elements. Though the arcing of chain lightning is better than either, it's also a higher level spell.

in my experience (both table and video games like Kingmaker) I prefer the cone for more tactical applications. I can use an edge like a line or set up to hit a swath of enemies, whereas the rounded area of a spread, can limit the number of targets one can hit. But mileage of course varies by encounters.


Ummm... the spells are mostly sorted along the lines of practical in-game power. There are some gems from 3.5 that were core and never tinkered with, such as Magic Missile, Shocking Grasp, and Fireball.

It's well known that class abilities, metamagic(mMag) feats, and spells combine to do more damage than simply raising the caster level of the spell (even with mMag Intensified spell). You can simply review a wizard guide to see how it's done. Some class abilities/features or mMag allow you to alter/change the energy type (to get around resistances).

It's not necessary to have every Energy type attack to be highly effective.

Spell Research is the common way around this inadequacy but it is home game specific.


yukongil wrote:
avr wrote:

I'd say a cone is more limiting than a spread, actually. Cold spells usually get worse areas than other elements. Though the arcing of chain lightning is better than either, it's also a higher level spell.

in my experience (both table and video games like Kingmaker) I prefer the cone for more tactical applications. I can use an edge like a line or set up to hit a swath of enemies, whereas the rounded area of a spread, can limit the number of targets one can hit. But mileage of course varies by encounters.

Yeah, the way a survivor of a cone attack can charge you or at least move and attack makes it less than ideal to me. A good spread can be cast from directly behind your meatshield. I haven't encountered that many situations where the enemies line up neatly. Your mileage obviously varies.


Just two options not mentioned or (maybe intentionally) overlooked from spells. Lightning Bolt is the other "staple" level 3 energy blast spell. I think Acid Arrow is level 2. Isn't there also an acidic cloud floating around somewhere at that level?

If you look at the elemental wizard schools you can find most of the appropriate spells by level. Numerous different effects, but I'm pretty sure there's at least one of each energy type at almost every level. You just have to go beyond CRB.

If you're willing to look at 3pp, then every level, for every type is filled, including 0's. Does anyone else find it slightly odd/arbitrary that the electric cantrip, "electric jolt" I think, is transmutation?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
avr wrote:
Yeah, the way a survivor of a cone attack can charge you or at least move and attack makes it less than ideal to me. A good spread can be cast from directly behind your meatshield. I haven't encountered that many situations where the enemies line up neatly.

Both of you are talking from the perspective of the ant; true spellcasters fly and from up here a cone ends up as the same circle on the ground as a spherical spread.


Theaitetos wrote:
avr wrote:
Yeah, the way a survivor of a cone attack can charge you or at least move and attack makes it less than ideal to me. A good spread can be cast from directly behind your meatshield. I haven't encountered that many situations where the enemies line up neatly.
Both of you are talking from the perspective of the ant; true spellcasters fly and from up here a cone ends up as the same circle on the ground as a spherical spread.

ha! True!

If not flying, then certainly the bonus speed from Expeditious Retreat or Haste, is enough to move into position to catch a group from most any configuration.

Unless we're in a wide open space, I've seen too many fireballs detonate on the backs of allies when trying to toss one in a confined space to trust the old lob from behind the wall o' meat, though it always good for a laugh

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
yukongil wrote:
Theaitetos wrote:
avr wrote:
Yeah, the way a survivor of a cone attack can charge you or at least move and attack makes it less than ideal to me. A good spread can be cast from directly behind your meatshield. I haven't encountered that many situations where the enemies line up neatly.
Both of you are talking from the perspective of the ant; true spellcasters fly and from up here a cone ends up as the same circle on the ground as a spherical spread.

ha! True!

If not flying, then certainly the bonus speed from Expeditious Retreat or Haste, is enough to move into position to catch a group from most any configuration.

Unless we're in a wide open space, I've seen too many fireballs detonate on the backs of allies when trying to toss one in a confined space to trust the old lob from behind the wall o' meat, though it always good for a laugh

Unless you are in a very unusual situation there is no reason for the fireball to hit the backs of party members. You need to make a to hit to bypass an obstacle only if the only available gap is 1' or less.

I was way more "fun" with the 1st and 2nd AD&D edition, where the fireball had a total volume and adapted its form to the available space. I recall a player that had an uncanny ability to cast it without checking the available space and fill the whole area, hitting his friends, but avoiding himself by a few inches.
Lightingbolt instead bounced on the obstacles it was unable to destroy. You could do amazing things calculating the angle of reflection and using the rebounds to sweep an area or double bach on enemies.
Or you can be Jimmy (again that player) and hit twice the character of the player that said 5 minutes before the event: "Remember, guys, I will be in that corridor, invisible. Don't use lightingbolt!"


Diego Rossi wrote:

Unless you are in a very unusual situation there is no reason for the fireball to hit the backs of party members. You need to make a to hit to bypass an obstacle only if the only available gap is 1' or less.

like in a corridor with a melee going on? That seems pretty regular in a dungeon setting, or really any brawl, so unless you've got open space to the sides of the melee, that check should probably be fairly common. It's typically easy enough, but dice are fickle and often times hilarious!

Quote:

I was way more "fun" with the 1st and 2nd AD&D edition, where the fireball had a total volume and adapted its form to the available space. I recall a player that had an uncanny ability to cast it without checking the available space and fill the whole area, hitting his friends, but avoiding himself by a few inches.

Lightingbolt instead bounced on the obstacles it was unable to destroy. You could do amazing things calculating the angle of reflection and using the rebounds to sweep an area or double bach on enemies.
Or you can be Jimmy (again that player) and hit twice the character of the player that said 5 minutes before the event: "Remember, guys, I will be in that corridor, invisible. Don't use lightingbolt!"

our current game has seen our Sorcerer nuke the party or something else important a dozen times now. He's set fire to a ship we were on, blow up three of my wagons, destroyed an elven tree village we had JUST finished making for some refugees, campsites and accompanying gear, etc. I don't know that he'd be any better with cones, but it's been interesting to say the least.

Another player, isn't even allowed to have AoE abilities he's ruined so many games with them. Might just be our players are real dumb.


yukongil wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

Unless you are in a very unusual situation there is no reason for the fireball to hit the backs of party members. You need to make a to hit to bypass an obstacle only if the only available gap is 1' or less.

like in a corridor with a melee going on? That seems pretty regular in a dungeon setting, or really any brawl, so unless you've got open space to the sides of the melee, that check should probably be fairly common. It's typically easy enough, but dice are fickle and often times hilarious!

Melee combatants in a corridor don't constitute obstacles which only leave a 1' gap to aim around (unless they are gelantionous cubes).

Liberty's Edge

bbangerter wrote:
yukongil wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

Unless you are in a very unusual situation there is no reason for the fireball to hit the backs of party members. You need to make a to hit to bypass an obstacle only if the only available gap is 1' or less.

like in a corridor with a melee going on? That seems pretty regular in a dungeon setting, or really any brawl, so unless you've got open space to the sides of the melee, that check should probably be fairly common. It's typically easy enough, but dice are fickle and often times hilarious!

Melee combatants in a corridor don't constitute obstacles which only leave a 1' gap to aim around (unless they are gelantionous cubes).

Exactly.

To require a to hit you need a wall with an arrowslit with a width of 1' or less or something with the same degree of difficulty. If the corridor is packed with squeezed creature and has no space overhead you would have to make a to hit to have the fireball reach the destination point, but not when the creatures occupy their normal space. I doubt there is any human that will fill more than 1/20 of a 5'*5'*10' volume.

Quote:
You point your finger and determine the range (distance and height) at which the fireball is to burst. A glowing, pea-sized bead streaks from the pointing digit and, unless it impacts upon a material body or solid barrier prior to attaining the prescribed range, blossoms into the fireball at that point. An early impact results in an early detonation. If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must “hit” the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely.

Fireball has an unusual text as it says that the ball explodes if it hit something while on transit from the caster hand to the target point, something that no other spell has, AFAIK. With aimed spells you can miss because of cover, but in Pathfinder you never risk hitting the wrong target simply because of obstacles, with the exception of Fireball.

As long as you can see the target point you need something like a hedge, a very dense forest, or a wall with arrowslit.

If your GM is hard like me on that limitation, a heavy rain will stop fireballs as it will be impacting on several raindrops in sequence while traveling, but you normally can see people moving and you complete the spell when there is the gap you need.

The flip side of fireball limitation is that "You point your finger and determine the range (distance and height) at which the fireball is to burst." Based on that text Fireball is an exception to most spells as you can send it to a point you can't see and, as long as there isn't anything along the straight route, it will get there.
With other spells that don't generate an effect that you aim as a weapon (like the rays or Acid Arrow) you need to see the target point.


sure if they're standing still in that square. I tend to imagine that a person fills that square with constant movement when in combat as they dodge, parry, thrust, yadda yadda yadda. I then try to imagine flicking a pea through two of such people and have it land behind the guy/gal in the back. I think that deserves a roll to time and aim that. This is also one of the few checks on fireball, since its enjoys a grandfathered status among spells, doing far greater damage as compared to anything else in its league.


Have I lost something in the cross over from 3.5 to Pathfinder? I know each has situational use, but is fireball really so much better than lightning bolt. I thought both were 1d6/level (max 10d6). Ones a burst the other a line. It used to be the number of squares in the area of both only differed by 1 or two, I can't remember the exact figures. Then of course whether you optimized for fire or electric damage. Comparable choices for either. What am I missing?


Sysryke wrote:
What am I missing?

Fireball

Lightning Bolt


Theaitetos wrote:
Sysryke wrote:
What am I missing?

Fireball

Lightning Bolt

Yep. I understand that point. Each superior for area in their own circumstance. What I'm asking, is why (it seems) everyone always talks about the extreme power and grandfathering in of Fireball, and fails to mention Lightning bolt in the same comments?

Until I came to these threads, I rarely if ever heard one mentioned without the other in spell conversations. The impression I was left with is that the spells are comparable in overall power.

The posts on this site make it seem like there is a communal favoritism, or greater value to fireball. Am I just getting a wrong impression, or is that really the case? If so, why? What tips the scales in fireball's favor?


Circular blasts are significantly easier to wrangle enemies into than straight lines


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lightning bolt needs enemies lined up with you facing down their column. That happens sometimes especially in tunnels, but IME it's not that common. Fireball's area is more generally useful and can go to places you can't even see.

Also there's the range. Fireball can be used in an ambush from extreme range, or in a first strike between ships or something; lightning bolt's range is fine for most combats but falls down in such situations.

OTOH electricity resistance/immunity is less common than fire resistance/immunity. That's an advantage to lightning bolt.

There was BTW exactly one person in this thread who talked about the extreme power and grandfathering in of fireball and it wasn't me. To me it looks versatile but doesn't have the level-efficiency of burning arc, the single-target power of a metamagiced battering blast, or the built-in debuffs of a dozen other spells.


Dox of the ParaDox twins wrote:
Circular blasts are significantly easier to wrangle enemies into than straight lines

Especially with special abilities like the Selective Spell or Vast metamagics. Fireball also gets enhancements from other places like alchemical components that spells like Lightning Bolt do not get.

I've basically never cast Lightning Bolt, either in Pathfinder or "normal" DnD -- even on a Storm Sorcerer build I tested in D&D 5e the first choice was Fireball.


To be clear, I wasn't trying to level any accusations, and thanks for the breakdowns.

I was noting a sentiment I have seen in several other threads, that I saw again echoed here. It's not right or wrong; I'd just seen it enough times to finally feel the need to ask for clarification.


Lightning bolt might have been en par with fireball back in the days when most action happened in dungeons. When outdoor battles became more important, spells appearantly weren't adapted to compensate.

Fireball's versatility profits from a few tricks, like to target a point way outside battle to only hit one or two enemies. Or to aim quite high in the air, so you affect only a single square right below the point of explosion. Up to the GM what works, of course.

I believe it's possible to do comparable things with the lightning bolt spell. If you have an enemy and beyond that an ally in a line, you can target a point way higher than the combatants, so the rising bolt hits the enemy but then rises above the ally.

Personally I am a big fan of the spell specialist archetype of the arcanist. Bending a line up to 90° basically guarantees you catch three or more enemies with your lightning bolt.

And finally, it doesn't hurt to have both spells at your disposal.

Sysryke wrote:
To be clear, I wasn't trying to level any accusations

Oh, this community has its share of favoritisms, like pouncing barbarians or 6th-level casters (aka Swiss army knives or "I don't have to rely on teammates").


yukongil wrote:
sure if they're standing still in that square. I tend to imagine that a person fills that square with constant movement when in combat as they dodge, parry, thrust, yadda yadda yadda. I then try to imagine flicking a pea through two of such people and have it land behind the guy/gal in the back. I think that deserves a roll to time and aim that. This is also one of the few checks on fireball, since its enjoys a grandfathered status among spells, doing far greater damage as compared to anything else in its league.

If you want to maek a GM call on that, that's fine, but its not supported by the rules. The rules would give targets in the back soft cover, but soft cover has no impact on fireball targeting.

Alternately, if I cast with my hand almost touching a wall, I can virtually guarantee a clear path along that wall. It is very very unlikely even moving creatures in their 5' square are going to get that close to the wall (makes it hard to swing a weapon).

Note also that the rules don't specify that anything less than 1' gap requires targeting. They call out a small opening like an arrow slit (arrow slits are in the 4-6 inch width range).


bbangerter wrote:
yukongil wrote:
sure if they're standing still in that square. I tend to imagine that a person fills that square with constant movement when in combat as they dodge, parry, thrust, yadda yadda yadda. I then try to imagine flicking a pea through two of such people and have it land behind the guy/gal in the back. I think that deserves a roll to time and aim that. This is also one of the few checks on fireball, since its enjoys a grandfathered status among spells, doing far greater damage as compared to anything else in its league.

If you want to maek a GM call on that, that's fine, but its not supported by the rules. The rules would give targets in the back soft cover, but soft cover has no impact on fireball targeting.

Alternately, if I cast with my hand almost touching a wall, I can virtually guarantee a clear path along that wall. It is very very unlikely even moving creatures in their 5' square are going to get that close to the wall (makes it hard to swing a weapon).

Note also that the rules don't specify that anything less than 1' gap requires targeting. They call out a small opening like an arrow slit (arrow slits are in the 4-6 inch width range).

I just think that anything that provides any kind of cover is within the spirit of having to aim the fireball to avoid it impacting early is all.

basically if someone firing or throwing a weapon at the same spot would receive some sort of penalty, then so should the fireballer.

I tend to think fireball needs some limiters to keep casters from getting to setup perfect strike conditions as they analyze a battle map for several minutes at a time as opposed to the rushed few seconds of actual combat that the casting would actually occupy, and enforcing strict rules on point of impact/early detonation is a good way to do that IMO


yukongil wrote:
I tend to think fireball needs some limiters to keep casters from getting to setup perfect strike conditions as they analyze a battle map for several minutes at a time as opposed to the rushed few seconds of actual combat that the casting would actually occupy, and enforcing strict rules on point of impact/early detonation is a good way to do that IMO

It's important to keep in mind though, that (experienced) characters in-game would be familiar with these things & situations, so while a player might take some more time to think about where to detonate the Fireball the in-game evoker wizard / draconic sorcerer wouldn't need such time and is perfectly capable of making these determinations within "the rushed few seconds of actual combat".


Theaitetos wrote:
yukongil wrote:
I tend to think fireball needs some limiters to keep casters from getting to setup perfect strike conditions as they analyze a battle map for several minutes at a time as opposed to the rushed few seconds of actual combat that the casting would actually occupy, and enforcing strict rules on point of impact/early detonation is a good way to do that IMO
It's important to keep in mind though, that (experienced) characters in-game would be familiar with these things & situations, so while a player might take some more time to think about where to detonate the Fireball the in-game evoker wizard / draconic sorcerer wouldn't need such time and is perfectly capable of making these determinations within "the rushed few seconds of actual combat".

eeh maybe? Your experiences may vary, but with mine, nearly every fireball ends pretty much exactly at an allies nose. Imagine being in the army with a guy who loves to toss grenades around and mentally determines the exact kill zone by visual sight only, so that you don't catch shrapnel but the guy you're knife fighting does. Again, I don't think it too much to ask the Wizard to make a ranged attack roll in such situations.

Like my RL job is almost nothing but measuring things and after 3 decades of it, I can eyeball distances pretty well, but if you gave me 6 seconds to first make some wild hand gestures, spout some gibberish to bend reality with my will and then told me to make such a accurate measurement by sight, I'd tell you to go do something either extremely painful or pleasurable depending on the person in question.


While I do agree the rules for aiming and shooting the bead of a Fireball could have been better written, since as they are, the crunch does not match the fluff, how about we take this discussion to the homebrew section?

About the arrowslit, I wonder if it is the bead has an unsteady flight, wobbling as a ball with no spin rather than purely an issue of aim. Going through an arrowslit two meters away from the caster to go explode twenty meters further isn't the same as going through the same slit twenty meters away from the caster to go explode two meters further.


yukongil wrote:
Like my RL job is almost nothing but measuring things and after 3 decades of it, I can eyeball distances pretty well, but if you gave me 6 seconds to first make some wild hand gestures, spout some gibberish to bend reality with my will and then told me to make such a accurate measurement by sight, I'd tell you to go do something either extremely painful or pleasurable depending on the person in question.

You don't die on a mistake though. Pain & other forms of immediate displeasure when making a mistake raise the speed of learning to incredible levels: if a miscalculation were to hurt as much as a kick in the nuts, we'd all be math wizzes. So a job is one thing, but burn yourself a few times with a wrongly distanced Fireball and I'm sure you'd learn judging distances and proper aiming real quick.

Maybe do such attack rolls for aiming the first few times on using Fireball, but at some point the character [not player] should have learned how to do it.

But yeah, it's probably getting offtopic, so...


OmniMage wrote:
There is no staves of acid or lightning (at least not in the core rulebook). So I prepared myself to make my own, but there doesn't appear to be much of selection of spells for energy types either. Acid has the least.

Dragon's Breath, maybe? Custom staff, obvs, but you could keep it as the same item for each caster.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Lightingbolt instead bounced on the obstacles it was unable to destroy. You could do amazing things calculating the angle of reflection and using the rebounds to sweep an area or double bach on enemies.

Or you can be Jimmy (again that player) and hit twice the character of the player that said 5 minutes before the event: "Remember, guys, I will be in that corridor, invisible. Don't use lightingbolt!"

*flashbacks to Baldur's Gate and one lightning bolt killing half the party with bounces*


SheepishEidolon wrote:
Personally I am a big fan of the spell specialist archetype of the arcanist. Bending a line up to 90° basically guarantees you catch three or more enemies with your lightning bolt.

Oh, you think this ability of your Spell Specialist Arcanist is strong?

Well, I raise the Magic Trick: Fireball! Once you have the Reach Spell and Selective Spell metamagic (and which good evoker doesn't?), you can sculpt your Fireball as you please:
Quote:

Sculpt Flames (Reach Spell, Selective Spell):

You can alter the shape of your fireball to send its fire along the path you desire. When casting the spell, you can change the area to one 5-foot square per caster level. The spell’s area must be continuous and unbroken when cast. If its blocked or otherwise interrupted by a 5-foot wide or larger environmental feature like a wall, the spell fails. A creature only takes damage once from a fireball cast in this way, even if the spell’s area intersects with the creature multiple times.

And this is pretty much the end for all pro-Lightning Bolt arguments at this point, because for the cost of 1 feat (Magic Trick), you can not just bend your line once, but freely arrange your Fireball area in (continuous) 5ft-squares like Wall of Stone or Fire Snake. In fact, An intensified Fireball (level 4 spell) is even far superior to Fire Snake (level 5 spell) because the Fireball area doesn't have to begin right next to you, but anywhere you want inside the spell range; Fireball has long range (400ft +40ft/CL) while Fire Snake is 60ft; the damage is the same for both spells.

Up to today I wasn't even aware of this Magic Trick for Fireball -- it's just wow! No need for sculpting spells, or carefully aiming anymore, and you don't even have to apply the metamagic feats to get this benefit!
Slap the Spell Perfection feat and the Magical Lineage + Metamagic Master traits on this baby and Fireball is the only aoe damage spell you'll ever need.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Non-symetrical energy damage spell selection? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.