Sure, if we buff all cantrips to the point where they are better than every other spell, then, yeah, sure, it will impact resource. But since that isn't ever going to happen nor has anyone asked for it... perhaps we could pair down this particular avenue of conversation.
A few posts above mine are posts about how cantrips having a d4 damage die is too little
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bumping d4 cantrips to d6 is not going to make cantrips better than slotted spells. Or even focus spells.
So, no, those posts aren't asking for cantrips to be better than every other spell.
|
Sure, if we buff all cantrips to the point where they are better than every other spell, then, yeah, sure, it will impact resource. But since that isn't ever going to happen nor has anyone asked for it... perhaps we could pair down this particular avenue of conversation.A few posts above mine are posts about how cantrips having a d4 damage die is too little
There’s that pesky nuance and context tripping you up again.
“Things have meaning” shouldn’t be point of contention, but here we are.
Bumping d4 cantrips to d6 is not going to make cantrips better than slotted spells. Or even focus spells.
So, no, those posts aren't asking for cantrips to be better than every other spell.
Also not what I claimed... This is exhausting
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
“Things have meaning” shouldn’t be point of contention, but here we are.
You should know better if dialectic is in the name.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't it?Also not what I claimed... This is exhaustingBumping d4 cantrips to d6 is not going to make cantrips better than slotted spells. Or even focus spells.
So, no, those posts aren't asking for cantrips to be better than every other spell.
I was going to at first break this down point by point, but really you haven't made an argument against my point. I used an illustrative point and you're arguing because it isn't 1 to 1 and spending a lot of effort just restating "they are different" until you come to this last sentence which I don't believe for a second you made fully sincerely. It doesn't matter the game system, if your at will abilities are nearly as good as, as good as, or better than you daily resources, or any finite resources for that matter, you are not going to use those resources much at all. I don't know about you but I would like to get to use all my spells, or most of them, in a given adventuring day. Otherwise, why did I prepare them? The real question is, do you disagree that at-will abilities can affect whether you use your daily resources? If you don't disagree, why are you arguing with me? If you do disagree, why?
So you argued that cantrips shouldn't be as good as regular spells (duh), but nobody was arguing that they should be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also not what I claimed... This is exhaustingBumping d4 cantrips to d6 is not going to make cantrips better than slotted spells. Or even focus spells.
So, no, those posts aren't asking for cantrips to be better than every other spell.
Certainly sounded like you did.
Sure, if we buff all cantrips to the point where they are better than every other spell, then, yeah, sure, it will impact resource. But since that isn't ever going to happen nor has anyone asked for it... perhaps we could pair down this particular avenue of conversation.A few posts above mine are posts about how cantrips having a d4 damage die is too little
If you weren’t offering those posts calling to raise the damage of cantrips as evidence of people asking that cantrips be more effective than regular spells, what exactly did you mean with this reply?
This isn’t a trap or a gotcha. I don’t see another reasonable interpretation, but if you misspoke or otherwise meant something else, I’m listening.
Also not what I claimed... This is exhaustingBumping d4 cantrips to d6 is not going to make cantrips better than slotted spells. Or even focus spells.
So, no, those posts aren't asking for cantrips to be better than every other spell.
Certainly sounded like you did.
Sure, if we buff all cantrips to the point where they are better than every other spell, then, yeah, sure, it will impact resource. But since that isn't ever going to happen nor has anyone asked for it... perhaps we could pair down this particular avenue of conversation.A few posts above mine are posts about how cantrips having a d4 damage die is too littleIf you weren’t offering those posts calling to raise the damage of cantrips as evidence of people asking that cantrips be more effective than regular spells, what exactly did you mean with this reply?
This isn’t a trap or a gotcha. I don’t see another reasonable interpretation, but if you misspoke or otherwise meant something else, I’m listening.
My original post:
I mean, I find it weird people want cantrips buffed when I noticed when playing the wrath of the righteous video game that I ended up removing the scaling cantrips mod because it was stopping me from using my spell slots. Cantrips should be better at the first few levels and fall off to being one of your worst tools when you have a bunch of spell slots except for a class like the psychic. You end up with a lot of focus spells and proper spells in addition to scrolls, wands and staves. Cantrips walk a really fine line and the fact people use them at all means they are good enough IMO
The conversation lost the forest for the trees, this was also in context of mentioning that spell attack rolls are deliberately worse and a minority of spells. Basically, in the WotR example cantrips didn't have to be better than my spells, it's just that if they pull too much weight it makes using a resource harder to justify until you get to say, a boss. In all cases I mentioned "nearly as good as" but even then I think I understated it being too cautious. Cantrips only have to be a good option and not even necessarily super close to spell slot spells to make you use spell slots spells significantly less. What I wanted to express is that I think making cantrips better than they are currently will result in a "just desserts" situation and give casters too much of a good things resulting in less need to use spell slots spells and even focus spells. I would almost argue against scaling cantrips altogether but the current state of the game seems properly balanced and I think people using cantrips less and less as they level is precisely the exact thing you want to happen in a game like this. Buffing them to be used at higher levels imo is just not actually what is good or healthy for the game
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hope they buff Wizard hats.
They are, arguably, the most important part of the wizard.
Oddly, I agree, since Hat of the Magi (and its greater counterpart) don't scale into the endgame compared to other items.
I really sincerely disagree with trying to compare martials and casters like this. Consider how a three action scorching ray at character level 3 (second level spell slot) does 12d6 damage
You fire a ray of heat and flame. Make a spell attack roll against a single creature. On a hit, the target takes 2d6 fire damage, and on a critical hit, the target takes double damage.
For each additional action you use when Casting the Spell, you can fire an additional ray at a different target, to a maximum of three rays targeting three different targets for 3 actions. These attacks each increase your multiple attack penalty, but you don't increase your multiple attack penalty until after you make all the spell attack rolls for scorching ray. If you spend 2 or more actions Casting the Spell, the damage increases to 4d6 fire damage on a hit, and it still deals double damage on a critical hit.
Like yeah, sure a wizard only gets 6 spells a day at the highest tiers of their spells (not including items) but those 1/day abilities are insanely powerful. Not to mention you have 32 other spell slots to use in a day and the DCs for all of those slots are the same and many spells that don't require saves like wall of force, reverse gravity and maze. You can load them up with various useful spells not combat related. You can get mountains of scrolls, get wands, a staff or two. Then other items that are none of these with spells like the necklace of fireballs if you're into that sort of thing. The reason I don't want cantrips to be too good when you have more slots is so people will actually try and use all 37-38 slots rather than hoard them like a dragon and only using them on bosses
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My original post:
I mean, I find it weird people want cantrips buffed when I noticed when playing the wrath of the righteous video game that I ended up removing the scaling cantrips mod because it was stopping me from using my spell slots. Cantrips should be better at the first few levels and fall off to being one of your worst tools when you have a bunch of spell slots except for a class like the psychic...So just to be clear, you think Cantrips should be "better" (presumably here you mean higher damage, not 'better than 1st level spells') at the first few levels and then fall behind other damage options. Except for a class like psychic...where they should scale the entire progression?
I frankly don't see the need. Most cantrips provide some indirect benefit swing-a-sword doesn't give, such as splash or persistent or range or multiple targets. Plus the ability to target saves. Plus a variety of damage types that may help work around resistances and play on vulnerabilities or weaknesses. At early levels, this IS how they are better.
Casters even have directly comparable: Shilleleigh and Gouging Claw. Hey look! Claw gets 1d6+mod base damage just as you requested and shelleleigh is +1 to hit and 2d4 base damage.
I think a lot of the folks who argue for comparable damage haven't thought through that what they're *really* asking for is same dpr PLUS range PLUS the option of targeting a save PLUS ability to select different damage types for different encounters PLUS some multitarget options. Which is a recipe for wizard dominance, not wizard parity. The system has to balance cantrip flexibility out somehow. The fact that while the martial may be carrying 1-2 weapons of bigger damage dice, casters are essentially always armed with many different weapons suitable for many different opponents. How do you suggest they balance that?
And yes, I'm with OMR, they should buff hats. :) Just make it a fun-and-useful feat, not a...
Cantrips just don't need to be all over the place. Having a niche is fine. Not being better than martials is also fine. Having cantrips being leagues and bounds better than other cantrips is not. Electric Arc doing twice the damage of other cantrips while targeting a commonly neglected save is not exactly good parity compared to options like Produce Flame, which require optimal conditions (which aren't guaranteed) to maintain parity. And really, the only reason why "nerf EA" gets touted is because buffing the rest is way too much work, even for an Errata+, meaning the idea that this will come to pass, even if it's better for the game, even if it's a preferred option, just isn't feasible.
Even compared to a dedicated ranged character, cantrips will fall behind, and saying they can target saves is like saying martials can't. They most certainly can, with Athletics, and most martials will have investments in that. Basic things like Grapple and Trip are effective combat tools that Martials can use to relatively reliable effect. It's not damage, but when you can target AC anyway, to better accuracy, it's not exactly much to gloat about.
Gouging Claw requires 2 actions per cast and melee range, which is not an ideal place for a squishy caster, and Shillelagh is just a more situational Magic Weapon, which is actually less DPR than Electric Arc. Unless you are fighting Fiends, Undead, etc., Shillelagh will not do any better. Saying these are comparable to martial options is wrong on multiple levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Martial characters can't use the jolt coil unless they engage in some heavyish feat investment.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing about "martials can do their thing forever" and "casters can cantrip forever" is that martials and casters are based on different premises.
A martial's best thing never runs out but they can't use it whenever they want.
A caster's best thing does run out, but until it runs out, they can use it whenever they want.
There are other tradeoffs built off of these premises, but this is the basic one.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your martial will do their thing forever.
Your cantrip user will do their thing forever, but worse than a martial.
Your focus point user will do their thing every 10-30 minutes.
The actual spellcaster? 2 uses of the absolute best and 4 uses of their second best (effectively 1 use every 3 hours).Your martial can do their ONE weapon thing forever. They can't change what it does without a major downtime investment (i.e. moving all runes over to a new weapon).
Your caster will do several cantrips forever. PLUS in addition they get a different set of focus spells every 10-30 minutes, PLUS in addition they get 2-6 top tier spells every few hours.
So nope, I don't see a compelling argument for upping the caster's 'forever-weapons' (i.e. cantrip) to be comparable to a martial's. Because they have a flexibility in both damage choice and noncombat effects that a martial doesn't have.
As I said above, it seems to me that when folks say they want "the same", what they are really saying is they want wizards to do the same single target dpr PLUS at range PLUS with variety of spells PLUS spell choices that include vs. different saves PLUS a variety of damage types to choose from PLUS additional AoE spells on top of that. And that doesn't seem very "balanced" to me. If you agree that that's not balanced, but think single target dpr parity is so important that it's a "must have" for wizards and other casters, then what other things in that wizard capability list are you willing to give up to balance the situation? Or maybe we should add flamethrowers and rocket propelled grenades to the martial choice list, because giving them the flexibility of casters is another way to balance things.
You can move runes at anytime at no cost. There is also a level 1 feat (verdant weapon) that let's you change your weapon in 10 minutes.
Cantrips? You mean the ones that can be poached by paying 30 gold (hello jolt coil).
Before complaining about the rules, please actually read the rules on Transferring runes, the rules on Spellhearts and the Verdant weapon level 1 DRUID feat ...
You just might be surprised.
My original post:
I mean, I find it weird people want cantrips buffed when I noticed when playing the wrath of the righteous video game that I ended up removing the scaling cantrips mod because it was stopping me from using my spell slots. Cantrips should be better at the first few levels and fall off to being one of your worst tools when you have a bunch of spell slots except for a class like the psychic...So just to be clear, you think Cantrips should be "better" (presumably here you mean higher damage, not 'better than 1st level spells') at the first few levels and then fall behind other damage options. Except for a class like psychic...where they should scale the entire progression?
I frankly don't see the need. Most cantrips provide some indirect benefit swing-a-sword doesn't give, such as splash or persistent or range or multiple targets. Plus the ability to target saves. Plus a variety of damage types that may help work around resistances and play on vulnerabilities or weaknesses. At early levels, this IS how they are better.
Casters even have directly comparable: Shilleleigh and Gouging Claw. Hey look! Claw gets 1d6+mod base damage just as you requested and shelleleigh is +1 to hit and 2d4 base damage.
I think a lot of the folks who argue for comparable damage haven't thought through that what they're *really* asking for is same dpr PLUS range PLUS the option of targeting a save PLUS ability to select different damage types for different encounters PLUS some multitarget options. Which is a recipe for wizard dominance, not wizard parity. The system has to balance cantrip flexibility out somehow. The fact that while the martial may be carrying 1-2 weapons of bigger damage dice, casters are essentially always armed with many different weapons suitable for many different opponents. How do you suggest they balance that?
And yes, I'm with OMR, they should buff hats. :) Just make it a fun-and-useful feat, not a...
Cantrips should definitely do more damage than 1st level spells given the way they scale and the way Paizo designed spell scaling,
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... They can't daily wake up and say "gosh, the GM is throwing large groups of weenies as me, I'd rather have an axe with sweep"...
Uh... in fact... they can make that those choices round by round with a Shifting rune...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When can martials not Strike? In the games I play martials always Strike once or twice a turn, sometimes more.
Well, say you're the world's best guy with a greataxe. What if you're fighting something that you can't, or don't want to get close to? Or something that is extremely resistant to slashing damage. You could pick up a different weapon, but perhaps you're not as good with it as the one you specialized in using.
What cantrip does better damage than shocking grasp?
Your martial will do their thing forever.
Your cantrip user will do their thing forever, but worse than a martial.
Your focus point user will do their thing every 10-30 minutes.
The actual spellcaster? 2 uses of the absolute best and 4 uses of their second best (effectively 1 use every 3 hours).Your martial can do their ONE weapon thing forever. They can't change what it does without a major downtime investment (i.e. moving all runes over to a new weapon).
Your caster will do several cantrips forever. PLUS in addition they get a different set of focus spells every 10-30 minutes, PLUS in addition they get 2-6 top tier spells every few hours.
So nope, I don't see a compelling argument for upping the caster's 'forever-weapons' (i.e. cantrip) to be comparable to a martial's. Because they have a flexibility in both damage choice and noncombat effects that a martial doesn't have.
As I said above, it seems to me that when folks say they want "the same", what they are really saying is they want wizards to do the same single target dpr PLUS at range PLUS with variety of spells PLUS spell choices that include vs. different saves PLUS a variety of damage types to choose from PLUS additional AoE spells on top of that. And that doesn't seem very "balanced" to me. If you agree that that's not balanced, but think single target dpr parity is so important that it's a "must have" for wizards and other casters, then what other things in that wizard capability list are you willing to give up to balance the situation? Or maybe we should add flamethrowers and rocket propelled grenades to the martial choice list, because giving them the flexibility of casters is another way to balance things.
Shifting Rune says hi. There's also Returning for thrown weapons. Plenty of existing effects that change what a weapon does on the regular. It's relatively true in the low levels, but saying it can't be changed isn't exactly accurate either.
This is implying the Focus Spells are going to be any good. If you get Focus Spells like Wilding Word and Force Bolt, they aren't very impressive. When you get actually good Focus Spells, that changes, but it's not as ubiquitous as we make it out to be. And the top spell slots can just as easily be non-applicable (Negative Energy against Undead/Constructs, who knew?), making them effectively non-existent.
When folks say they want "the same," they are more likely referring to cantrips being "the same" as other cantrips. Electric Arc doing 2x the damage of other damaging cantrips with no apparent balance around it seems pretty bad from a design perspective, and when other classes purposefully poach for it specifically because of its ubiquitous power scale, it should be an indication that there is a significant outlier that needs to be reined in.
Also, putting the idea that range, variety, and choice are important doesn't matter. The former is only good when you can exploit it; in situations where you can't or doing so is a bad idea doesn't really help to have it. Variety is only good if it's available, or if it's actually going to do something. Bludgeoning versus Piercing against humanoids isn't a very compelling choice to make, for example. And being able to target saves isn't something exclusive to spellcasters, because again, martials can do so as well, probably to greater levels of success as well, I might add. Consequently, when you have effects whose sole purpose is single target damage, it's a feelsbad/trap option when you consider that to be a very poor choice/usage of spell slots when martials can do the same thing all day long without fear or consequence of investing in the wrong option.
What cantrip does better damage than shocking grasp?
While not better damage, Electric Arc does the same amount of damage at 13, the same average as Shocking Grasp at 1st level. Shocking Grasp does outscale Electric Arc by nature of 1D12 having a higher average than 2D4, as well as having circumstantial benefits, but given that Electric Arc can be cast at-will, whereas Shocking Grasp cannot, you are paying spell slots for slightly better damage and to tie it to a single target, which at that point you should just be relying on the Martial with their D12 weapon to be making successful strikes and preparing a different, more useful spell instead.
When can martials not Strike? In the games I play martials always Strike once or twice a turn, sometimes more.Well, say you're the world's best guy with a greataxe. What if you're fighting something that you can't, or don't want to get close to? Or something that is extremely resistant to slashing damage. You could pick up a different weapon, but perhaps you're not as good with it as the one you specialized in using.
Things that you don't want to get close to as a Martial most likely means that it's an APL+4 or worse threat that probably shouldn't be in the game anyway. Things that you can't get close to are more likely, but that depends on the level, since flight becomes evident by around 7th level or so, and becomes ubiquitous around 13th and higher, meaning by those points, you should have some means to circumvent that stuff, whether it's items or spells from the party. In either case, bad party tactics or bad GM power gauging isn't a valid excuse for Martials not wanting to Strike on the regular.
As for enemies with resistances, the odds of a secondary weapon being more efficient than a primary weapon are slim, unless you are both avoiding a resistance as well as exploiting a weakness simultaneously with that switch; these aren't very likely to occur, since by design most enemies don't have this kind of dynamic due to how swingy the math gets.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. I didn't know what that was about. It costs 10% to transfer runes. If you find a runestone, you can put on for free. If you find a weapon and want to transfer the runes to another weapon, you pay 10%.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Runestones are 3gp and remove the cost of switching runes. The process of switching or transfering runes takes 1 day which is more than 10 minutes yes, but plenty of GMs just throw downtime days at the player. I have seen more games were the party just stays back for a day than the opposite. All it takes is not to sell the new weapon you found so you can transfer the rune in a day as needed.
I'm not sure this would have the intended effect of reducing price. Perhaps there is clarification I'm not aware of (we've only used rune transfer mechanics once in our game--the world was at risk and we didn't have a lot of downtime), but a runestone only seems to void the cost of transferring from stone to weapon, at which point it crumbles, effectively reducing the transfer cost to 3 gold. Swapping runes with a runestone (operating under the assumption that the runestone never cracks until it is left without rune) doesn't have any such mention of a discount, nor does transferring a rune to a blank stone.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Runestones are 3gp and remove the cost of switching runes...Um, no they don't.
... the Price of the transfer is 10% of the rune’s Price, unless transferring from a runestone, which is free...
Emphasis added.
Using a runestone for switching runes actually costs more than just transferring runes between two weapons. Transferring a +1 Potency Rune from your +1 dagger to a plain shortsword costs 3.5 gold. To transfer that rune from the +1 dagger to a runestone will cost 6.5 gold (10% of the rune + the price of a runestone). Transferring the rune from the runestone to the shortsword is free, but it cost 6.5 gold to get that +1 Potency Runestone.
The part just afterunless transferring from a runestone, which is free
You don't find many runestones.
If you have to buy the runestone, you pay full price for the rune and then transfer it on to the weapon for free. Most of the time you find a weapon and pay the 10% transfer fee.
I'm normally pretty nice and let a PC transfer the rune and have the PC pay 10% for the cost of the materials to account for the cost.
Personally, I wish they would allow crafters to transfer the runes with no cost to make PC crafting skill more worthwhile.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oddly, I agree, since Hat of the Magi (and its greater counterpart) don't scale into the endgame compared to other items.I hope they buff Wizard hats.
They are, arguably, the most important part of the wizard.
That's it. I've had enough of this "Inconspicuous Wizard Hat" nonsense that's going on in the Pathfinder system right now. Wizard hats deserve much better than that. Way, way better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I've personally crafted a genuine wizard hat from the feathers of a rare mythical bird, infused with the tears of a phoenix, and enchanted under a full moon. I've been wearing it during my magical exploits for almost a decade now. I can even summon an army of dancing flamingos with a mere flick of its brim.
Wizard hat craftsmen spend years studying ancient rituals and consulting mystical beings to create a single hat that channels the very essence of arcane power. Each stitch is imbued with incantations, and each gemstone is carefully aligned with celestial constellations to produce the most magnificent headwear known to spellcasters.
Wizard hats are twice as enchanting as mundane hoods and twice as inspiring for that matter too. Anything a common hat can do, a wizard hat can do better. I'm confident that a wizard hat could effortlessly bewitch an entire army with a mere tilt of its pointed tip.
Ever wonder why commoners tremble in awe when they encounter a powerful wizard? That's right, they are struck by the commanding presence and immeasurable power emanating from their majestic hats. Even legendary creatures and ancient dragons pause to admire the exquisite craftsmanship of a true wizard's headwear.
So what am I saying? Wizard hats are the epitome of magical fashion and deserve to be acknowledged as such in the Pathfinder system. Here's the hat block I propose for the ultimate wizardly headgear:
(Wondrous Item) Grants +10 to all spellcasting rolls
Enhances all enchantments and spell effects by 200%
Grants the wearer a mesmerizing aura that intimidates enemies and captivates allies
Counts as a sentient magical artifact with unparalleled wisdom and arcane knowledge
Now, that seems much more befitting of the immense power that wizard hats possess in the realms of Pathfinder, don't you think?
tl;dr = Wizard hats need to radiate supreme magical power in Pathfinder, see my new hat block.
The part just afterYou can just transfer it directly to the weapon from the other one though.unless transferring from a runestone, which is freeDid I type it that badly that part wasn't understood?
Find weapon with insteresting property. Transfer it to runestone. When needed transfer it to the weapon you need. After that rune is not needed pass it back into a runestone. Repeat as needed.
Yeah.
But I meant it for selling all the duplicate weapons and the weapons you already have covered.
Why would you transfer it to a runestone first?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The part just afterunless transferring FROM a runestone, which is freeDid I type it that badly that part wasn't understood?
How about the operative word FROM... "transferring from a runestone... is free"
Find weapon with insteresting property. Transfer it to runestone. When needed transfer it to the weapon you need...
Transferring the interesting property rune TO the runestone still costs 10% of the rune's price.
Oddly, I agree, since Hat of the Magi (and its greater counterpart) don't scale into the endgame compared to other items.I hope they buff Wizard hats.
They are, arguably, the most important part of the wizard.
That's it. I've had enough of this "Inconspicuous Wizard Hat" nonsense that's going on in the Pathfinder system right now. Wizard hats deserve much better than that. Way, way better than that.
I should know what I'm talking about. I've personally crafted a genuine wizard hat from the feathers of a rare mythical bird, infused with the tears of a phoenix, and enchanted under a full moon. I've been wearing it during my magical exploits for almost a decade now. I can even summon an army of dancing flamingos with a mere flick of its brim.
Wizard hat craftsmen spend years studying ancient rituals and consulting mystical beings to create a single hat that channels the very essence of arcane power. Each stitch is imbued with incantations, and each gemstone is carefully aligned with celestial constellations to produce the most magnificent headwear known to spellcasters.
Wizard hats are twice as enchanting as mundane hoods and twice as inspiring for that matter too. Anything a common hat can do, a wizard hat can do better. I'm confident that a wizard hat could effortlessly bewitch an entire army with a mere tilt of its pointed tip.
Ever wonder why commoners tremble in awe when they encounter a powerful wizard? That's right, they are struck by the commanding presence and immeasurable power emanating from their majestic hats. Even legendary creatures and ancient dragons pause to admire the exquisite craftsmanship of a true wizard's headwear.
So what am I saying? Wizard hats are the epitome of magical fashion and deserve to be acknowledged as such in the Pathfinder system. Here's the hat block I propose for the ultimate wizardly headgear:
(Wondrous Item) Grants +10 to all spellcasting rolls
Enhances all...
Can wizards with these hats spell wizard as wizzard?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also worth noting that transferring a rune requires Magical Crafting + Expert in Crafting + a successful check. In all likelihood the wizard is needed to do the transfer anyway, or at least has the best odds of doing it.
|
|
Can wizards with these hats spell wizard as wizzard?
Thinking about, I think the idea of really big spells taking up multiple slots is nifty one.
Rincewind is basically a vancian caster, whose entire series of spell slots are occupied by a single spell.
This operates something like Spell Blending, but with all the limitations removed and access to spells of around spell rank 50!
|
|
What cantrip does better damage than shocking grasp?While not better damage, Electric Arc does the same amount of damage at 13, the same average as Shocking Grasp at 1st level. Shocking Grasp does outscale Electric Arc by nature of 1D12 having a higher average than 2D4, as well as having circumstantial benefits, but given that Electric Arc can be cast at-will, whereas Shocking Grasp cannot, you are paying spell slots for slightly better damage and to tie it to a single target, which at that point you should just be relying on the Martial with their D12 weapon to be making successful strikes and preparing a different, more useful spell instead.
I guess the damage from EA is assessed for 2 targets who failed their save. What if only one fails ?
For that matter, what if there is only one target within range ?
What cantrip does better damage than shocking grasp?While not better damage, Electric Arc does the same amount of damage at 13, the same average as Shocking Grasp at 1st level. Shocking Grasp does outscale Electric Arc by nature of 1D12 having a higher average than 2D4, as well as having circumstantial benefits, but given that Electric Arc can be cast at-will, whereas Shocking Grasp cannot, you are paying spell slots for slightly better damage and to tie it to a single target, which at that point you should just be relying on the Martial with their D12 weapon to be making successful strikes and preparing a different, more useful spell instead.I guess the damage from EA is assessed for 2 targets who failed their save. What if only one fails ?
For that matter, what if there is only one target within range ?
Using a cantrip inoptimally isn't really a fair grounds to dismiss its viability/power, because most every option is going to have inoptimal circumstances where using it probably isn't the best course of action. This is like saying Produce Flame is bad because you used it on an enemy with Fire Resistance/Immunity; of course it's bad, we handpicked a scenario for the purposes of demonstrating how awful it is.
2 enemies failing their save is the equivalent of a successful attack in terms of determining an average result. What if the Shocking Grasp misses? Nothing happens, then. EA still doing damage on successful saves gives it a more reliable usage compared to Shocking Grasp.
|
|
What cantrip does better damage than shocking grasp?While not better damage, Electric Arc does the same amount of damage at 13, the same average as Shocking Grasp at 1st level. Shocking Grasp does outscale Electric Arc by nature of 1D12 having a higher average than 2D4, as well as having circumstantial benefits, but given that Electric Arc can be cast at-will, whereas Shocking Grasp cannot, you are paying spell slots for slightly better damage and to tie it to a single target, which at that point you should just be relying on the Martial with their D12 weapon to be making successful strikes and preparing a different, more useful spell instead.I guess the damage from EA is assessed for 2 targets who failed their save. What if only one fails ?
For that matter, what if there is only one target within range ?
Using a cantrip inoptimally isn't really a fair grounds to dismiss its viability/power, because most every option is going to have inoptimal circumstances where using it probably isn't the best course of action. This is like saying Produce Flame is bad because you used it on an enemy with Fire Resistance/Immunity; of course it's bad, we handpicked a scenario for the purposes of demonstrating how awful it is.
2 enemies failing their save is the equivalent of a successful attack in terms of determining an average result. What if the Shocking Grasp misses? Nothing happens, then. EA still doing damage on successful saves gives it a more reliable usage compared to Shocking Grasp.
All of these variables should be taken into account to provide valuable comparisons.
And having only a single target available is not that rare.