PDA

View Full Version : Evoker Wizards = Bad?



Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 08:23 PM
*sigh* I've already caused some annoyance on this forum today, but considering this is the best site to get information on D20 stuff and the fact that I am such a new player I am compelled to ask my questions here; sorry folks...

I've read that Evoker Wizards are not that good. The group that I play with are pretty much family friends and I have known them for several years. Any time they have a Wizard, it was always an Evoker and it seemed to do ok. Currently, we are running with a Wizard who can only cast Conjuration (He wanted Mage Armor), Evocation, and Divination. At level 5, his Fireballs are doing 10d6 with a DC of like 23. The only problem I see with him is that he is going to have to devout all his feats to Metamagic (Most do anyway) and that anytime he gets a Evocation spell it will be maxed immediately; a Rogue gets better with every level but the next few levels for Dabble the Blaster will be pretty stagnate. However, it doesn't erase the fact that Dabble destroys anything put forth.

Aside from Resist Energy (he'll have 3 or 4 different Energy Substitutions), what makes him not as good as say a Batman Wizard?

Best of luck y'all.
-Eddie

Vexxation
2009-01-18, 08:27 PM
At level 5, his Fireballs are doing 10d6 with a DC of like 23.

Can I ask how exactly he's doing that?

Heliomance
2009-01-18, 08:28 PM
It's not so much that evoking is bad, as that other choices are a lot better. Where your evoker is doing 10d6, your necromancer could be doing 6 negative levels, your transmuter could have hasted the barbarian, giving an extra attack per round, which adds up fast, your conjurer could have set up the battlefield exactly as he likes so that you get to face your enemies one by one...

AmberVael
2009-01-18, 08:30 PM
Can I ask how exactly he's doing that?

There are a lot of ways he could be doing that.
Fire Domain wizard would give him +1 CL.
Fiery Burst would grant another +1 CL.
Spellgifted could give +1 CL to all evocation spells.
Arcane Thesis could give +2 CL to one spell.

There are a lot of class features, magic items, races, and other feats that could also increase caster level.

Starbuck_II
2009-01-18, 08:33 PM
*sigh* I've already caused some annoyance on this forum today, but considering this is the best site to get information on D20 stuff and the fact that I am such a new player I am compelled to ask my questions here; sorry folks...

I've read that Evoker Wizards are not that good. The group that I play with are pretty much family friends and I have known them for several years. Any time they have a Wizard, it was always an Evoker and it seemed to do ok. Currently, we are running with a Wizard who can only cast Conjuration (He wanted Mage Armor), Evocation, and Divination. At level 5, his Fireballs are doing 10d6 with a DC of like 23. The only problem I see with him is that he is going to have to devout all his feats to Metamagic (Most do anyway) and that anytime he gets a Evocation spell it will be maxed immediately; a Rogue gets better with every level but the next few levels for Dabble the Blaster will be pretty stagnate. However, it doesn't erase the fact that Dabble destroys anything put forth.

Aside from Resist Energy (he'll have 3 or 4 different Energy Substitutions), what makes him not as good as say a Batman Wizard?

Best of luck y'all.
-Eddie

1) Evokers deal damage that usually less than a monster gains per HD (level).

A Fireball deals 5d6 at level 5 (average 17.5 damage if fail save).
A 3-4 HD creature will usually have more than that (not counting how much more 5 HD will).
Rogue-like enemies will have good reflex (meaning they will make save usually).
If enemy has 2 levels in rogue youdeal none if they make it.
Evocation spells also must deal with SR (almost all of them)

2) Compare to another 3rd level spell:
Haste or Slow (Batman uses them)
Haste increases saves, AC, attack (number and bonus) for whole party
or make every enemy as weak as a zombie (slow movement, can't move and attack or full attack).

3) or another spell from Transmutation:
Fly: now they can't even touch you in melee

4) Or Illusion:
G. Invisibility means Mr. Rogue can sneak attack multiple times/round like a full attack.
Displacement: means 50% miss to hit a party member.

The Minx
2009-01-18, 08:36 PM
Direct-damage that allows both Spell Resistance and saving throws tend to be easier to get around than more subtle stuff like battlefield control or no Spell Resistance stuff like Cloudkill. That's basically the reason.

Of course, there are exceptions, like the Forcecage spell, which is basically Instant Win Evocation, but everyone agrees that this one is stinky cheese, and I doubt any DM would allow it. :smallwink:

BTW, evocations can largely be duplicated by Shadow Evocation. Although duplicating evocations with that allows an extra save, it does make the evocation school it less attractive as a specialization school and more attractive as a barred school.

Baron Corm
2009-01-18, 08:40 PM
I played an evoker wizard once. The game was level 5 too. I believe my fireballs were 9d6 with a similarly high DC.

The problem was that the barbarian was doing a consistent 50 damage with his charges. I was completely overshadowed, and I had to really stretch my feats to get 9d6 (playing a wu jen, not a wizard, for the +1 to fireball DC). Plus, I could only throw two fireballs and one empowered fireball a day. Then again, I could kill groups faster than he could, and I don't think batman would be any better with the spells per day thing.

So at lower levels, I don't think it makes a huge difference. At higher levels, your damage doesn't get much higher, unless you use cheesey metamagic reducing abilities.

Disintegrate is transmutation. That's where your damage is at. Split Ray and Ocular Spell are cheap. Also, for unresistability, the Orb spells are conjuration. Without cheesey metamagic your Orb spells will be doing fairly low damage as well however.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-18, 08:40 PM
*sigh* I've already caused some annoyance on this forum today, but considering this is the best site to get information on D20 stuff and the fact that I am such a new player I am compelled to ask my questions here; sorry folks...


Annoyance? You were seeking enlightenment! A nobler cause is rarely seen! Nobody should be annoyed at you.

Now, to business. A 10d6 fireball is nothing to scoff at at 5th level. At this level, I would say it can arguably rival much batmanery. The big problem is that this power won't last. As the character goes up in levels, most level-dependent blaster spells run into damage-dice caps. So, at 15th level, the fireball is still doing 10d6 damage (which is only 35 avg. damage). Assuming at 15th level he's upgraded to some bigger spell (20d6 damage), the blaster is not really doing enough damage (70 avg. on a failed save) to justify not casting a save-or-die spell.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 09:00 PM
Annoyance?
Now, to business. A 10d6 fireball is nothing to scoff at at 5th level. At this level, I would say it can arguably rival much batmanery. The big problem is that this power won't last. As the character goes up in levels, most level-dependent blaster spells run into damage-dice caps. So, at 15th level, the fireball is still doing 10d6 damage (which is only 35 avg. damage). Assuming at 15th level he's upgraded to some bigger spell (20d6 damage), the blaster is not really doing enough damage (70 avg. on a failed save) to justify not casting a save-or-die spell.

I figured that would happen... He's doing 35 damage a round to everything, which is pretty much Save-or-Die. We also have a Warlock, but I have read that they too hit prime at level 6-8 than start to lack when the Fighter is Tripping/Power Attacking or the Rogue is doing the same amount of damage as well as Staggering them.


However, in comes the fact that he will just have a Quickened and than a Maximized-Empowered 'Sonicballs' with a DC26 when he can cast Sixth levels spells (he has some feat that reduces the Metamagic amount by 1). Aside from an Army of Monk1/Fighter11's at us, I don't see how any multiple creature encounters are possible. Quickened does 10d6 (Average of 35, 17.5 on success) and the Mega-Sonicball will do 150 (75 on success). Will there actually be an end to this, because playing a campaign where the DM just says something like "30 goblins attack you in the night. Frank, mark off 3 Fireballs. Nothing disturbs you the rest of the night." seems really boring...

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 09:01 PM
It mostly comes down to inefficiency of blasting. Everyone else can do blasting, but Wizards can do so much more; damage doesn't reduce opponent's ability to damage your party unless it's lethal, so Wizard instead opts for abilities that make the opponents effectively unable to harm your party so that the rest of the party can kill them off easily. That is, a Wizard trivializes the encounters rather than killing them (because damage spells don't scale as fast as monster HD and Con; this means that as levels go up, damage spells get worse as it takes more and more to drop an opponent, while it just takes one failed save to trivialize them anyways). Therefore, a Wizard seeking efficiency begins with spells like:
-Grease; Rogue's best friend as everything Balancing without at least 5 ranks in Balance (go ahead and check the Monster Manual for how many such opponents you can find) is considered flat-footed and thus subject to Sneak Attack. Also causes opponents to fall (-4 to AC and attacks) and disrupts their movement and makes them provoke AoOs while getting up. So the party reach fighter, and the rogue (who DOES have 5 ranks in Balance since he's a Rogue) are free to maul the fallen opponents while they struggle to do anything useful.

-Color Spray; stuns a bunch of opponents. Neat and simple. Go around Coup de Gracing them (unless your DM goes by the RAW that stunned opponents aren't helpless - they're unable to move or defend themselves so they appear pretty helpless to me).

-Sleep; same as Color Spray, except longer to cast, but longer range and has a different HD limitation. These two are low level encounter enders, while Grease just heavily inconveniences the opponents.


On level 2, you get Glitterdust and Web, of which Glitterdust reveals invisibles (really useful) and forces Will-save vs. Blindness which is effective "kill" as blind opponents (unless they have alternative senses; don't bother hitting bats) can't really do much unless they do a lot of guessing right and get hugely lucky rolls. And they're still denied Dex bonus to AC and thus very vulnerable.

Web on the other hand screws opponents whether they save or not; stops movement, disrupts general activity and overall is just a thorn in their butts. For the low Reflex-types; pepper away once they're stuck.


That's how it goes in general; you could cast Magic Missile on level 1 instead, but that doesn't really deal much more damage than shooting your Crossbow, and uses one of your 2-5 (I'm assuming no Wizard has under 12 Int) level 1 slots, which could be used to actually end encounters instead. Blasting is a matter of insufficient rewards for the investment. You could cast Scorching Ray to hurt level 2 opponents, or Glitterdust to make them meaningless.

Blasters aren't horrible, but they could be so much more effective by just having few blast-spell scrolls/wands for when the spell happens to be just what the doctor ordered and instead focusing on knocking as many opponents down for others to kill with each spell as possible. Of course, an optimized blaster is a horror to watch and anything subject to the spell and damage is like to die a horrible death. That's mostly a matter of stacking metamagic, metamagic reducers and caster level increases on a single spell. Like, Arcane Thesised Scorching Ray pumped to CL 11 with Twin, Energy Admixture, Empower, Maximize and maybe Repeat or so metamagic applied ot them means base 12d6 damage x2 Twin x2 Admixture x1.5 Empower Maximized (so 48d6 maximized = 288 + av. 84 = 372). Then Repeat does it over again next turn, and your Metamagic Rod of Quicken does it again this turn, so twice that in one turn and twice more the next. And you could use Fell Drain to inflict negative levels and Born of Three Thunders to force a save vs. being knocked prone and dazed from the target, and preface it with Assay Resistance to pretty much negate opponent's spell resistance and Elven Spell Lore or such to change it to whatever element.

Point being that if you work hard enough (and use Incantatrix + metamagic reducers, which can do ugly stuff), blasting becomes not only viable, but [i]superb[/b]. In fact, it becomes so strong that you suddenly only need a party when you run out of spells (the above could've been accomplished in around level 2-4 slot thanks to Arcane Thesis allowing you to apply Adjustment +0 Metamagic for negative modifiers)...or you could just go to your Rope Trick and rest for that 1 hour in Heward's Fortifying Bedroll and be good to go with no danger of anyone ambushing you in the night.


EDIT: The reason he's being stupid-strong is metamagic reducers. They're baaaad for you, mmmkay? Also, stacking caster level boosts can do nasty stuff. The combination of these two is veeeeeery bad. 2000 damage of any type split to areas on character level 15 is just dumb.

Keld Denar
2009-01-18, 09:04 PM
Here is an 11th level Focused Specialist Conjourer (http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheets/view.php?id=103401), the oft cited "GOD" or Batman wizard. Take a look down at his 3rd sheet, toward his spell sheet. Granted, this was just kind of hastily thrown together, but see what you see there.

Solid Fog(PHB) - This spell wins, and how! If you are fighting 2 bad guys, this guy can take one completely out of the fight for at least 2 rounds, depending on placement. That gives your party 2 full rounds to beat the snot out of the other guy. There is no save, there is no SR. They just sit there and make swimming motions with their arms until they stumble out onto the waiting blades of your allies. Its good, because an enemy that is stuck in one isn't fighting back. Divide and Conquer. Core spell, straight outa the PHB.


Freezing Fog(SpC) - This spell wins harder than Solid Fog does, but that's why its 2 levels higher. There is no save against the fog, only the grease. I've seen this spell SOLO a Greater Stone Golem, a very nasty melee foe. Every time it tried to get up and move out, it would slip and fall back again, all the while taking 1d6 damage every round that it can't resist. Its really good.

Evards Black Tenticles(PHB) - This is AoE control. Tentacles grab foes, and unless they are large or larger, they typically can't get out. It slowly squeezes them to death, but thats minor compared to the fact that your enemies now lie helpless beneath you.

Benign Transposition - Probably one of the best 1st level spells at higher levels. Why? You can Quicken it and cast it along with any of the winning spells above. Why is it good? A trick I like to use on my wizards is to actually walk straight up to a bad guy, thumb your nose at them, and then cast this spell to switch positions with your party meleer. Quickened Spells don't provoke, and you just put him into full attack range, and you still have your standard action left to cast another spell. If you have excess cash lying around, get a Circlet of Rapid Casting(MIC) or a Lesser Metamagic Rod of Quicken(DMG) to do this multiple times per day. There is a good chance that melee character will do more damage with the full attack you gave him than you would with a spell. Best against single targets.

Ray of Enfeeblement(PHB)/Clumsiness(SpC) - No save, just a ranged touch. 1d6+5 str or dex penalty. Empower it for more goodness, or Split Ray it to neft 2 foes. If you reduce a monsters Str to less than 13, it can't Power Attack and more, or use any other PA related feats like Cleave. Ray of Clumsiness is also a great one to Quicken. Cast it right before you Freezing Fog something, and you've just increased the DC of your spell by a few points. Thats just mean.

See how these tactics can be just as useful, if not more useful than mearly doing HP damage? Anyone can do HP damage, but not everyone can manipulate the battle field, removing foes and adding friends as required.

Granted, these tactics require a good party to pay off. If you BT someone into full attack range, and they only hit for a couple damage, then you probably would have been better off blasting them.

Make sense?

RebelRogue
2009-01-18, 09:14 PM
While the batman/battlefield control route is no doubt more effective (I'm sort of going that route myself with the current wizard I'm playing), let's not forget that playing a blaster can be a lot of fun too. Sorcerer is probably a better choice to do that, though.

ChaosDefender24
2009-01-18, 09:18 PM
Evoker wizards are fine

1. play an evoker
2. take levels in master specialist
3. for your bonus spell from the class, take Divine Power
4. ???
5. PROFIT!

Keld Denar
2009-01-18, 09:20 PM
Actually, Sorcerer can do either remarkably well, as well as both at the same time. With Heighten Spell, to trade your move action for the ability to be an effective blaster with exactly 1 blaster spell known. Better make it 2, though, just to be safe, especially with damage resistances/immunities (although these are avoidable with 1 more feat invested). Other than that, you can spam Solid Fog, Haste, Glitterdust, Web, and all of those other Batman spells with the rest of them.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 09:32 PM
While the batman/battlefield control route is no doubt more effective (I'm sort of going that route myself with the current wizard I'm playing), let's not forget that playing a blaster can be a lot of fun too. Sorcerer is probably a better choice to do that, though.

Well, what's fun is entirely subjective. I was always more of a mind mage kind of person for example; I love screwing with peoples' heads and using as little effort as possible to negate whatever issues I have to solve. When I played the D&D PC games, I really found the damage-spells to be horribly crude, wasteful "showboat spells". I just didn't find they had any style. Which is why I've been happy playing my tricksy mages always. Then again, I don't know whether I'm in a minority or not.

I certainly always expected people percieve it that way due to much of the modern fantasy, such as LotR portraying magic as a subtle, taxing tool that you use only when necessary, and practically never to actually kill your opponent as that just requires too much energy. Then again, I never thought a warrior would ever use just spells as his means of combat; certainly, classic fantasy almost invariably gives even the spellcasters martial ability and weapons (except witches, I guess, but that just means they're pretty much boned if someone figures out who they are/gets to them before they brew something nasty).

Now I've percieved that many peoples' fun is simply killing opponents. To which end, the most effective route is the best.


Hmm, seems like it became a rant that slipped somewhat offtopic. Wops.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 09:41 PM
The reason he's being stupid-strong is metamagic reducers. They're baaaad for you, mmmkay? Also, stacking caster level boosts can do nasty stuff. The combination of these two is veeeeeery bad. 2000 damage of any type split to areas on character level 15 is just dumb.

The DM isn't letting him get anything below +1. What feats/items lower metamagic?

Baron Corm
2009-01-18, 09:45 PM
However, in comes the fact that he will just have a Quickened and than a Maximized-Empowered 'Sonicballs' with a DC26 when he can cast Sixth levels spells (he has some feat that reduces the Metamagic amount by 1). Aside from an Army of Monk1/Fighter11's at us, I don't see how any multiple creature encounters are possible. Quickened does 10d6 (Average of 35, 17.5 on success) and the Mega-Sonicball will do 150 (75 on success). Will there actually be an end to this, because playing a campaign where the DM just says something like "30 goblins attack you in the night. Frank, mark off 3 Fireballs. Nothing disturbs you the rest of the night." seems really boring...

Sending 30 1 HD creatures against any level 11 PC is a cakewalk. Sending 1 30 HD creature... your fireball suddenly wishes it was targeted and more powerful.

Also, a maximized, empowered fireball does 112.5 average damage. You add the maximized value to the empowered value. Then, adding a quickened fireball to that, you're dealing about 150 average damage in a round.

Now, a level 11 barbarian, using a 2 hander, using leap attack, is dealing 33 power attack damage, and let's give him a +6 Strength bonus, and base weapon damage of 2d6, for an additional 9 damage and 7 average damage, so about 50 damage on 3 attacks. The barbarian is dealing 150 average damage, not counting any weapon enchantments (which could bump it up to 200 depending... +1 enhancement, +4d6 energy, x 3 attacks, adds 45 average damage). Not resistable fire damage, unlimited times per day, and no save (though attack roll might be a problem depending). To hit, we are using Shock Trooper, and to attack 3 times, we are using pounce from any source.

Your maximized, empowered fireball has a spell level of 3 + 3 + 2 = 8. Try an ocular disintegrate for 80d6, or 280 average damage.

Edit: Large mathematical post = large amount of minor mathematical errors

Thurbane
2009-01-18, 09:48 PM
While it is hard to argue that direct damage/Evoker type wizards are less efficient in damage output than "controller/debuffer/buffer" types, the alleged useless of direct damage is generally vastly overstated on this and other internet forums.

I played an Evoker (Thurbane, my namesake character) from 1st through 8th in a Shattered Gates mini-campaign, and I never felt useless in the slightest...

It also heavily depends on the dynamic of the group and the DM - direct damage casters suffer more in high-optimization groups than with general gamers/heavy roleplayers. Not that any particular style is better or worse than another, or that one precludes the other, of course (in before the flames start!) :smallbiggrin:

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 09:59 PM
The DM isn't letting him get anything below +1. What feats/items lower metamagic?

+1 Twin/Split/Quicken/whatever can get pretty stupid really fast. There's of course Arcane Thesis, Practical Metamagic, Easy Metamagic, the normal boogeymen of optimization (and few other, more limited ones). Metamagic Rods from DMG can apply one metamagic for free X times per day, but as long as not combined with metamagic reducers, they're really perfectly ok as they cost quite a bit.

Then there's the big one, Incantatrix prestige class, which allows applying metamagic for free, reduces all metamagic costs, gives you bonus metamagic feats and overall is totally retarded.

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 10:07 PM
Then there's the big one, Incantatrix prestige class, which allows applying metamagic for free, reduces all metamagic costs, gives you bonus metamagic feats and overall is totally retarded.

Never heard of it, where's it from?

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 10:09 PM
Player's Guide to Faerun.

Paul H
2009-01-18, 10:10 PM
Hi

Not sure where the 100+ average Fireball damage comes from, Empowered & Maximised or not.....

Prefer to 'lock down' my opponents with No Save/No SR spells. My LG main character was a Clr/Warmage/Mystic Theurge who usually started with an Evards Tentacles CL 12. His cohort (Dakon Wiz 1/Beguiler 9) opens with Legion of Sentinels. Tentacles grab & constrict. Legion just makes attacks of opportunity, brilliant against spellcasters.

Forced an Illithid to flee when my Beguiler lvl 6 cast Legion of Sentinels. Illithid tried something that triggered over 18 AoO, the ones that hit did D8+2 damage.

Evokers soften up the opposition. Conjurers kill it (Orb spells). Illusionists/Enchanters control the battlefield.

Cheers
Paul H

Zergrusheddie
2009-01-18, 10:14 PM
Evokers soften up the opposition. Conjurers kill it (Orb spells). Illusionists/Enchanters control the battlefield.

Cheers
Paul H

Conjurers are actually more lethal than Evokers?

BRC
2009-01-18, 10:20 PM
Evoker Wizards are bad, but only according to a certain design philosophy I like to call "Absolute Optimization", which is that, because any wizard COULD be a Polycheesing Batman, any wizard that is NOT a Polycheesing Batman sucks. By the same logic, because any character could be a wizard, any character that is not a Polycheesing Batman Wizard sucks. This Philosophy is flawed for the obvious reason that the purpose of the game is to have fun, rather than to create the most optomized character possible, but whatever.

ChaosDefender24
2009-01-18, 10:21 PM
In terms of blasting capability? They sure are, in the right builds.
The orb spells (which are conjuration for some bizarre reason) are the quintessential "load me up with metamagic" spells, because they're prone to energy admixture, are a ranged touch attack, and penetrate SR.


Incantatrix

Through this guy especially, expect to deal thousands of damage with ease.


By the same logic, because any character could be a wizard, any character that is not a Polycheesing Batman Wizard sucks.

Polycheesing Batman Wizard sucks too because thanks to Pazuzu, *anyone* who can make a DC 25 Knowledge (religion) check can become Pun-Pun.

Mando Knight
2009-01-18, 10:33 PM
Conjurers are actually more lethal than Evokers?

Cloudkill. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/cloudkill.htm) Evard's Black Tentacles. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blackTentacles.htm) Summon Monster chain. Maze+shenaniganry.

Collin152
2009-01-18, 10:35 PM
Most of the cloud and fog spells rock, really.

Keld Denar
2009-01-18, 10:46 PM
Yea, when Complete Arcane came out, and then later, Spell Compendium, Conjouration killed Evocation and took most of his stuff. Evocation is now worth about 3 whole spells. Wall of Force and Contingeny being the big ones, with the expensive albeit nearly ultimately damning Force Cage being the real winner. Radiant Assault from Spell Compendium is pretty good too, for a blast, because its LIGHT damage, which is not resistable, and it has a Will Save for 1/2, instead of Reflex, so its good against big dumb things, and finally, it STUNS for 1d6 rounds on a failed save. This spell would be a good 7th level spells if it didn't do 15d6 damage, but thats just gravy on top.

Other than that, Evocation has single target no save blasts, Conjouration has single target no save blasts that don't have SR, and have status effects tacked on. Evocation has big dice AoEs, Conjouration has big dice AoEs that don't have SR.

AmberVael
2009-01-18, 10:49 PM
Most of the cloud and fog spells rock, really.

See, I've never understood why people say this. What am I missing? It's obvious that I'm missing something.

Eldariel
2009-01-18, 10:53 PM
That's a whole other question though: The answer to "Why Evokers are poor?", which really was meant to say "Why the Fireball/Lightning Bolt/Magic Missile/Scorching Ray-throwing Wizard is poor?", has already been sufficiently answered in this thread. Unless the OP has any additional questions?

The biggest problem with Evocation is that everything Evocation is really easy to replicate. And I'm not just talking about Shadow Evocation here. Basically, it has a lot of neat stuff, but it's the least painful school to let go. That said, Treantmonk's Guide to Evocation (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=968899) is a really spiffy piece on why Evocation is decent. Just, focusing on your evocation damage spells isn't the best way to go about it. Evocation has a wealth of other types of effects, which tend to be more effective. But as I said, Evocation doesn't suck as a school but it's simply redundant so specialists ban it. Evoker as an archetype has the aforementioned issues.

AslanCross
2009-01-18, 11:48 PM
I don't buy the "blasting spells are bad" paradigm. I believe that a "blasting wizard" is sub-optimal, yes, but from seeing our party wizard in practice I can say that the blaster spells have saved them a lot of trouble, and also that NPC monsters hurling massive explosions has been extremely dangerous--while NPC monsters casting solid fog just ends up slowing the encounter down to a crawl.

Blasting spells have their uses, and I don't think a wizard should have absolutely no way of causing big explosions. I'm also not sold on the shadow evocation spells at all. It'd be great for clearing out first-level kobold swarms, I guess, but I just find it a lot less optimal to prepare it at all, since it takes up a higher-level spell slot to duplicate a weaker spell.

Of course, I don't think a wizard should prepare nothing but blasting spells. I figure he should at least have one slot with a blaster prepared, or if he really doesn't want to prepare them, have one on a wand. (And yes, I prefer generalist wizards to specialists. The Elf wizard substitution feature that grants an extra highest-level slot is one of my favorites.)

Shosuro Ishii
2009-01-18, 11:59 PM
The main arguement stems from a disagreement on what 'bad' means.

As someone who plays other competetive games, I can tell you that from a purely theoritical aspect, 'sub-par does in fact eqaul bad'.

Now, I know people will respond with 'but I enjoy my blaster wizard...therefore they aren't bad'. Which leads us to the next point. You can enjoy a sub-par character, and you are doing nothing wrong. Hell, my favorite character ever was a Bard 7/Duelist 4. By no means powerful, by no means optimized, but still fun.

However, from a purely analytical standpoint, we can't critique and breakdown 'fun'. We can't look at a build and say 'sure it's bad, but it must be fun to play'. It doesn't work like that. Everyone who says 'Blaster Wizards are bad' is making a purely analytical statement, completly seperating itself from the idea that a character can be 'fun', since it can't be measured.

So, while there is nothing wrong with playing a blaster wizard, they are sub-par choices, and therefore, by the standards of comparing class power levels, they are bad.

Waspinator
2009-01-19, 12:09 AM
The real question is "If you're playing a blaster, why not go Psion instead?"

Talic
2009-01-19, 12:18 AM
The real question is "If you're playing a blaster, why not go Psion instead?"

Simple. Because Psions don't get Incantatrix, and can only apply 1-2 metapsionic feats per power.

Mages can build a 7 layer cheesecake of metamagic and make 'ok' spells into 'omg' spells.

Tokiko Mima
2009-01-19, 05:21 AM
Blasting spells have their uses, and I don't think a wizard should have absolutely no way of causing big explosions. I'm also not sold on the shadow evocation spells at all. It'd be great for clearing out first-level kobold swarms, I guess, but I just find it a lot less optimal to prepare it at all, since it takes up a higher-level spell slot to duplicate a weaker spell.

Well, keep in mind shadow evocation is versatile. You pick a spell based not only on shape, but optimized to exploit any elemental weakness or lower save and you get to do that adjustment on the spot. That's worth the extra spell level, I think. :smallsmile:

Heliomance
2009-01-19, 05:26 AM
People keep citing the Incantatrix as a way to cheese off your metamagic. Most evocation is instantaneous, and hence invalid for the Incantatrix's Metamagic Effect ability. Aside from the level 10 cappstone ability, I'm missing what makes this class so awesome for a blaster. It's awesome for a buffer, debuffer or battlefield controller, but I can't see how it's good for a blaster.

AslanCross
2009-01-19, 08:47 AM
Well, keep in mind shadow evocation is versatile. You pick a spell based not only on shape, but optimized to exploit any elemental weakness or lower save and you get to do that adjustment on the spot. That's worth the extra spell level, I think. :smallsmile:

Hmm, mind elaborating? I'd like to know a bit more about how people actually use the shadow spells aside from shadow fireball.

Starbuck_II
2009-01-19, 09:03 AM
Hmm, mind elaborating? I'd like to know a bit more about how people actually use the shadow spells aside from shadow fireball.

Shadow Evoction spell:
How about Shadow Daylight?
Doesn't matter if it doesn't affect the enemy (Vampires aren't harmed by Daylight spell anyway).
You still dispel any darkness and can see normally.

The enemy may or may not get this benefit based on will save.

Shadow Tensar's Floating disc: obvioiusly you want it to work so you won't disbelief (though it is only a 1st level spell slot).

Continual Flame: normal effect.

Leomold's Tiny Hut works normally.

Greater Shadow Evoc:
Contingency: Normal effect
Sending: I've never prepared this but there were moments when it would be useful.

And that is just Core.

jcsw
2009-01-19, 09:07 AM
Aside from the level 10 cappstone ability, I'm missing what makes this class so awesome for a blaster.

That's like "Aside from spells, I don't see why the wizard is such a good caster."

That *is* why it's suggested as a blaster. Although the instant metamagic and gaining bonus metamagic feats faster than a normal wizard also helps.

Talya
2009-01-19, 09:14 AM
There are some good evocation spells, actually. An evoker doesn't need to be a blaster. That said, there aren't as many good evocation spells as some of the other schools.

Playing a blaster wizard is an effective way to keep your wizard from eclipsing some of the better melee types in the party, such as the Swordsage or Warblade. Although if you're going to go that route, there are other classes that can outblast the wizard.

Heliomance
2009-01-19, 11:32 AM
That's like "Aside from spells, I don't see why the wizard is such a good caster."

That *is* why it's suggested as a blaster. Although the instant metamagic and gaining bonus metamagic feats faster than a normal wizard also helps.

Your analogy is flawed. You don't have to suffer through 10 levels to get your spells. The first nine levels of Incantatrix do nothing for a blaster that straight wizard wouldn't. Less, in fact - you give up a school.

jcsw
2009-01-19, 12:07 PM
Your analogy is flawed. You don't have to suffer through 10 levels to get your spells. The first nine levels of Incantatrix do nothing for a blaster that straight wizard wouldn't. Less, in fact - you give up a school.

Just cause my analogy doesn't map out the situation exactly the same doesn't mean it's flawed. (Or rather, the dissonance is inherent in any analogy)

You're asking "Why would anyone do this if it only gives X?" The answer is "Because X is good enough to be the main reason why they do it." This reasoning is true in both this case and in the analogy. "Why would anyone take wizard for a spellcasting? A cleric has better HD and more class features!" "Ans: Because the difference between wizard spells and cleric is worth it."
"Why would anyone take incantatrix over <PrC X>? Incantatrix has almost only one good feature?" "Ans: The feature is good enough to make the difference"
They'd take it even if the 10th level was the only feature, it's just that good.

And in fact, the first 9 levels do do something. Straight wizard gives 2 metamagic feats in 10 levels, incantatrix gives 4.
Instant Metamagic also allows you to go nova, somewhat important to a blaster.
It also allows for the somewhat cheesy thing of adding every spell you want from the banned school to your spellbook before taking incantatrix, which negates quite a bit of the penalty.

Heliomance
2009-01-19, 12:15 PM
Incantatrix is wasted on blasters. Almost all its features deal with ongoing effects. I'm sure there are better ways to spend 10 levels, but I'm AFB right now and don't feel like spending hours trawling through them anyway. The metamagic reduction is nice, but I don't think it's worth 10 levels by itself, especially as it can't reduce below +1. I don't remember what Instant Metamagic does, though - enlighten me briefly?

As for taking spells of the banned school first, I'm pretty sure that doesn't work. I've looked into this before. Sure, you have spells of your banned school sitting there in your spellbook. Doesn't mean you can cast them. Wizards don't learn their spells, they write them down. And just like you can't cast a banned spell from a scroll, you can't prepare it from your spellbook either.

DrizztFan24
2009-01-19, 12:21 PM
Derail-ish above yes?

I think the point has been given above already that the blaster isn't bad, just not optimized. Some say that is bad. This is like arguing about which play style is best.

Keld Denar
2009-01-19, 12:33 PM
Giving up a single school for the kind of power you get from Incantrix is crazy worth it. Its like saying you can't eat pie anymore, but we've got 15 different kinds of cake you can eat as much of a you want. And when you get to level 10, all of the cakes double in size and deliciousness. Incantrix10 is really good on its own, but when you combine it with other things like Arcane Thesis and Easy Metamagic and Metamagic School Focus, you get some rediculous things. The abuse isn't the fault of Incantrix itself, but the disturbing things that happen when you combine it all together.

Plus, if you have a cleric in your party, you can persist his buffs for free. A Persisted Vigorous Circle is pretty amazing, as is a Persisted Righteous Wrath of the Faithful or Mass Shield of Faith or other buffs. Even if you aren't casting many non-blasty spells yourself (which is dumb, you should cast other stuff too, like Forsight and whatnot), you still benefit from just about every single ability that Incantrix gives. Incantrix also gives bonus MM feats to replace the MM feats you lose going straight wizard. Oh wait, it gives you MORE MM feats than going straight wizard would.

Spiryt
2009-01-19, 12:44 PM
Resilient Sphere is rather good too.

Big bad barbarian is a threat? Put him in the sphere, cut down minor foes, and then wait for spells end in good tactical positions (flank, whatever)

Your mate at 3HP, bad/good guys surrounded him? Resilent sphere.

There are probably many more uses for impenetrable sphere.

ericgrau
2009-01-19, 12:57 PM
I think a lot of people already touched on what I'm gonna say, but oh well. I'll assume you mean evoking direct damage, b/c there's also evoker control/etc., conjuration direct damage, conjuration control of course, etc., etc. That complicates things, especially with non-core books. Not to mention the martial ubercharger damage options in those books.

Ok, then. Direct damage is not bad, just worse, and only by a little. A caster focused on such can be quite powerful, and any caster should get at least a couple DD spells. Even for a focused DD caster I'd encourage him to branch out, at least a little. Especially if direct-damage is all your games ever use. They're really missing out on a large chunk of fun. For example I was in a group where DD evokers were considered THE way to go, but the party blaster still loved evard's black tentacles as a great battlefield control spell that also clustered enemies nicely for his tweaked out fireballs.

And +1 on resilent sphere and wall of force.

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-19, 01:21 PM
I like evokers but then again that's half the reason I play a Wizard. Then again I also tend to use that other stuff I just prefer to specialize in Evocation.

I ALSO like to do things like drop that "Sonic Ball" on the cave roof thus ignoring the nasty's spell if not his Reflex save. Then again if I recall the rules for cave ins success on a Reflex save there only means you aren't buried not that you take less damage.

In short if you think of your evocations more like illusions (utility spells whose actual effect is somewhat up to you and your imagination) then you can get a great deal if amusement out of the look on your DM's face when you freeze something in a block of ice using a Quickened Create Water and a Lingering Cone of Cold. (just an example though I need to remember that one)

For direct damage though Wizards do get a bit lackluster at the higher levels. Then again when you smack into something with DR 20 and no SR you get to giggle as you suddenly become the biggest nastiest thing on the field.

Paul H
2009-01-19, 10:10 PM
Hi

Got to say, my favourite arcane class used to be Warmage, because they were simple to play damage-dealers, could use light armour/light shields, D6 HP, and had Edge.

Now changed to Beguiler, having seen how easily it controls the battlefield, effectively doing even more damage in the long run.

Enchantments & Illusions flying everywhere. Party Buffs when you can't hurt the enemy. Unsettling Enchantment nerfs the opponents. Legion of Sentinels locking down spellcasters. Plus PrC's like Nightmare Spinner & Eldritch Theurge (1 level dip into Warlock req'd).

I'd take an Beguiler/Eldritch Theurge, or Beguiler/Rainbow Servant over an Evoker any day. But that's just me.

Most importantly, play to your own style & enjoy it.

Cheers
Paul H

Decoy Lockbox
2009-01-19, 10:25 PM
When I used to play wizards in 3.5, I normally went the generalist route and stocked up on buffs/debuffs/control spells from all across the different schools. However, I always packed at least 1 or 2 souped-up orbs or rays in case the shiz hit the fan and something absolutely needed to die immediately.

I remember one game where our barbarian and rogue had just finished off a fire giant and couldn't make it to the partially wounded red dragon in time to finish it off before it hit us all with it's breath weapon, so I threw a sudden maximized, sudden empowered, frost substituted, split ray CL 15 scorching ray at it. That was a very dead dragon. Of course, in that particular group our fights never lasted longer than 3 rounds, and the first two rounds for my wizard generally consisted of hasting the party, then either fogging/tentacling the enemy (against multiple targets) or improved invis'ing the rogue (against one target).

The wizards I played weren't terribly optimized either, but they certainly got the job done. I'm almost glad the class got it's cojones removed in 4th edition. Though I've seen some really obscene builds for wizards in that edition too, they don't come close to the 3rd edition cheese I saw and used.

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-20, 03:34 AM
Eh, I'm not a supporter of Wizard hax. If someone wants to pull random ass **** and make a twinked out Wizard then that's their problem but if I ever have to DM it then I will either disallow it or the gloves will come off the monsters.

Lycanthromancer
2009-01-20, 05:36 AM
Eh, I'm not a supporter of Wizard hax. If someone wants to pull random ass **** and make a twinked out Wizard then that's their problem but if I ever have to DM it then I will either disallow it or the gloves will come off the monsters.

A basic, core-only wizard is one of the strongest characters in the entire game. PrCs and out-of-core spells are just gravy on top.

That's because overpowering "random ass ****" is what wizards do.

Khaeta
2009-01-20, 05:59 AM
kinda jumping in here: the D&D for dummies book (which I use to teach new players) says something very interesting about this sort of thing, and i think it's true: if you're using evocations or othere damamge dealing spells, you're helping your other party members to take down the baddies because the damage stacks. however, the spells that are "save or die", such as slow, put you in competition: if it works, you beat out the fighter. congrats. if not, then it does nothing (or occasionally some ridiculously winpy effect)

OzymandiasVolt
2009-01-20, 08:33 AM
The short answer to the topic is "no". The long answer is "no, and anyone who says otherwise is pushing mathematical superiority without regard for other means of measuring value".

Eldariel
2009-01-20, 08:42 AM
kinda jumping in here: the D&D for dummies book (which I use to teach new players) says something very interesting about this sort of thing, and i think it's true: if you're using evocations or othere damamge dealing spells, you're helping your other party members to take down the baddies because the damage stacks. however, the spells that are "save or die", such as slow, put you in competition: if it works, you beat out the fighter. congrats. if not, then it does nothing (or occasionally some ridiculously winpy effect)

This is hardly the case. Slow weakens the opponent making it easier for the fighter to kill. The only exception are spells that actually kill the opponent. Usually they just heavily inconvenience the opponent leading to more damage from the fighter and less damage to the party. Thus better than blasting, which wouldn't have reduced the damage to the party unless it dropped the opponent (again, the reason to occasionally keep a boom scroll/wand around; sometimes something is on the edge and about to unleash a flurry and you wanna blow it up before it does rather than wasting a good spell).


The short answer to the topic is "no". The long answer is "no, and anyone who says otherwise is pushing mathematical superiority without regard for other means of measuring value".

Huh? "Mathematical superiority"? "Other means of measuring value"? You're being unnecessary vague here.

Paul H
2009-01-20, 09:08 AM
Hi

Anyone's powerful if they have the right tool/spell at the right time. Problem with Wizards is they have to prepare ahead of time. Clerics at least have a bigger spell list known, and can spont some spells.

I remember as a lowly Cleric/Warmage (total 5 levels, going Mystic Theurge), coup de gras'ing an armoured Troll with an Acid Splash. Now controls battle with Evard's Tentacles. More recently decking two three armed Giants in a 5th lvl party. (I was Changeling Beguiler). Buffed party, including Shifter Barbarian, then kept on casting Whelm (Had Unsettling Enchantment). Later, in same campaign forced an Illithid to flee from my Legion of Sentinels. (Was Beguiler 6).

My style is spont arcane casters in preference. Waramages & Beguilers, possibly a level of Warlock for Eld Theurge.

Find a style that suits you & stick to it.

Cheers
Paul H

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-20, 10:24 AM
The short answer to the topic is "no". The long answer is "no, and anyone who says otherwise is pushing mathematical superiority without regard for other means of measuring value".

Sir you have hit the nail on the head and I applaud you. Also I intend to quote this later.

Nothing is more annoying than people who push statistics over creativity and experience. These are the same people who annoy the heck out of me by saying I shouldn't be able to kill people on Ragnarok Online (as a High Wizard btw) when the corpse count clearly says otherwise.

Flickerdart
2009-01-20, 06:23 PM
Hi

Anyone's powerful if they have the right tool/spell at the right time. Problem with Wizards is they have to prepare ahead of time. Clerics at least have a bigger spell list known, and can spont some spells.

I remember as a lowly Cleric/Warmage (total 5 levels, going Mystic Theurge), coup de gras'ing an armoured Troll with an Acid Splash. Now controls battle with Evard's Tentacles. More recently decking two three armed Giants in a 5th lvl party. (I was Changeling Beguiler). Buffed party, including Shifter Barbarian, then kept on casting Whelm (Had Unsettling Enchantment). Later, in same campaign forced an Illithid to flee from my Legion of Sentinels. (Was Beguiler 6).

My style is spont arcane casters in preference. Waramages & Beguilers, possibly a level of Warlock for Eld Theurge.

Find a style that suits you & stick to it.

Cheers
Paul H
That's when Divination becomes a virtue. A Wizard that knows what he is going to be up against is a living Wizard. A Wizard that doesn't...prepare a few tricks to hit each save, spells that protect you (Fly, Wind Wall, etc) and you're pretty much set. Cleric spontaneous healing is useless, since you heal out of combat with wands of Lesser Vigor and then Heal.
It is presumed that a Wizard goes to the mage-o-mart and buys all the useful spells for his level as scrolls, so the Cleric's advantage here is somewhat nullified. Sorcerers and Beguilers, on the other hand, learn spells slower and can't grab new ones easily: if you know you'll be duking it out with a dragon, a Wizard goes and finds some Solid Fog and Assay Resistance. A Sorcerer can't prepare at all, because he's already set his spells in stone.
Yes, having the right tool for the job can be hard. But if you're RPing properly, a Wizard of colossal intelligence won't prepare all fireballs and rush into the fray, guns blazing. Sorcerer? Sure, they're not required to be smart, just have a high force of personality. In fact, it's pretty keeping in with the reckless stereotype they've earned.

Khaeta
2009-01-20, 08:28 PM
This is hardly the case. Slow weakens the opponent making it easier for the fighter to kill. The only exception are spells that actually kill the opponent. Usually they just heavily inconvenience the opponent leading to more damage from the fighter and less damage to the party. Thus better than blasting, which wouldn't have reduced the damage to the party unless it dropped the opponent (again, the reason to occasionally keep a boom scroll/wand around; sometimes something is on the edge and about to unleash a flurry and you wanna blow it up before it does rather than wasting a good spell).

yeah, slow was a bad example. I guess that applies more to hold monster and similar, which isn't really the discussion... *carefully takes foot out of mouth and puts it back on the ground*

Shosuro Ishii
2009-01-21, 01:43 AM
Nothing is more annoying than people who push statistics over creativity and experience.

Interesting fact:

'creativity' and 'experince' can't be quantified into a build. Raw mathematical power can. That's why we push statistics as the most important thing.

Thus, Blaster Wizards are 'quantifiably' inferior to batman wizards. You can argue that things like 'experince, creativity and play style' make up for this, but (while that my be personally true for you) that can't be seen.

Every single bit of game theory, number crunching and statistical comparison shows that blaster wizards are strictly inferior to their controlling counter parts. That doesn't make you a bad player for playing a blaster wizard, nor does it mean you are playing the game wrong. While you may not care, a sizable amount of people do, so that's why this discussion exists.

Keld Denar
2009-01-21, 02:23 AM
Oh, a bit of Stormwind! Separation of build and rp! Optimization without Discrimination! Right to cast disables and freedom from fireballs! WE WILL BE HEARD!

Nerd-o-rama
2009-01-21, 02:26 AM
Evoker/Blaster Wizards are less good than other Wizard builds in theory, but are still among the most powerful character archetypes in D&D. They aren't as good as they could be, but they're still better than 90% of other build types. That answer your question, OP?

MCerberus
2009-01-21, 02:48 AM
Suboptimal, but they can be fun in combat and to RP. In the end the latter is more important. If you want to blast, blast.

Moechi_Vill
2009-01-21, 03:05 AM
*sigh* I've already caused some annoyance on this forum today, but considering this is the best site to get information on D20 stuff and the fact that I am such a new player I am compelled to ask my questions here; sorry folks...

I've read that Evoker Wizards are not that good. The group that I play with are pretty much family friends and I have known them for several years. Any time they have a Wizard, it was always an Evoker and it seemed to do ok. Currently, we are running with a Wizard who can only cast Conjuration (He wanted Mage Armor), Evocation, and Divination. At level 5, his Fireballs are doing 10d6 with a DC of like 23. The only problem I see with him is that he is going to have to devout all his feats to Metamagic (Most do anyway) and that anytime he gets a Evocation spell it will be maxed immediately; a Rogue gets better with every level but the next few levels for Dabble the Blaster will be pretty stagnate. However, it doesn't erase the fact that Dabble destroys anything put forth.

Aside from Resist Energy (he'll have 3 or 4 different Energy Substitutions), what makes him not as good as say a Batman Wizard?

Best of luck y'all.
-Eddie


Don't worry, your OP seems fine. Most people don't have the ability to think or behave properly regularly with or without facing variance (though the latter of course are worse off). You're just on a quest for knowledge, right? :)

As for your question I find evocation quite powerful, just homebrew some high-level uses and hit 'em sideways early on (with creativity (there are achilles heels)) or restrict evocation to special characters or reduce it's powers early on.

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-21, 03:28 AM
Interesting fact:

'creativity' and 'experince' can't be quantified into a build. Raw mathematical power can. That's why we push statistics as the most important thing.

Thus, Blaster Wizards are 'quantifiably' inferior to batman wizards. You can argue that things like 'experince, creativity and play style' make up for this, but (while that my be personally true for you) that can't be seen.

Every single bit of game theory, number crunching and statistical comparison shows that blaster wizards are strictly inferior to their controlling counter parts. That doesn't make you a bad player for playing a blaster wizard, nor does it mean you are playing the game wrong. While you may not care, a sizable amount of people do, so that's why this discussion exists.

While the statistician in me agrees with you the entire rest of me wishes to point out that a Batman Wizard is only as good as the person playing him which amounts to experience. Yes there is, somewhere, a perfect play scenario... and if a DM ever sets that up he should be smacked. HARD.

Take Reverse Gravity for example. It's a simple battlefield control spell and one that I, even as a "blaster", rather enjoy. It also takes a great deal of skill to use properly and I certainly don't pretend to have the knack of it yet.

So as much as quantitative is discussed it doesn't matter much when you misinterpret your Divination results ever so slightly and the midden hits the windmill. Ignoring build cheese when two characters of equal level face off, what will determine things is who knows their stuff better. Not something like the school specialization.

Leon
2009-01-21, 03:30 AM
Evocation = Good as every other School class just used in a different way.

If your a normal D&D player then what is optimal and what is not isn't important, whats important is that your enjoying whats happening and the rest of your group are too.
If Mr Blasty Wizard is dramatically overshadowing the rest of the party then talk to that player about it.

At least your Evoker isn't focused solely on Fire spells to the detriment unlike ours...
Nothing more useless in a Red dragons lair than a Fire Mage

Starbuck_II
2009-01-21, 08:48 AM
Evocation = Good as every other School class just used in a different way.

If your a normal D&D player then what is optimal and what is not isn't important, whats important is that your enjoying whats happening and the rest of your group are too.
If Mr Blasty Wizard is dramatically overshadowing the rest of the party then talk to that player about it.

At least your Evoker isn't focused solely on Fire spells to the detriment unlike ours...
Nothing more useless in a Red dragons lair than a Fire Mage

Searing Spell Metamagic Disagrees. That Fire Mage can kill that Red Dragon with fire!

Tsotha-lanti
2009-01-21, 09:14 AM
Nothing is more annoying than people who push statistics over creativity and experience.

Color be baffled, but I could swear playing a non-blaster battlefield control wizard requires more creativity, cleverness, and tactical thinking than just casting fireballs.

In fact, the whole reason many people don't understand why battlefield control spells are superior is that they haven't figured out how to use them right, because it's not always obvious.

aje8
2009-01-21, 06:06 PM
Look the essential reason why Blasters (Not neccasarily Evoker, there are a couple of good Evocation Battlefield Control/Debuff/Save or Lose spells.)
are bad is two fold.

1. Combat is inherently rigged towards the PCs. What does this mean? Essentially, it means that with a little bonus against a large number of enemies PCs will absolutley dominate mook encounters. Kill some and damaging the rest of large numbers of small enemies is ok. But glitterdusting (Prepferably Sculpted) or Cloud of Bewildering those same enemies is better! With just the slight de-bonus from either of those spells, it makes them litterally no threat to the PC's because comabt is inherently easy. The PCs are meant to win, thus combat is on the verge of being easy already. With Battlefield Control (And to a lesser extend Buff and Debuff) the combat becomes trivial.


2. HP is irrelevant. You see, an enemy with 1 Hp fights just as well as one with 100 Hp. That means that a strong enemy is just as strong post-fireball as long as it lived. However, a Glitterdusted enemy is far less strong and may not even be a threat. On 1 big enemy, this is even more true only replace BC with Debuff. Witch is better, Baleful Blink removing 1/2 of the BBEG's actions or a Blast Spell dealing 1/2 his health? The answer is clearly Baleful Blink, because hindering his ability to fight is much more important than simple damage.

Other factors include that many conjuration (The quittessential Batman school, tied with Transmutation) BCs apply much of the effect even if they save and many also don't allow SR. Fireball does only 1/2 if they save, allows SR AND is vunerable to energy immunity.

But WAIT, Blasters cry, optimized Fireballs do huge amounts of damage, with sky-high DCs and Sonic Damage.
Good wizards use Sculped Glitterdust with sky high DCs on defense, then turn around and beat the evokers on offense with Empowered Twin Rayed Enervation.

Temp.
2009-01-21, 07:26 PM
I would argue that the Blaster wizard is very well balanced with the Controller or God wizard.

The Blaster is at least as competent a damage dealer as the Charger, Swift Hunter or Rogue starting around level 3. It's able to throw handfuls of damage dice at enemies, altering the damage types of each of its attacks to get around enemy resistances and immunities. It will have the same defenses as any Wizard (maybe slightly fewer as using Evocation makes Focused Specialization an actual tradeoff) and the same maneuverability.

The Blaster isn't outshone in the same way that the party Damage-monkeys are never outshone by the God wizard--while Battlefield Control, buffs and debuffs determine whether or not the party can win, there need to be party members dedicating combat actions to actually winning the fight. It doesn't matter if the enemies are split by Solid Fog, blinded by Glitterdust and disabled by Slow--unless somebody throws something sharp into the baddies' spleens, the party is going to have its collective face eaten.

So the Blaster doesn't compete with the Controller: one is a fighter, the other is an enabler. The Blaster wizard competes with Rogues and Warlocks. The God wizard competes with Archivists and Dragonfire Adepts.

aje8
2009-01-21, 08:26 PM
I would argue that the Blaster wizard is very well balanced with the Controller or God wizard.as any Wizard (maybe slightly fewer as using Evocation makes Focused Specialization an actual tradeoff) and the same maneuverability.

The Blaster isn't outshone in the same way that the party Damage-monkeys are never outshone by the God wizard--while Battlefield Control, buffs and debuffs determine whether or not the party can win, there need to be party members dedicating combat actions to actually winning the fight. It doesn't matter if the enemies are split by Solid Fog, blinded by Glitterdust and disabled by Slow--unless somebody throws something sharp into the baddies' spleens, the party is going to have its collective face eaten.

So the Blaster doesn't compete with the Controller: one is a fighter, the other is an enabler. The Blaster wizard competes with Rogues and Warlocks. The God wizard competes with Archivists and Dragonfire Adepts.

I wish this where true, but it simply isn't. (Sorry for the Wall of Text)

The answer is the following:
Polymorph

A single Polymorph after all that BC= As much damage as your blaster can put out in one spell. Hydra Anyone?

Planar Binding is similair.

Even excluding those two spells (As they're arguably overpowered)
How about Summon Monster 3(And the Summon Monster Line in general)? Once the enemies are all glitterdusted ect and are basically useless, the Fiendish Ape (Just my personal favorite Summon Monster 3 choice) can take them all out. Summoning may be a role God(Batman) only fufills sometimes, but it can replace fighters once the BC has been layed down.

Does the ape deal as much damage as blast? Not nearly. However, it only takes a single spell slot with no feats ect. involved.

At the high levels it's not even close. SoD(Save or Dies) are alot of what God's cast. You fireball for hitpoint damage? K, I tell them to hit a DC 28 Fortitude Save or INSTANTLY DIE! You're seriously saying the blaster can keep up??? Flesh to Ice says hi. Also, what about enemies with tons of hitpoints?

But that's looking at them in a vacum, think about them in the context of a party. God buffs his party, debuffs enimies, provided TONS of utility. If you have even a single Melee Character on your side, you can an ECL appropiate encounter. (assumign your melee character is at least somewhat optimized) Trust me, I've actually done this with my Focused Specalist Conjurer before.

The Blaster, on the other hand, is a GLASS CANNON! You're not a fighter, you can't tank, all you do is deal damage and be fragile. The fighter role involves tanking, a blaster can't do this at all. Throw him in a party in a fighter role and the party will have some MAJOR problems. He's much worse in an actual party and can only be a Glass Cannon, a role which is often unnessary, tangenial at best.

Admitatley, before level 7 (That's a liberal estimate) your Blaster may well be able to keep up with God in terms of overall usefullness. However, as soon as Polymorph comes into play and the SoDs start showing up, he's useless in comparison.

kalt
2009-01-22, 10:52 AM
Right now I'm playing a fifth level Conj3/MS2 with the rapid summoning variant and the other variant that you sacrifice scribe scroll to gain augment summoning and it is beginning to get a little ridiculous already and I haven't even touched Malconvoker yet. The rest of the party is a combat cleric(non DMM because it's banned) wielding a Jovar, a Duskblade, and a Dread Necromancer(he seems to be favoring the summon undead/create undead route). So this party really isn't optimized by any means, but right now when we get a couple summons on the mat a haste is just ridiculous. Cloud of bewilderment is just funny and a sculpted glitterdust has just rocked things. We are playing the Second Darkness adventure arc so SR is rather prevelant and so Conjuration has just become all the better.

I've played a couple blasters, but would highly recommend going the psion route due to the added versatility you get with being able to fine tune spells on the fly with just expending PP's. You still will have to worry about SR, creatures with evasion/ improved evasion really hurting your damage output and a large amount of energy resistances as you scale up. Blasters(of the arcane variant) are nice up to I dunno 8-12 but after that there is just so many better things you could be doing with your action.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-01-22, 11:23 AM
A single Polymorph after all that BC= As much damage as your blaster can put out in one spell. Hydra Anyone?


I remember the first time I 'morphed into a hydra in one of my campaigns. The look on the DM's face was priceless. :smallbiggrin:

Temp.
2009-01-22, 03:03 PM
The Blaster, on the other hand, is a GLASS CANNON! You're not a fighter, you can't tank, all you do is deal damage and be fragile. The fighter role involves tanking, a blaster can't do this at all. Throw him in a party in a fighter role and the party will have some MAJOR problems. He's much worse in an actual party and can only be a Glass Cannon, a role which is often unnessary, tangenial at best.

A Blaster is still a Wizard. A Blaster filling in for the Tank role will be as effective, if not more, than your average fighter. There's nothing stopping a primarily damage-focused character from throwing around Quickened Webs, Walls or Tentacles during a fight; it's just not the main purpose of the build. Hell, spells like Defenestrating Sphere, Maw of Chaos, the Elemental Fogs or Sleet Storm cover both roles at once: providing a damage source and influencing movement on the battlefield.

The Blaster is no different than any other archer (even being able to go as far as filling in the job of party utility belt), except that it has access to abilities that will help manage enemies as well as dealing damage.


But that's looking at them in a vacum, think about them in the context of a party. God buffs his party, debuffs enimies, provided TONS of utility. If you have even a single Melee Character on your side, you can an ECL appropiate encounter. (assumign your melee character is at least somewhat optimized) Trust me, I've actually done this with my Focused Specalist Conjurer before.I won't argue with this. You just seem to be comparing a Blaster to the wrong character in this scene. The Blaster is competing with the Fighter here. I don't think there should be any doubt that God and the Blaster are able to beat an ECL appropriate encounter.

aje8
2009-01-22, 03:34 PM
A Blaster is still a Wizard. A Blaster filling in for the Tank role will be as effective, if not more, than your average fighter. There's nothing stopping a primarily damage-focused character from throwing around Quickened Webs, Walls or Tentacles during a fight; it's just not the main purpose of the build. Hell, spells like Defenestrating Sphere, Maw of Chaos, the Elemental Fogs or Sleet Storm cover both roles at once: providing a damage source and influencing movement on the battlefield.

The Blaster is no different than any other archer (even being able to go as far as filling in the job of party utility belt), except that it has access to abilities that will help manage enemies as well as dealing damage.
I see your point there. my biggest issue is the SoD thing. As soon as god get's his SoDs your blasts are obleseted.

Ok, I guess I concede the point that blaster can be an improved Fighter/Glass Cannon. However, when THOSE classes (and hit point damage as a whole) become obselete, a blaster gets significantly worse as he's wasted feats on Meta-Magic, Arcane Thesis, ect. while God has Cloudy Conjuration, Sculpt Spell and so on.

My point about God and BSF soloing encounters was that God only really needs a single other party memeber. The Blaster needs more than that unless the single party memeber IS God.

I definatley agree on the Dual Threat spells. Those are absolutley insane.


(maybe slightly fewer as using Evocation makes Focused Specialization an actual tradeoff
Um was that saying that Focused Specalists AREN'T good in general??!! All my Gods are Focused Specalists!! See this thread on the wizards forums for explanation: Focused Specalists are better than you think (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=953100).

KKL
2009-01-22, 03:43 PM
These are the same people who annoy the heck out of me by saying I shouldn't be able to kill people on Ragnarok Online (as a High Wizard btw) when the corpse count clearly says otherwise.

Too bad decent MDEF enough to spike your MATK down the opposite direction is piss-easy to acquire.

I'll be over there, applying EDP to my Katars so I can Sonic Blow some fools so far into the negatives, it actually will be quite funny.

Temp.
2009-01-22, 05:20 PM
Um was that saying that Focused Specalists AREN'T good in general??!! All my Gods are Focused Specalists!! See this thread on the wizards forums for explanation: Focused Specalists are better than you think (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=953100).Nope. I was actually agreeing with you.

What I meant was that normally Focused Specialization isn't much of a trade-off; you lose Enchantment (normally replaceable with a combination of Illusion and the party face), Necromancy (can mostly be replaced by Transmutation) and Evocation (Conjuration has it trumped hands down. Illusion can do a better job of this school than it does). Since an Evoker naturally can't drop Evocation, the choice is down to Abjuration and Illusion. Both of those schools are unique and powerful; suddenly giving up a school actually limits your options.

So by specializing in Evocation, you either cost yourself defenses in the form of extra spell slots or defenses by way of banning abilities like Mirror Image, Invisibility or the Spell Matrix line.

aje8
2009-01-22, 05:34 PM
Nope. I was actually agreeing with you.

What I meant was that normally Focused Specialization isn't much of a trade-off; you lose Enchantment (normally replaceable with a combination of Illusion and the party face), Necromancy (can mostly be replaced by Transmutation) and Evocation (Conjuration has it trumped hands down. Illusion can do a better job of this school than it does). Since an Evoker naturally can't drop Evocation, the choice is down to Abjuration and Illusion. Both of those schools are unique and powerful; suddenly giving up a school actually limits your options.

So by specializing in Evocation, you either cost yourself defenses in the form of extra spell slots or defenses by way of banning abilities like Mirror Image, Invisibility or the Spell Matrix line.

Good. Though Abjuration vs. Necromancy is quite debatable, I do see what you mean about Evocation Focused Specalists losing significantly more.

Drop Illusion?! NEVER! That school is clear 3rd in terms of power level IMHO, Silent Image Line, Mirror Image and it's Greater Version, Invibility, Shadow Conjuration and Evocation, the school doesn't have all that much depth but it's good spells are REALLY good. /end rant.

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-22, 11:13 PM
Too bad decent MDEF enough to spike your MATK down the opposite direction is piss-easy to acquire.

I'll be over there, applying EDP to my Katars so I can Sonic Blow some fools so far into the negatives, it actually will be quite funny.

One: Safety Wall
Two: Only if you can get to me first
Three: This has nothing to do with D&D I was just griping about people and their stupid little ideas about Perfect Play which are so very far from what ever happens

Olo Demonsbane
2009-01-25, 02:31 AM
There are several things I would like to point out:

1. The thing that no one has mentioned is that often fights are not party vs. monster. They are party vs. 2-4 monsters. If the blaster wizard does 150 damage with a fireball and the barbarian does 200 damage with his greataxe, against 4 enemies the wizard does 600 damage vs the barbarians 200.

2. Everyone seems to assume that your party is optimized. I often play with players that don't really care about optimizing their characters. If the above barbarian only does 100 damage, then the wizard is better as long as he has his fireballs.

3. I ussually play a wizard with 1 other party member, if that. A haste may be good with a monk, a swordsage, and a barbarian, giving 3 extra attacks, but with one fighter, the overal damage increase may not be very high.

aje8
2009-01-25, 09:52 AM
1. The thing that no one has mentioned is that often fights are not party vs. monster. They are party vs. 2-4 monsters. If the blaster wizard does 150 damage with a fireball and the barbarian does 200 damage with his greataxe, against 4 enemies the wizard does 600 damage vs the barbarians 200.

Against larger numbers of monsters, Haste on the Barbarian may become less effective, but Battlefeild Control becomes MORE effective, you can easily Glitterudst or Tentacles a large number of mosnters.


2. Everyone seems to assume that your party is optimized. I often play with players that don't really care about optimizing their characters. If the above barbarian only does 100 damage, then the wizard is better as long as he has his fireballs.
If the party isn't optimizied, then the wizard isn't optimized. Thus his Fireballs will be NOT be meta-magiced out the wazoo, will have easy to make reflex saves and will not take energy subsitution. Thus, his Fireballs will still be weaker than the Barbarian getting Hasted.


3. I ussually play a wizard with 1 other party member, if that. A haste may be good with a monk, a swordsage, and a barbarian, giving 3 extra attacks, but with one fighter, the overal damage increase may not be very high.
Honestly, Haste on a SINGLE optimized party memeber does a ton. Also, even it's a bit lower, you have to remember the following:
The Evoker needs to use Meta-magic, arcane thesis, Energy Substituion, and so on to deal that much damage. God can deal almost that much with a single haste and still have all his feats to use for other things. (such as Sculpt Spell)

Olo Demonsbane
2009-01-25, 12:04 PM
Against larger numbers of monsters, Haste on the Barbarian may become less effective, but Battlefeild Control becomes MORE effective, you can easily Glitterudst or Tentacles a large number of mosnters.


If the party isn't optimizied, then the wizard isn't optimized. Thus his Fireballs will be NOT be meta-magiced out the wazoo, will have easy to make reflex saves and will not take energy subsitution. Thus, his Fireballs will still be weaker than the Barbarian getting Hasted.


Honestly, Haste on a SINGLE optimized party memeber does a ton. Also, even it's a bit lower, you have to remember the following:
The Evoker needs to use Meta-magic, arcane thesis, Energy Substituion, and so on to deal that much damage. God can deal almost that much with a single haste and still have all his feats to use for other things. (such as Sculpt Spell)

Emphasis is mine.

Good Point.

The wizard is optimized because Im the only one who ever plays a wizard. All my friends play rouges and rangers, with occasional druids.

See emphasis and the paragraph above it.

ericgrau
2009-01-25, 01:35 PM
I played in a party with a great melee damage dealer and a great blaster wizard. Combats ended in 2-3 rounds pretty much with direct damage. The wizard cast haste the first round and blasted away during following rounds. Shocking, I know, that you're not forced to choose between haste and direct damage. I came in with a (very effective) controller caster to round out the party, but only because the party was missing one.

Anyway I think everyone's point was that direct damage isn't so bad, just worse (IMO just a little worse). This thread was going so well for a while, then a couple people started to debate an old dead horse. No offense meant, by all means continue if you like, and I might agree with over 50% of it. It's just that we've all heard it before. We all know controlling can often be better; it's just a matter of how often and how much better is it?

aje8
2009-01-25, 03:54 PM
The wizard is optimized because Im the only one who ever plays a wizard. All my friends play rouges and rangers, with occasional druids.
So wait, let me get this straight, you're in a mostly unoptimized party, with only 1 ally usually?

In this rare circumstane.............. GOD is much better. God will have plenty of space for utility, learning Teleport, Summon Elemental Reserve Feat ect.

He will be able to take the place of the Rogue, Summon a BSF and still control the Battlefield and his normal stuff. Blasters...... yeah not so much because many of their slots will be devoted to Evocation and their Focused Specalizing will require more utility lost than normal.

Additionallly, the SoD argument has not been answered by any of you blaster supporters.

Knaight
2009-01-25, 05:05 PM
Save or Dies aren't actually all that impressive. Not only is every other monster immune to death effects, there are all sorts of spells which go up against them.

Flickerdart
2009-01-25, 05:08 PM
Save or Dies aren't actually all that impressive. Not only is every other monster immune to death effects, there are all sorts of spells which go up against them.
Which is why you use Save or Loses or Save or Sucks. As long as you have something to hit each save, you're golden. A blaster wizard is stuck with AC and Ref and SR pretty much, and if they can't be damaged for whatever reason, their trick is gone.

Starbuck_II
2009-01-25, 05:11 PM
Which is why you use Save or Loses or Save or Sucks. As long as you have something to hit each save, you're golden. A blaster wizard is stuck with AC and Ref and SR pretty much, and if they can't be damaged for whatever reason, their trick is gone.

Searing Spell: nothing stops that. Need a good Fire spell to put it on but I'm sure he can find one.

Flickerdart
2009-01-25, 05:22 PM
Searing Spell: nothing stops that. Need a good Fire spell to put it on but I'm sure he can find one.
Except SR, a reflex save (and Evasion), and so on. The thing is, they don't get to choose what they attack as freely as BC/Debuffers.

Starbuck_II
2009-01-25, 05:32 PM
Except SR, a reflex save (and Evasion), and so on. The thing is, they don't get to choose what they attack as freely as BC/Debuffers.

Not true, they could use no SR spells.
SR is easy to bypass (assuming not a golem): Assay Resistance or True casting.


Fire Seed, Orbs spells, Fire substituted Vitriolic Sphere, Fire substituted Lightning Blade, Internal Fire (Fort Partial): fire Finger of death without the death type so Death ward doesn't block, Fire Breath (no SR and ranged touch attack, 1/rd).

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-26, 01:53 AM
Also keep in mind people that just because someone is playing an evoker doesn't mean that all they have are evocation spells. True Creation used properly can deal just as much damage as a fireball and then you can do stuff like telekinesis it around the battlefield for extra damage. Neither of these spells requires you to be a non-evoker for maximum effect. Infact in the case of True Creation you are best off being a Elemental Savant (lightning) because you have that 100 foot fly speed.

Jayabalard
2009-01-26, 07:13 AM
'creativity' and 'experince' can't be quantified into a build. Raw mathematical power can. That's why we push statistics as the most important thing.

Thus, Blaster Wizards are 'quantifiably' inferior to batman wizards. You can argue that things like 'experince, creativity and play style' make up for this, but (while that my be personally true for you) that can't be seen. You're mixing terminology. "Inferior" and "Better" are qualitative statements, not quantifiable statements. The idea that having a character that is more powerful is "better" than one that is less powerful is strictly subjective.

You'd probably see less disagreement if you stick to statements like: "Thus, Blaster Wizards are 'quantifiably' less powerful than batman wizards." instead.

aje8
2009-01-26, 05:42 PM
Also keep in mind people that just because someone is playing an evoker doesn't mean that all they have are evocation spells. True Creation used properly can deal just as much damage as a fireball and then you can do stuff like telekinesis it around the battlefield for extra damage. Neither of these spells requires you to be a non-evoker for maximum effect. Infact in the case of True Creation you are best off being a Elemental Savant (lightning) because you have that 100 foot fly speed.
That's why I always use the term "blaster" instead of evoker.

Evokers can and should use BC and Debuff, there's quite a few good ones actually. (Great Thunder Clap? Some of the Bigby's Hand line? Force line?)

What we're really talking about here is: Blaster vs. God.

Not true, they could use no SR spells.
SR is easy to bypass (assuming not a golem): Assay Resistance or True casting.

Fire Seed, Orbs spells, Fire substituted Vitriolic Sphere, Fire substituted Lightning Blade, Internal Fire (Fort Partial): fire Finger of death without the death type so Death ward doesn't block, Fire Breath (no SR and ranged touch attack, 1/rd)

Your suggesting using Searing Meta-magiced Orb spells for your blaster? (Say, Orb of Fire, it's not evocation, but we're kinda discussing Blasters here, not evokers) Ok, you've wasted feats on Arcane Thesis, Empower Spell, Searing and so on.

Ok, God has SoD on all 3 saves which are as effective (if not more) at one hit killing opponents than your blast spells AND God still has his feat slots open for improving those same spells or qualifing for more powerful Prcs. Additionally, God doesn't NEED to use SoDs Save or Suck/Lose are also there.

Take Baleful Blink for example. A mere 4th level spell that results in opponents essentially losing 50% of their actions. If God Baleful Blinks 3 opponents and your Blaster blasts those same 3 opponents, who has accoplished more? I'm willing to bet (on average) it's God. Another example is Phantalsmal Strangler. This spell usually takes a single opponent out of action for it's duration. Can your blast spell reliably do better than that?

For Crowds: Stinking Cloud>Fireball and Solid Fog>Metamagiced Fireball for the exact reasons described above.

Shosuro Ishii
2009-01-26, 07:21 PM
You're mixing terminology. "Inferior" and "Better" are qualitative statements, not quantifiable statements. The idea that having a character that is more powerful is "better" than one that is less powerful is strictly subjective.

You'd probably see less disagreement if you stick to statements like: "Thus, Blaster Wizards are 'quantifiably' less powerful than batman wizards." instead.

My earlier statement addressed this.

When comparing the relative power of characters, the only factor we can compare is their "power level". The only benchmark we have for character quality in this discussion is the characters power using RAW/game theory.

I am by no means saying that a player playing a blaster wizard is playing the game wrong, nor am I implying that they are a bad player playing a bad character.

What I am saying is that in the context of opimization discussions, such as this one, blaster wizards are inferior when compared to Batman wizards.

Epic_Wizard
2009-01-27, 03:41 AM
First of all I can't honestly say I'm familiar with the Wizard build known as "God". Enlightenment would be appreciated.

I also wish to point out that playing a "Blaster" like that is equivalent to playing "stupid evil". It is neither realistic nor practical. Every Wizard is going to have a selection of utility spells and while an Evoker or Blaster may not take things like Major Image he will mostly likely have things like Wall of Iron/Stone/Fire.

Mostly I just get tired of people ragging on Evocation like it's the worst thing in the world. When the party Fighter can blast a hole in a dungeon with his Haste spell then he can say I'm worthless.

Besides which Evokers get some of the best PrC's. Earth Elemental Savant can turn an entire dungeon crawl on it's head not to mention the kind of threat that being able to burrow under someone to deliver touch spells poses. (flat footed touch AC is a bugger)

Here's one for you which is pure blaster: An Air Elemental Savant casts a Wall of Fire spell that's Born of the Three Thunders. Now anyone that takes damage from the wall has a chance to be stunned and knocked prone which could very well become lethal since they would be IN the wall. Oh and lets not forget that half the damage is Sonic.

Heliomance
2009-01-27, 03:50 AM
Wall of Fire isn't blasty, it's Battlefield Control. And GOD isn't so much a build as a state of mind. It's the wizard that takes pretty much all battlefield control spells, buffs, and no-save debuffs. They don't take out the enemy themselves, instead they make it much easier for everyone else to take them out. They break up the battlefield so you only have to fight one foe at once, they buff the meattanks to high heaven, and they make it so all the monsters have one strength and go over with a hard sneeze.

aje8
2009-01-27, 04:16 PM
And GOD isn't so much a build as a state of mind. It's the wizard that takes pretty much all battlefield control spells, buffs, and no-save debuffs. They don't take out the enemy themselves, instead they make it much easier for everyone else to take them out. They break up the battlefield so you only have to fight one foe at once, they buff the meattanks to high heaven, and they make it so all the monsters have one strength and go over with a hard sneeze.
Yes essntially. God is quite similair to Batman. The origin of the term is Treantmonk's Guide over at the Wizards forums where he refers to well built wizards as "GOD". For the obvious reason that they tell the universe to sit down, shut up, and bend to their will.

Besides which Evokers get some of the best PrC's. Earth Elemental Savant can turn an entire dungeon crawl on it's head not to mention the kind of threat that being able to burrow under someone to deliver touch spells poses. (flat footed touch AC is a bugger)
Wait what? I'm not familiar with that particular PrC (Book please?) However, are you claiming that Earth Elemental Savant is stronger than any of the following:
Shadowcraft Mage (Generally considered to be 1 step under pun-pun)
Incantrix (Often banned for power level reasons)
IoSV (Unkillability is good)

Burrowing? Ok, God casts Alter Self. ................ that requires no PrC.


I also wish to point out that playing a "Blaster" like that is equivalent to playing "stupid evil". It is neither realistic nor practical. Every Wizard is going to have a selection of utility spells and while an Evoker or Blaster may not take things like Major Image he will mostly likely have things like Wall of Iron/Stone/Fire.
I'm not saying Blasters have no utility. I'm saying that:
1. Their blast spells would be better spent as God Spells.
2. Their feats would be better spent on God feats not Blaster feats
3. Their power comes, not from their blasts, but from their utility spells.

Major Image? When was that mentioned. It's a decent spell but not by any means a God staple.