PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Why remove Evocation?



Thunder Hammer
2009-09-28, 10:45 PM
I've noticed some comments for wizards/sorcs banning evocation for becoming specailized, may I ask why?

What schools provide better Direct damage spells? And more importantly, which spells are superior to classics like "Fireball" and "Lightning Bolt"??

thanks!

deuxhero
2009-09-28, 10:50 PM
"Roll a fortitude save or die" and "roll a will save or be turned into a helpless creature" to start with.

Ernir
2009-09-28, 10:51 PM
There was a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126323) on this not long ago at all. Lots of discussion in there you will probably find relevant.


And since I am posting, here's my 2cp:

Evocation is often banned because a large portion of the school can be substituted for by the others.
I also think it is a bit underrated, but yes. In many situations, it is often possible to produce the same results using spells from other schools.


What schools provide better Direct damage spells? And more importantly, which spells are superior to classics like "Fireball" and "Lightning Bolt"??

The Orb of Fire/Force/stuff from Complete Arcane are the usual examples.

taltamir
2009-09-28, 10:51 PM
there are direct damage spells in almost all schools. And direct damage is not the best way to do things anyways.
Tons of conjuration, necromancy, and even trasmutation (disintegrate).
Specializing means having 1 more spell per day per level. which means double or triple (if focused specialized) your spells per day in most levels when you first get them. (3 instead of 1 if you focus specialize)

Frankly I'd rule most of those spells to be evocation instead of their listed schools, since it is unfair to evocation that all its capabilities are duplicated by other schools. But even then, you still have a bunch of "save or die" or "save of lose"...
For example: baleful polymorph enemy into a newborn puppy. or a toad.
finger of death, disintegrate (not an energy spell, a force effect), etc

jiriku
2009-09-28, 10:58 PM
I've noticed some comments for wizards/sorcs banning evocation for becoming specailized, may I ask why?

What schools provide better Direct damage spells? And more importantly, which spells are superior to classics like "Fireball" and "Lightning Bolt"??

thanks!

1) Conjuration may not provide "better" direct damage spells, but it does provide acceptable replacements.

2) blast of flame, the orb series, disintigrate, horrid wilting, night's caress, arc of lightning, lightning leap, acid breath, acid storm to name a few.

3) I'm not sure I 100% agree with it, but the consensus around here is also that a wizard is better off controlling the battlefield and buffing/debuffing or neutralizing enemies and leaving direct damage to his allies. Evocation has few spells to accomplish those things. Personally, I agree with that philosophy at lower levels, but at higher levels, assuming the damage dealers in your group play non-optimized characters (which is pretty common) area direct damage has its place. Of course, at higher levels, all those conjuration, transmutation, and necromancy spells that I mentioned are available....

Yukitsu
2009-09-28, 11:00 PM
I don't think I've cast a damage spell when I really meant it since I played an orbizard. Which incidently, is a conjurer.

taltamir
2009-09-28, 11:04 PM
well... levels 1 through 4 there is absolutely nothing that does direct damage that is worth casting... not when things like web, glitterdust, or grease can insta win a battle, while nothing will die from a direct damage spell you cast at this level.
level 5 you get fireball for 5d5... so, people, what are some of the better uses fo a level 3 spell instead of fireball? (I know they are there, I am looking for specific suggestions)

jiriku
2009-09-28, 11:07 PM
well... levels 1 through 4 there is absolutely nothing that does direct damage that is worth casting... not when things like web, glitterdust, or grease can insta win a battle, while nothing will die from a direct damage spell you cast at this level.
level 5 you get fireball for 5d5... so, people, what are some of the better uses fo a level 3 spell instead of fireball? (I know they are there, I am looking for specific suggestions)

Let's give a big hell yeah to our main man...stinking cloud (conjuration)! Or, for single target goodness, shivering touch (necromancy).

Yukitsu
2009-09-28, 11:08 PM
On my side of the fence it's usually phantom steed (for travel and kiting with reserves/crossbows) and sleet storm. At that level, I can't always prepare more than that.

Korivan
2009-09-28, 11:10 PM
There is still some very nice things in Evocation. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

But still lets look at this from a practical view.

Necromancy-"Die, or be debuffed to the point my kitten familer will eat you"

Enchantment-"You are mine"

Illusion-"Your limits is your imagination"

Conjuration-"Teleportation, reinforcments, no-save damage dealers...etc."

Transmutation-"A big school, tons of in and out of combat utility...more then I can list"

Divination-"Cause knowing is half the battle". G.I.Joe

Arburation-"Ya know how people keep calling wizard uber-powerfull? This is the school that lets them be uber-powerfull and not die by a pointy stick"

and lastly Evocation-"I blow you to itty bitty pieces, then blast those, just like the fighter could have'

ericgrau
2009-09-28, 11:13 PM
well... levels 1 through 4 there is absolutely nothing that does direct damage that is worth casting... not when things like web, glitterdust, or grease can insta win a battle, while nothing will die from a direct damage spell you cast at this level.
level 5 you get fireball for 5d5... so, people, what are some of the better uses fo a level 3 spell instead of fireball? (I know they are there, I am looking for specific suggestions)

During that ever so brief and situational window, haste is better than a 5d6 fireball against 1 or 2 targets. But, ya, fireball rocks in most encounters, because hitting multiple baddies adds up to a crazy amount of damage. When it doesn't, you switch spells or just switch energy types and save the fireball for the next encounter when it will work. Nothing says you can't take haste and fireball and sleet storm (or w/e mix at different spell levels).

The orb spells are lauded in char op and despised in DM discussions. They are broken not for their damage output, which is actually a little worse and only hits 1 target, but because they are no save, no SR and conjuration instead of evocation. Oh, and WotC says they were experimenting with added effects to damage spells for 4e. Ya, I never heard about that last part until I heard it from WotC staff; everyone else is too fixated on the other stuff. Thanks for breaking the system for your experiment.

sadi
2009-09-28, 11:15 PM
It's a matter of which spells people can't live without. Read the batman thread if you haven't, but the general idea is if you're a wizard, your job is to make the meatshields kill stuff easier, thats their job. Doing a little damage for a 1st level spell, or incapacitating something so the guys who carry big pointy objects can kill it.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104002

sonofzeal
2009-09-28, 11:15 PM
I've noticed some comments for wizards/sorcs banning evocation for becoming specailized, may I ask why?

What schools provide better Direct damage spells? And more importantly, which spells are superior to classics like "Fireball" and "Lightning Bolt"??

thanks!
As pretty much the only guy who defends Evocation on a regular basis....

...the reason to ban it is because it mostly fills the damage/BC roll that Conjuration does a whole lot better. If you have Conjuration, you don't really need Evocation, and Conj is one of the two most popular and least-commonly dropped schools. It's not so much that Evoc is bad, so much as Conj is better.

jiriku
2009-09-28, 11:28 PM
As pretty much the only guy who defends Evocation on a regular basis....

...the reason to ban it is because it mostly fills the damage/BC roll that Conjuration does a whole lot better. If you have Conjuration, you don't really need Evocation, and Conj is one of the two most popular and least-commonly dropped schools. It's not so much that Evoc is bad, so much as Conj is better.

Agreed. Evocation has got some hoss spells like ball lightning, defenestrating sphere, contingency and lightning ring. And don't forget extract water elemental...oh wait, that's another conjuration spell...sigh.

Dixieboy
2009-09-29, 12:17 AM
Evocation has some other useful spells, mainly "Force" types.

But if you really have to let one go evocation is the one that hurts the least.

Soras Teva Gee
2009-09-29, 01:07 AM
But if you really have to let one go evocation enchantment is the one that hurts the least.

Fixed that for you there. Because Enchantment is easy to defend against and there's otherwise plenty of save-or-whatever going around. Evocation's problem is just that it isn't (or isn't perceived to be) as good as people think it should.

(Lesser case with Illusion too.)

PhoenixRivers
2009-09-29, 01:34 AM
In a party, Haste typically provides better damage than fireball/lightning bolt.

Conjuration can take up damage slack, with orbs.

Offensively, Slow, Hold Person, Wall of X, and the like are awesome.

Solid Fog and the like.

They don't kill... But Ray of enfeeblement hinders an opponent's ability to hurt you. If an enemy has 100 hp and you do 30 damage, it's able to hit back just as hard.

But if it has 100 hp, and you slow it, or damage its strength, it is less of a threat. It is less able to harm the group.

That lets others kill it easily, and everyone, cooperating, wins the fight.

taltamir
2009-09-29, 01:49 AM
In a party, Haste typically provides better damage than fireball/lightning bolt.

and, as a bonus, gives a +4 ac and better speed to move about (aka, more control)
And you can use it on yourself to run away in a pinch

Myrmex
2009-09-29, 01:52 AM
"Roll a fortitude save or die" and "roll a will save or be turned into a helpless creature" to start with.

Easily circumvented with a blanket +3 or +4 to all saves, and a blanket +3 or +4 to touch attacks. I've had a lot of DMs do that. You then get about the same efficacy out of your SoDs as you would have out of blasting, which means encounters last more than one round.

taltamir
2009-09-29, 01:54 AM
Easily circumvented with a blanket +3 or +4 to all saves, and a blanket +3 or +4 to touch attacks. I've had a lot of DMs do that. You then get about the same efficacy out of your SoDs as you would have out of blasting, which means encounters last more than one round.

then you use spells that win the battle without requiring a save (which are not damage dealers). It is not that SoD spells are overpowered, its that damage spells are underpowered compared to almost any other type of spell in existence. Either you systematically nerf them all, or you buff up direct damage.

Myrmex
2009-09-29, 02:01 AM
then you use spells that win the battle without requiring a save (which are not damage dealers). It is not that SoD spells are overpowered, its that damage spells are underpowered compared to almost any other type of spell in existence. Either you systematically nerf them all, or you buff up direct damage.

Care to name any?
The best approach to this is a) suck it up & blast (rewards the guy who wants to play glass cannon) b) buff the team (probably the best way to play wizard) c) use battlefield control spells and rely on your teammates to tear the enemy a new one.

The GOD wizard relies largely on b & c, which, while quite powerful, aren't exceedingly so in most games I've actually played in. They feel far more like team players, filling in whatever gaps the rest of the party is missing. Batman was supposed to do b &, though with heavy reliance on SoDs.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-29, 02:04 AM
and, as a bonus, gives a +4 ac and better speed to move about (aka, more control)
And you can use it on yourself to run away in a pinch

Haste does not give +4 AC. It was +1 last time I checked.

Kylarra
2009-09-29, 02:09 AM
Haste does not give +4 AC. It was +1 last time I checked.He's thinking 3.0 haste.

taltamir
2009-09-29, 02:14 AM
Care to name any?
The best approach to this is a) suck it up & blast (rewards the guy who wants to play glass cannon) b) buff the team (probably the best way to play wizard) c) use battlefield control spells and rely on your teammates to tear the enemy a new one.

The GOD wizard relies largely on b & c, which, while quite powerful, aren't exceedingly so in most games I've actually played in. They feel far more like team players, filling in whatever gaps the rest of the party is missing. Batman was supposed to do b &, though with heavy reliance on SoDs.

not save or die... save or lose... and many are just lose without any save.

PhoenixRivers
2009-09-29, 02:16 AM
and, as a bonus, gives a +4 ac and better speed to move about (aka, more control)
And you can use it on yourself to run away in a pinch

+1 AC, however, it's better than that.

1 target per level. At level 5, when you get it, you can pretty much hit up your whole party with it.

So the rogue moves faster, and hits more accurately, the fighter charges farther and hits better (and more often), the cleric can position better, and you can also.

It gives you control and offense.

jiriku
2009-09-29, 02:22 AM
I will add, though, that for NPC wizards, especially when encountered as part of a mixed group of enemies, direct damage is GREAT. Fog and walls and such will inconvenience players or annoy them, but taking damage, especially in great big chunks, SCARES THEM. Plus, it is totally hilarious to watch players go into freak-out mode when they're being pelted with damage spells from greater-invisible wizards and no one in the party prepped a means of detecting invisible creatures.

For my NPC evokers, I would tend to ban necromancy and transmutation, precisely because the save-or-die spells are terrible for use against players. As the DM, the last thing I want is to create a situation where either: a) the PC saves and the monster just wasted its action, or b) the PC dies, the player loses a cherished character because of one unlucky die roll, and the player now has to sit the game out for the next few hours until he receives resurrection or can create and introduce a new character.

PhoenixRivers
2009-09-29, 02:29 AM
I will add, though, that for NPC wizards, especially when encountered as part of a mixed group of enemies, direct damage is GREAT. Fog and walls and such will inconvenience players or annoy them, but taking damage, especially in great big chunks, SCARES THEM. Plus, it is totally hilarious to watch players go into freak-out mode when they're being pelted with damage spells from greater-invisible wizards and no one in the party prepped a means of detecting invisible creatures.

For my NPC evokers, I would tend to ban necromancy and transmutation, precisely because the save-or-die spells are terrible for use against players. As the DM, the last thing I want is to create a situation where either: a) the PC saves and the monster just wasted its action, or b) the PC dies, the player loses a cherished character because of one unlucky die roll, and the player now has to sit the game out for the next few hours until he receives resurrection or can create and introduce a new character.

Oh, you can scare them with status spells too. My players are terrified of hold person, dominate, and obscuring mist.

Why? Because when you can't see your friends, bad things happen.

Mordokai
2009-09-29, 02:34 AM
He's thinking 3.0 haste.

A neat spell, by any description. Extra attack is nothing to scoff at as well :smallbiggrin:

Cyclocone
2009-09-29, 02:51 AM
What schools provide better Direct damage spells?
thanks!

Conjuration and Abjuration both do blasting way better, and Necromancy isn't bad either, though thats not to say Evocation is bad at it. It still gets stuff like Radiant Assault, DB Fireball (only because of Time Stop) and Wings of Flurry (which, amusingly, isn't on the wyzzards list).
I don't get peoples weird fascination with disintegrate though, it's a thoroughly crappy spell that's only ever good for utility.


And more importantly, which spells are superior to classics like "Fireball" and "Lightning Bolt"??

Almost everything. Blastan has sucked ever since 3e came out.
Now it's linear blasting, quadratic HP, unless you go full-on Incantatrix/Halruaan Elder Metamagic cheese-fest.[/old man rant]

Killer Angel
2009-09-29, 03:42 AM
He's thinking 3.0 haste.

Which was really broken, giving an additional standard action (AKA 2 spell / round, without counting the quicken feat).

On the subject, sometimes (IMO) can be a bad idea banning evocation, but it's very situational: example: if your pc evolve from low levels, when you became 11°, it's very annoying to wait 4 other levels to learn greater shadow evocation to duplicate the useful Contingency... 'specially if is not available Craft contingency spell.

PhoenixRivers
2009-09-29, 04:35 AM
I don't get peoples weird fascination with disintegrate though, it's a thoroughly crappy spell that's only ever good for utility.


Disintegrate is a spell that is situationally awesome.

Against things generally considered the greatest threats in the game (casters), it's a solid spell that's effectively Save-or-die.

Against undead, it's essentially an "I Win" button, as it is a fort save (their weakness) that affects objects (it can affect undead). This is even more true than casters, as they don't generally sport a large amount of HP.

You don't throw Reflex Negates spells against rogues.
Don't throw a disintegrate against the fire giant.

Every spell has its place, and, in that place, disintegrate is useful as both utility and situational save-or-die.

Yora
2009-09-29, 05:33 AM
Orbs are teh broken!

If one spell is clearly superior to spells from the school, that is focused on that effect, there's clearly something wrong.

PhoenixRivers
2009-09-29, 05:36 AM
Orbs are teh broken!

If one spell is clearly superior to spells from the school, that is focused on that effect, there's clearly something wrong.

Orbs focus on the touch attack over the save. Evocation is crippled by the fact that it usually goes for saves.

Evocation's best spells are not damage spells, oddly enough. Wall of Force, Contingency...

Philaenas
2009-09-29, 05:48 AM
Orbs are teh broken!

If one spell is clearly superior to spells from the school, that is focused on that effect, there's clearly something wrong.

Only thing I find annoying about orb spells, is all those times you roll abysmally on your touch attack, which in my case happened LOTS of times. Same goes for disintegrate of course. Now with most evocation spells you do not have this problem. That is what I like about evocation, that you usually get at least something (unless people start having evasion of course, but then you still have force spells :smallsmile:).

Kaiyanwang
2009-09-29, 05:53 AM
Orbs are teh borken, of course.

Remember few things about orbs anyway:

Touch attack: yeah, you can quicken true strike, but there are scintillating scales or astral driftmetal armors

Targets: you don't always fight 4vs1. orb is orb, but is vs 1 target

Range: in spell compendium nerfed it (compare with fireball).

Tokiko Mima
2009-09-29, 06:15 AM
Orbs are teh broken!

If one spell is clearly superior to spells from the school, that is focused on that effect, there's clearly something wrong.

Well, I wouldn't say that. Orb spells aren't exactly the kings of damage, their primary advantage is that they rarely 'miss.' The fact that orb spells are so awesome is more an indication that the ranged touch mechanic is wonky.

In general, a wizard should probably avoid doing damage directly not because evocation/DD sucks, but because by doing that you're stepping on the toes of your allies. A barbarian, rogue, monk or fighter pretty much only does damage. Why would you want to take away the sense of accomplishment they get when they 'kill' a foe you've webbed/slowed/exhausted after you buffed them? You have options and they don't, so please... think of the non-casters. :smalltongue:

Cyclocone
2009-09-29, 06:30 AM
Disintegrate is a spell that is situationally awesome.

Against things generally considered the greatest threats in the game (casters), it's a solid spell that's effectively Save-or-die.

Except, you could use an actual save or die like Flesh to Stone, a 6th level Transmutation, just like Disintegrate.


Against undead, it's essentially an "I Win" button, as it is a fort save (their weakness) that affects objects (it can affect undead).

But so does Glasstrike.


This is even more true than casters, as they don't generally sport a large amount of HP.
You don't throw Reflex Negates spells against rogues.
Don't throw a disintegrate against the fire giant.

Every spell has its place, and, in that place, disintegrate is useful as both utility and situational save-or-die.

It ends up being either a lame SoD that requires an attack roll and might not actually kill the target, or a lame blasting spell that does (almost) nothing on a save.
On second thought, I'll actually retract my statement about Disintegrate being usefull for utility; a fighter with an adamantine sword would be just as good for making holes in walls.


Now, don't get me wrong, I still consider Disintegrate to be good if you're fighting liches in a core-only game. Maybe it's just that I've always found Disintegrate underwhelming from 3.5 and onwards.

Kaiyanwang
2009-09-29, 07:04 AM
IMHO disintegrate can be great for versatility. You only have to be imaginative, like target pillars, or making an hole whre the fighter bull rushes en and "cleans" the side of the corridor and so on.

After all, in the same slot you have a spell that can damage an opponent, can crit and can creatively change the environment. Is not so powerful but deserves attention.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-29, 08:11 AM
Fixed that for you there. Because Enchantment is easy to defend against and there's otherwise plenty of save-or-whatever going around. Evocation's problem is just that it isn't (or isn't perceived to be) as good as people think it should.

(Lesser case with Illusion too.)

I actually agree with this. Enchantment provides very little that can't be better done elsewhere. Mind affecting is a common immunity among mobs, and those mobs that are vulnerable often have high will saves. I wouldn't want to drop illusion AND enchantment, simply because that reduces your amount of will save targetting abilities, but illusion is better, so no point keeping enchantment around.

I do like evocation...but it's definitely one of the less painful schools to drop.

Kaiyanwang
2009-09-29, 08:16 AM
The cool things of enchantment is about manipulate enemies. Of course, in a campaign in wich you only nuke things, it seems weak.

But if you think about controlled enemies that accomplish your plans (sometimes without recognizing it) it gains appeal.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-29, 08:36 AM
This is true, but clever use of illusion spells can generally accomplish the same things through less overt means...at least, if it was likely at all to happen via enchantment.

It's also a very small school. Lets put it this way...you can't even fill your automatic 2 spells a level with enchantment unless you really dig through splatbooks. This isn't even accounting for the fact that some are pretty worthless.

PhoenixRivers
2009-09-29, 08:56 AM
Except, you could use an actual save or die like Flesh to Stone, a 6th level Transmutation, just like Disintegrate.



But so does Glasstrike.



It ends up being either a lame SoD that requires an attack roll and might not actually kill the target, or a lame blasting spell that does (almost) nothing on a save.
On second thought, I'll actually retract my statement about Disintegrate being usefull for utility; a fighter with an adamantine sword would be just as good for making holes in walls.


Now, don't get me wrong, I still consider Disintegrate to be good if you're fighting liches in a core-only game. Maybe it's just that I've always found Disintegrate underwhelming from 3.5 and onwards.

Yes. You can memorize Flesh to Stone, Glasstrike, and Passwall, and cover getting through passages, mages, or undead.

Or you could memorize Disintegrate.

It reminds me of the comic where Nale and Elan are comparing class selection. Nale is a Fighter/Sorceror/Rogue... Elan just went Bard. And they're comparable.

Hammer. Nail. We don't need to really reinvent the wheel.

EDIT: Not to mention the other applications. Ever thought of a ranged sunder with a ranged touch spell? Works really well for a wide variety of situations. It creates difficult terrain, creates flat charging ground for teammates, and more.

In short: It's passable in killing low will save enemies, and good for utility.

Bagelz
2009-09-29, 09:20 AM
specializing schools are they a waste? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126502)
one school wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126092)
is evocation really that bad? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126323)
being batman by Logic ninja (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19085) (i highly suggest this one)
tips on filling your spellbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=126064)(has lots of other links)

Kaiyanwang
2009-09-29, 09:23 AM
It's also a very small school. Lets put it this way...you can't even fill your automatic 2 spells a level with enchantment unless you really dig through splatbooks. This isn't even accounting for the fact that some are pretty worthless.

Maybe a good reason to not specialize - not to necessarily ban.

I noticed it too, anyway. Few spells, even in spaltbooks.

Optimystik
2009-09-29, 09:46 AM
Evocation and Enchantment are inferior because Illusion can do BOTH of their jobs, PLUS its own. Conjuration can also do Evocation's blasting job.

The clincher is that both Conjuration and Illusion have unique and highly useful effects that no other school can duplicate. Conjuration has Teleportation and Summoning/Calling effects; Illusion can mimic just about every other school to some degree, along with having the best defensive magic behind Abjuration, particularly at early levels. Thus, dropping these two is far more painful than dropping Evocation and Enchantment. Evocation's most useful spell (Contingency) can also be duplicated by Illusion or Limited Wish.

EDIT: Scratch L.Wish, since if you've forbidden Evocation it will be outside your acceptable spell replacement range.

Kylarra
2009-09-29, 10:10 AM
Range: in spell compendium nerfed it (compare with fireball).Orb of force has the same range as a fireball (but no rider in exchange for it).

Myrmex
2009-09-29, 12:38 PM
The orb spells aren't broken; metamagic reducers are. You can get very nearly the same results with Force Missiles or Hail Storm using Incantatrix & Arcane Thesis. The only advantage orbs have is that they aren't stopped by Epic SR, so you have high damage offense against anything without an astronomical touch AC. Typical SR can usually be overcome with Assay Spell Resistance.


not save or die... save or lose... and many are just lose without any save.

Yes, but making someone lose for 4 rounds, while it offers your team a tactical advantage, doesn't actually solve an encounter. You still need to bypass the monster somehow without it coming back with help, etc.

Also, most of the effects you are thinking of are easily circumventable. Any competent melee brute can smash any of the wall spells with a full attack or two (since you banned evocation, say goodbye to a wall of force that doesn't offer a save), and all the fogs are dispersable with a level two spell.

sonofzeal
2009-09-29, 01:11 PM
The orb spells aren't broken; metamagic reducers are. You can get very nearly the same results with Force Missiles or Hail Storm using Incantatrix & Arcane Thesis. The only advantage orbs have is that they aren't stopped by Epic SR, so you have high damage offense against anything without an astronomical touch AC. Typical SR can usually be overcome with Assay Spell Resistance.
It's less that they're broken, and more that they're in the wrong school. =P

Also, the no-SR no-save thing is pretty powerful. Touch attacks are usually pretty trivial to make; it's almost even better than Magic Missile in that they can critical, and carry precision damage. I could see a legitimate argument for removing/nerfing them.

Myrmex
2009-09-29, 01:15 PM
It's less that they're broken, and more that they're in the wrong school. =P

Also, the no-SR no-save thing is pretty powerful. Touch attacks are usually pretty trivial to make; it's almost even better than Magic Missile in that they can critical, and carry precision damage. I could see a legitimate argument for removing/nerfing them.

I dunno, against most opponents where touch attacks are trivial, I'd rather be using a different spell, since 10d6 to a Purple Worm or whatever really isn't that spectacular.

Agree that they're in the wrong school, though.

DragoonWraith
2009-09-29, 01:16 PM
I definitely like Enchantment; I tend to put Charm to great use. Especially in city-based campaigns, it's a lot more useful (humanoids are less often immune to it, more likely to have things you want them to give you "willingly" that you couldn't just take).

Mostly, I don't like direct damage on a caster. Everyone can do direct damage, and for many characters, that's all they can do (but can sometimes do it quite well). A caster has other options, and I feel he should use them. Buffing, debuffing, and battlefield control make the most sense for caster options, I think.

Lycanthromancer
2009-09-29, 01:28 PM
<snip>if your pc evolve from low levels, when you became 11°,<snip>He would likely die unless he was resistant or immune to cold.

taltamir
2009-09-29, 02:36 PM
I actually agree with this. Enchantment provides very little that can't be better done elsewhere. Mind affecting is a common immunity among mobs, and those mobs that are vulnerable often have high will saves. I wouldn't want to drop illusion AND enchantment, simply because that reduces your amount of will save targetting abilities, but illusion is better, so no point keeping enchantment around.

I do like evocation...but it's definitely one of the less painful schools to drop.

yes, generally speaking a lot of monsters are "mindless". that means they are immune to mind effecting, but incapable of saving against illusions (aka, always auto fail their saves against illusions).

Tyndmyr
2009-09-29, 03:12 PM
All the more reason to drop enchantment instead of illusion. =)

Of course, like vampires, there are some that are immune, but not mindless.

Starbuck_II
2009-09-29, 03:20 PM
yes, generally speaking a lot of monsters are "mindless". that means they are immune to mind effecting, but incapable of saving against illusions (aka, always auto fail their saves against illusions).

Nightmare Spinner Adaptation lets you use Mind-affecting spells on creature immune to mind affecting (even Mindblank).