PDA

View Full Version : Blasting: Bad or Just Worse?



nekomata2
2009-12-07, 12:35 PM
Blasting, people who don't understand the true power of magic love it. Even people who do, sometimes love using it.

Now I'm curious. Is blasting really a bad option for a arcane caster, or just inferior to other things he could be doing? Is it actually hurting the party to have the wizard use the generally inferior Fireball?

I'm curious because I group I play with is basically all noobs, and the sorcerer would prefer to take spells like burning hands and magic missile rather than grease, and it seems like its because she feels like she is doing more with her actions, despite me repeatedly telling her that is not true.

subject42
2009-12-07, 12:42 PM
It's been my experience that low-level blasting isn't too bad. The problems tend to show up when you're at higher levels.

Most blasty spells have a damage cap that limits their usefulness at higher levels. Combined with the fact that most high-level monsters have energy resistance and spell resistance, the utility of "I make it go kaboom" starts to drop off.

A third level caster rockin' the magic missile can be fun, though, especially since you can always refocus later on.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 12:43 PM
It's not actually bad, if you blast smart. For example, AOE spells are amazingly powerful when facing large quantities of mooks. Some of the low level single target nukes are *great* at killing solo mobs.

It tends to diverge more at higher levels, where hp numbers are huge, and non-damage spells have gotten more and more powerful.

I might have to write a good evocation/blaster guide someday.

Yukitsu
2009-12-07, 12:43 PM
In my opinion, it's actually often bad, unless the DM throws crowds at you, or you know how to fully optimize it. If it's a few big brutes, a melee bruiser can do more damage than a blasty spell. You need large groups of targets or you need metamagic shenanigans to make it on par with melee or better.

RagnaroksChosen
2009-12-07, 12:48 PM
In my opinion, it's actually often bad, unless the DM throws crowds at you, or you know how to fully optimize it. If it's a few big brutes, a melee bruiser can do more damage than a blasty spell. You need large groups of targets or you need metamagic shenanigans to make it on par with melee or better.

right but any decent blaster is going to have metamagic to increase it.

You can do a lot with blasting. I had a magic missile mage that could blast and do a decent amount of dmg... id say on par with a marginally optimized barbarian.

Person_Man
2009-12-07, 12:48 PM
In terms of damage output, it tends to be a lot lower then Sir Charge-a-lot or even a good bow build. The exceptions are when your DM throws a lot of mooks at you or when you really know what you're doing with metamagic abuse.

In comparison to other things a full caster can do (battlefield control, mind control, summoning, buff-bot, toolbox) it's pretty much the weakest option.

Having said that, it's still stronger then most other "weak" things in D&D (Monks, Samurai, Weapon Focus, half-casting, etc).

Andras
2009-12-07, 12:48 PM
As usual, it really depends on your DM's style.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-12-07, 12:49 PM
It's not actually bad, if you blast smart. For example, AOE spells are amazingly powerful when facing large quantities of mooks. Some of the low level single target nukes are *great* at killing solo mobs.

It tends to diverge more at higher levels, where hp numbers are huge, and non-damage spells have gotten more and more powerful.

I might have to write a good evocation/blaster guide someday.
Magic Missile
Scorching Ray
Seeking Ray
Unicorn Arrow
Orb of X
Enervation
Defenestrating Sphere
Howling Chain
Wings of Flurry
Disintegrate
Avasculate
Blackfire
Maw of Chaos
Streamers

That about covers it.

Morty
2009-12-07, 12:53 PM
Just worse, I say. A blaster wizard or sorcered won't be much better or worse than the rest of an unoptimized party.

snoopy13a
2009-12-07, 01:07 PM
Just worse, I say. A blaster wizard or sorcered won't be much better or worse than the rest of an unoptimized party.

I think that's the key. A blaster wizard might actually be better for a group with a fighter, rogue, cleric, and healbot cleric than an optimized one who would unbalance it.

Another point is if the DM will tailor NPCs towards the actual group or an standardized group at that level. If the NPCs are based on the actual srengths and abilities of a group than optimization becomes a zero-sum game. In this case, there is no advantage to optimize as optimization will result in more difficult encounters. On the other hand, if NPCs are based around a standard difficulty based on the level than optimization makes encounters easier.

Overall, there is really no right or wrong way to create characters if the DM tailors adventures strictly based off of the group's ability. In this case, having a "weak link" wouldn't hurt the group. However, an unbalanced group can make the adventure less fun for those with less effective characters.

But, if the DM tailors adventures based off of a standard "average" or even "optimized" character then a "weak link" will hurt the group as that character won't pull his or her weight.

To sum up, it depends entirely on your game and your gaming philosophies. In some games, a fighter character is a liabilty while in other games, a fighter character isn't a liability as the DM will lessen difficulty to compensate for the fighter's lesser effectiveness.

Myrmex
2009-12-07, 01:16 PM
Unoptimized blasting against single targets is usually bad. Bad as in the fighter can do what you do all day long without using up precious spell slots. Unoptimized blasty wizards will actually be weaker than core fighters for most of their career.

With metamagic abuse, the much maligned evocation school is actually really brutal, because you can be doing 100s of damage to multiple targets.

Without metamagic abuse, blasting is situational. As mentioned above, against large groups of creatures, fireball is actually pretty good, because your average damage will be high, and you're hurting everything at once (advantageous in the action economy). Doing fire damage against [cold] creatures, or things with regenerate, is also helpful, but the advantages of elemental damage are more situational.

Typically, you can do something that gives the party a better over all advantage than straight damage, like battlefield control or debuffing. If there are one or two heavies on the battlefield, say with 100HP, you're much better off debuffing one, putting a couple in a solid fog, and buffing the party fighter. The more HP & monsters on the battlefield, the more efficient debuffs, buffs, and control is, and the less efficient unoptimized blasting is. This is because HP damage rarely has effects outside of just damage- an injured monster still hits just as hard, moves just as fast, and is generally just as dangerous as an uninjured one. Slow and/or haste is almost always a better choice than fireball or lightning bolt, unless you can kill everything with a couple blasty spells. The longer combat goes on, the better non-damaging spells are.

Zovc
2009-12-07, 01:16 PM
Has no one mentioned save or die spells?

Myrmex
2009-12-07, 01:18 PM
Has no one mentioned save or die spells?

They're typically worse than blasty spells.

Wings of Peace
2009-12-07, 01:22 PM
My opinion on blasting is that it's binary. You are either not blasting at optimal efficiency and wasting actions that could be spent performing other tasks or you are over optimized and can one shot a mob of Tarrasques in which case you're winning but you're not really having fun. This includes SoDs to an extent.

ericgrau
2009-12-07, 01:24 PM
In my opinion, it's actually often bad, unless the DM throws crowds at you, or you know how to fully optimize it. If it's a few big brutes, a melee bruiser can do more damage than a blasty spell. You need large groups of targets or you need metamagic shenanigans to make it on par with melee or better.

There's such a thing as high level blasting without metamagic shenanigans?


[save or dies] They're typically worse than blasty spells.
+1. I dunno how the SoD people try to keep jumping onto the battlefield control over blasty bandwagon, but between saves, single target not area, lower avg. reflex saves on most monsters, stacking issues with ally damage, and immunities to many SoDs on high level monsters, you're usually better off nuking it. Control, status effect buff, nuke then SoD.

Btw, just as a test case I figured it out on a CR 14ish red dragon before. SoD was slower, and 2/3 of spells people mentioned in that thread just plain didn't work due to immunities and what not.

Myrmex
2009-12-07, 01:31 PM
My opinion on blasting is that it's binary. You are either not blasting at optimal efficiency and wasting actions that could be spent performing other tasks or you are over optimized and can one shot a mob of Tarrasques in which case you're winning but you're not really having fun. This includes SoDs to an extent.

It's not a extreme as that. When there are a lot of low HP monsters on the battlefield, blasting gets better, and is sometimes even necessary. Making low HD monsters dangerous in groups isn't that hard for the first 12 levels of the game. Once you break level 10, there are many more ways for characters to avoid mundane attacks that you need to dig for appropriate monsters.


+1. I dunno how the SoD people try to keep jumping onto the battlefield control over blasty bandwagon, but between saves, single target not area, lower avg. reflex saves on most monsters and stacking issues with ally damage, you're usually better off nuking it. Control, status effect buff, nuke then SoD.

I like efficient actions. SoDs are horribly inefficient, and trivially easy for a DM to defend against with anything he wants to be a challenge. A cloak, elite array, and a couple levels of monk is +5 to a monster's saves, with out changing the difficulty of the encounter for anyone but the guy who thinks Baleful Polymorph or Disintegrate are good spells.

quiet1mi
2009-12-07, 01:42 PM
Because I play a beguiler, my DM typically throws things that are outright immune to my shenanigans (Intelligent Undead, Golems with True-Sight) or resists my shenanigans often enough so I do not outshine everybody (High Will save monsters, high spell resistance monsters), or things that can resist my battlefield control or negate the buffs of the party (monsters with blindsight/sense, tremor sense and high balance, jump and climb modifiers ) that sometimes a simple heavy crossbow is my best option... it may not be much but it is an extra 1d10 of damage that was not dealt... pittance compared to the minotaur and the ogre in the party but it is better than sitting on my hands...

Sometimes I go so far as to use Alchemist fire because I know it cranks out continuous damage.

SurlySeraph
2009-12-07, 01:45 PM
+1. I dunno how the SoD people try to keep jumping onto the battlefield control over blasty bandwagon, but between saves, single target not area, lower avg. reflex saves on most monsters, stacking issues with ally damage, and immunities to many SoDs on high level monsters, you're usually better off nuking it. Control, status effect buff, nuke then SoD.

Btw, just as a test case I figured it out on a CR 14ish red dragon before. SoD was slower, and 2/3 of spells people mentioned in that thread just plain didn't work due to immunities and what not.

That's why you debuff it and then save-or-die.

Person_Man
2009-12-07, 01:52 PM
Overall, there is really no right or wrong way to create characters if the DM tailors adventures strictly based off of the group's ability. In this case, having a "weak link" wouldn't hurt the group. However, an unbalanced group can make the adventure less fun for those with less effective characters.

But, if the DM tailors adventures based off of a standard "average" or even "optimized" character then a "weak link" will hurt the group as that character won't pull his or her weight.

To sum up, it depends entirely on your game and your gaming philosophies. In some games, a fighter character is a liabilty while in other games, a fighter character isn't a liability as the DM will lessen difficulty to compensate for the fighter's lesser effectiveness.

While I agree with you in general, I would add that the smartest Batman Wizard never talks about how great he is. He spends most of his time flying beneath the radar, casting helpful but low key spells and buffing friends (instead of himself), and only whips out the crazy awesomeness when he absolutely needs to. This kind of elastic power level is very difficult for a DM to plan for if everyone else in the party is unoptimized.


DM: You open the door, and you see a young red dragon, surrounded by a dozen kobold minions. Roll Initiative.

Wizard: This dungeon is taking too long. I discharge my Moment of Prescience to give me a +25 to my Initiative check. (Rolls). Is it possible for anyone to beat an Initiative of 34? No? Good, I cast Quickened Enervation, and then Dominate Monster on the dragon. Does he make a DC 33 Will Save after losing 3 negative levels?

DM: Um, did I say young red dragon surrounded by kobolds? I meant a Great Wyrm surrounded by War Trolls.


Now if the player is smart, he will rarely do this. But I've seen it happen.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 01:54 PM
SoDs are useful...but highly situational. I typically pack few if any of them(depends on level). Blasty spells are almost invariably useful. Especially if you picked up stuff that ignores SR. Force damage is also applicable to almost any situation.

Thus, I have more of them. Still, there are buffs you should never, ever be without, and some debuffs/friendly buffs are pretty generically useful too. These tend to form the bulk of my spells per day.

Exact loadout varies, but replacing SoDs with blaster spells isn't usually going to hurt you. Likewise, you can go quite light on party buffs if you wish. Optimal? Nah. But you can still have a pretty reliable damage output.

I never, ever rely on illusion or enchantment(usually ban enchant anyhow), due to the ridiculous amount of times it's not useful. A *lot* of these coincide with times SoDs are also not useful. Thus, taking these is usually an either/or choice.

erikun
2009-12-07, 01:58 PM
Remember that without metamagic reducers, metamagiced blast spells have a lower DC and thus are more likely to be saved against. A Twin Fireball has a -6 DC compared to a level-appropriate spell, and if the target(s) save against it, the extra damage from the metamagic Twin gets cancelled by the half damage from the successful save.

It's not that Otiluke's Freezing Sphere (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/freezingSphere.htm) is a bad spell, just that Acid Fog (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/acidFog.htm) will pin the targets in place, do damage, ignores saves and SR, and removed the target from combat so you can blast everything else. (or blast the ones stuck in the fog)

Optimystik
2009-12-07, 01:59 PM
Magic Missile
Scorching Ray
Seeking Ray
Unicorn Arrow
Orb of X
Enervation
Defenestrating Sphere
Howling Chain
Wings of Flurry
Disintegrate
Avasculate
Blackfire
Maw of Chaos
Streamers

That about covers it.

Either this, or be a Psion. There's your blaster guide.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 02:07 PM
Remember that without metamagic reducers, metamagiced blast spells have a lower DC and thus are more likely to be saved against.

While true, this can also be negated by using no-save spells. Rays are popular single target nukes.

Gorbash
2009-12-07, 02:08 PM
Wizard: This dungeon is taking too long. I discharge my Moment of Prescience to give me a +25 to my Initiative check. (Rolls). Is it possible for anyone to beat an Initiative of 34? No? Good, I cast Quickened Enervation, and then Dominate Monster on the dragon. Does he make a DC 33 Will Save after losing 3 negative levels?

DM: Um, did I say young red dragon surrounded by kobolds? I meant a Great Wyrm surrounded by War Trolls.


From my experience, this would end in DM saying: Well, what do you know, a natural 20. Next!

So yeah, I totally agree with you. Throwing SoDs when party is in deep guano is a sure way to succeed and meanwhile buff/debuff.

Telonius
2009-12-07, 02:21 PM
Blasting isn't necessarily a bad option (meaning an option that won't actually do anything to the opponent). You do have to work a bit to make sure that it doesn't turn into a bad option.

The first concern you have, is that the thing you're fighting might be immune to the sort of damage you're flinging. Fireball won't be much use against a Fire Elemental, for example. Energy Substitution (as well as things like the Archmage's Mastery of Elements high arcana) can help you keep your options open. Sonic is typically the best element to use, since there are relatively few things immune to it. (Formians are the big exceptions).

The other concern you'll have, is that many monsters have Spell Resistance, which applies to most* blasty spells. You can cast things like Assay Resistance, but this does use up precious spell slots (and some DMs are known to ban the spell). The other options are taking craptacular feats like Spell Focus (Evocation), or doing other complicated and/or cheesy things to boost your caster level.
* Orb spells are the big exceptions; there's a reason that blasters love them.

The third concern is that energy spells (which form the backbone of most blasty builds) are fairly easy for higher-level opponents to negate. Resist Energy is very, very easy to get. Sufficiently high-level Rogues can practically ignore things with reflex saves (like Fireball).

There are other concerns with a blaster build too, but I think those summarize the biggest problems. The real challenge for a player who wants to make a blaster that contributes to the party, is to make sure that you can still do something useful when you fail on one or more of those concerns. Always keep a couple utility spells (in scroll form if necessary) for those times when you really aren't going to do anything. That's the time to Summon Monster, or debuff with Dispel Magic, hang back and throw Tanglefoot bags, or even (gods forbid) pull out your crossbow.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 02:26 PM
If the situation where you have nothing better to do occurs frequently, I suggest a reserve feat. Beats using a crossbow, generally.

The White Knight
2009-12-07, 02:26 PM
From my experience, this would end in DM saying: Well, what do you know, a natural 20. Next!

Totally. I'm playing a Wizard for the first time, and I don't think my DM likes my style. My Save-or-X spells are almost universally Save-with-flying-colors-and-then-laugh spells. I'm at the point where I'm considering switching strategies toward Conjuration blasting (since I've banned Evocation).

Soras Teva Gee
2009-12-07, 02:31 PM
If you aren't using metamagic and either the Arcane Thesis feat or Ultimate Magus levels its hard to argue that Blasting is just worse. There just isn't a damaging enough spell out there without enhancement. (And using good secondary effects is largely conceding the point)

That said with those options you can pump damage up into the several hundreds with only some ranged touch attacks to roll.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 02:38 PM
Totally. I'm playing a Wizard for the first time, and I don't think my DM likes my style. My Save-or-X spells are almost universally Save-with-flying-colors-and-then-laugh spells. I'm at the point where I'm considering switching strategies toward Conjuration blasting (since I've banned Evocation).

This is actually the biggest problem with SoDs, IMO. The DM simply doesn't want it to go off at any point where it would end the fight significantly early. As a DM I roll all important dice, like SoD saves, publicly, but I recognize Im the exception here.

If he "saves" against everything, he's clearly cheating the system. Thus, the best solution is to remove the saves. PW:Pain is a favorite of mine. Continue using "no save; just die" types of spells until he either realizes his cheating has negated a completely normal playstyle, or bans ridiculous amounts of spells. See also, highly optimized blasting. If he doesn't pick up on it, eventually, the non-stop bans/endless saves will begin to look blatantly unfair to the other players. Revolt.

BRC
2009-12-07, 02:46 PM
As a DM, I actually prefer my casters to be blasty.


The way I see it, an Ideal monster is one who dies after the wizard shoots it with fire, the fighter bashes it's face in, the ranger fills it with arrows, and the rogue stabs it in the kidneys and takes it's lunch money, because everybody got a chance to kill it. That's fun, everybody high-fives and says "Alright, we killed the monster".

What's not fun is when the Wizard waves his hands and makes it's brain explode with nobody else contributing. It's only slightly less not-fun to have the ranger fill it with arrows, the rogue stab it's kidneys and steal it's lunch money, the fighter bash it's face in, and then have the Wizard make it's brain explode with a spell that would have worked just as well if the monster was at full health. People want to think "We killed the monster" not "The wizard killed the monster"

If a Wizard starts exploding brains left and right, I, the DM, am forced to bring in things that brain-explosions don't work on. The Wizard will probably catch on soon enough and, hopefully, start blasting, instead of looking through the books for spells that make the monster's heart explode.

Now, this isn't to say Save-or-X spells don't have a place in DnD, they do, but they should be treated like a seasoning. Occasionally it's good to wave your hands and make somebodies brain explode, but it shouldn't be a regular occurrence. If you keep it up, the DM will have creatures with really high saves and immunities to your spell of choice show up and mob you until you are a smear on the ground.

That said, as far as I can tell, Blasting is not a bad way to play. It's not the best way by far in terms of character efficiency, but playing a blasting wizard isn't like playing a dagger-wielding fighter when you could use a greatsword. It's more like playing a greatsword-wielding fighter when you could be wielding an M-16.

SurlySeraph
2009-12-07, 02:56 PM
The other options are taking craptacular feats like Spell Focus (Evocation), or doing other complicated and/or cheesy things to boost your caster level.

Actually, raising your CL isn't too difficult. There's Bloodline of Fire for +2, Elemental Spellcasting for +2, Spell Thematics for +1, Arcane Thesis for +2, and Arcanist's Gloves for +2 3/day. That'd let you cast a CL15 Fireball at 6th level without much trouble. Add Scorching Spell to get through immunity and you're set.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 03:01 PM
Toss in an Ioun Stone. I prefer things that boost caster level overall, not things that boost just one spell. Even as a blaster, variety is quite helpful.

Person_Man
2009-12-07, 03:01 PM
From my experience, this would end in DM saying: Well, what do you know, a natural 20. Next!

I let my players roll all of the dice (including the attacks and Saves of their enemies) to avoid this temptation. If BBEG's never or rarely fail Saves at inopportune (from the DM's perspective) moments due to DM chicanery, it just makes the PCs distrust the DM, and leads them to use No Save magic. Let the dice fall where they may, and always let the players see the results. Trust me, in the long run, it will lead to much more exciting games.

Zovc
2009-12-07, 03:05 PM
From my experience, this would end in DM saying: Well, what do you know, a natural 20. Next!

From my experience, this DM should have just said "NO! DON'T KILL MY DRAGON YET! I'LL LET YOU DO IT IN A FEW ROUNDS!"

...or he could have been prepared for how powerful his player's characters are...

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-12-07, 04:39 PM
What people are missing in the discussion of SoD spells is that some of them are better than dying. Quickened Dispel Magic+Dominate Person on the evil Emperor's personal bodyguard is basically a free meatshield that you can throw off a cliff if you feel like. Save-or-die isn't the same as save-or-give me a cohort at CR+2.

Doc Roc
2009-12-07, 04:44 PM
The actual issue with blasting is that, yes, I can kit out a nightmare that meta's orbs into the dark heavens and calls down bloodied thunder.

No one else in the group is gonna have fun. And if I don't do that, I won't really be contributing that much.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-07, 04:47 PM
From my experience, this DM should have just said "NO! DON'T KILL MY DRAGON YET! I'LL LET YOU DO IT IN A FEW ROUNDS!"

...or he could have been prepared for how powerful his player's characters are...

I actually did lose a rust dragon to an assassin this way on fri. First time the assassin did something worthwhile with his death attack in the entire frigging campaign. I rolled precisely 1 less than needed to save(shoulda been an easy save), and the players erupted in cheering.

Sure, we ended a bit earlier than planned, but it was a good way to finish out the night. Things happen, people get lucky, some fights go down more rapidly than planned. Them's the breaks. Just going with them, rather than trying to fight them, results in far more odd things happening. Earlier in the night, wild jumping of the rails resulted in players happily killing off kobolds in truly chaotic evil fashion...just because they were kobolds. One of the players had a soft spot when they found a large group of younglings looking on in horror after the slaughter. They now are trying to care for 14 frightened baby kobolds. I have absolutely no idea where this is gonna go, but trying to keep babies safe in a dungeon is hilarious(there used to be 15 baby kobolds).

Zovc
2009-12-07, 04:49 PM
What people are missing in the discussion of SoD spells is that some of them are better than dying. Quickened Dispel Magic+Dominate Person on the evil Emperor's personal bodyguard is basically a free meatshield that you can throw off a cliff if you feel like. Save-or-die isn't the same as save-or-give me a cohort at CR+2.

I'm not sure 'which side' you're taking. On the other hand I think you're saying they are "Save or be-not-quite-as-bad-as-dead," but your example is, as far as the target's allies are concerned worse than that person being dead.

Instead of you killing my partner who I've been fighting alongside my entire life, you've made him fight me to the death--I now have to kill him or be killed by him.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-12-07, 04:53 PM
I'm not sure 'which side' you're taking. On the other hand I think you're saying they are "Save or be-not-quite-as-bad-as-dead," but your example is, as far as the target's allies are concerned worse than that person being dead.

Instead of you killing my partner who I've been fighting alongside my entire life, you've made him fight me to the death--I now have to kill him or be killed by him.I meant better from the perspective of the Beguiler who now has an NPC meatshield for as long as he feels like keeping him alive. From the perspective of the BBEG whose personal bodyguard just swaps teams, it is definitely not better.

SurlySeraph
2009-12-07, 04:54 PM
The actual issue with blasting is that, yes, I can kit out a nightmare that meta's orbs into the dark heavens and calls down bloodied thunder.

No one else in the group is gonna have fun. And if I don't do that, I won't really be contributing that much.

Or you could only metamagic them halfway to ridiculousness. Say, Maximize and Empower, but don't Twin or Split Ray.

Yukitsu
2009-12-07, 04:56 PM
That still kinda sucks though. The problem in my opinion is when those spells stop increasing in damage because they've hit the caster level caps.

Zovc
2009-12-07, 04:59 PM
Okay, Sstoopidtallkid, I just wanted to make sure that's what you meant.


That still kinda sucks though. The problem in my opinion is when those spells stop increasing in damage because they've hit the caster level caps.

This, in my opinion, demonstrates a success of Psionics. While I have to pay for my spells to scale, their scaling is only limited by my manifestor level. (A.K.A. My powers don't stop scaling, so long as I'm willing to pay for them to do so.)

horseboy
2009-12-07, 05:28 PM
Even at low levels, it's not that great an idea. Are there 4 or more kobolds? If yes, then sleep. Boom, everybody is safe. If no and you want to do damage what are your options? 1d3 acid splash, 1d4+1 magic missile or walk up behind the one the thief is fighting, poke it in the back, wave "hi" and give the rogue and extra d6 damage. I know which one is going to do more good there, and it's not the two blast spells.

Person_Man
2009-12-07, 05:29 PM
I actually did lose a rust dragon to an assassin this way on fri. First time the assassin did something worthwhile with his death attack in the entire frigging campaign. I rolled precisely 1 less than needed to save(shoulda been an easy save), and the players erupted in cheering.

You threw a Rust Dragon (Draconomicon?) against your PCs? IIRC, they have a breath weapon which destroys every metal item the PC has in their possession (though magic items get Saves). I'm all for being tough on PCs (I used one in a one-shot campaign against a party of Tome of Battle classes, so they were all equally nerfed but not entirely screwed), but potentially destroying everything valuable that the PCs own in 1 round seems a bit harsh. I'm glad they killed so quickly.

Karoht
2009-12-07, 06:21 PM
As a DM, I actually prefer my casters to be blasty.


The way I see it, an Ideal monster is one who dies after the wizard shoots it with fire, the fighter bashes it's face in, the ranger fills it with arrows, and the rogue stabs it in the kidneys and takes it's lunch money, because everybody got a chance to kill it. That's fun, everybody high-fives and says "Alright, we killed the monster".

What's not fun is when the Wizard waves his hands and makes it's brain explode with nobody else contributing. It's only slightly less not-fun to have the ranger fill it with arrows, the rogue stab it's kidneys and steal it's lunch money, the fighter bash it's face in, and then have the Wizard make it's brain explode with a spell that would have worked just as well if the monster was at full health. People want to think "We killed the monster" not "The wizard killed the monster"

If a Wizard starts exploding brains left and right, I, the DM, am forced to bring in things that brain-explosions don't work on. The Wizard will probably catch on soon enough and, hopefully, start blasting, instead of looking through the books for spells that make the monster's heart explode.

Now, this isn't to say Save-or-X spells don't have a place in DnD, they do, but they should be treated like a seasoning. Occasionally it's good to wave your hands and make somebodies brain explode, but it shouldn't be a regular occurrence. If you keep it up, the DM will have creatures with really high saves and immunities to your spell of choice show up and mob you until you are a smear on the ground.

That said, as far as I can tell, Blasting is not a bad way to play. It's not the best way by far in terms of character efficiency, but playing a blasting wizard isn't like playing a dagger-wielding fighter when you could use a greatsword. It's more like playing a greatsword-wielding fighter when you could be wielding an M-16.

I like this post. I especially like your M-16 analogy.

This is pretty much how I DM as well. The spell casters I play with all enjoy rolling buckets upon buckets of D6, so they tend to stay blasty for fun. Until I or the co-DM crank it to eleven, the blasty just isn't cutting it, so the SoD's come out as the emergency weapons. Though, my offensive casters tend to be sorcerers, so that flexibility of choice VS prepared casting might be why they feel comfortable doing it that way.

Chaelos
2009-12-07, 06:30 PM
I think blasting gets a lot of undeserved hate around the internet due to the prevalence of Batman/God Wizard builds and the shenanigans that can be pulled with them--to say nothing of the tendency we get to think of things in clinical, academic terms as opposed to "reality". Blasting absolutely has its uses, and any caster that doesn't have at least a few damage-oriented spells up his sleeve is going to be either bored or, at times, irrelevant in your standard, non-Tippy D&D game.

If I had to rank these things for general utility, in a non-optimized game run by people who usually don't frequent D&D boards: Buff/Utility>Blasting>Debuff>Control>SoD

My personal philosophy on this comes from years of playing in various groups that almost never do the "15 minutes of adventuring a day" model some people tout. Buffs and utility spells generally tend to last for hours/level, so we get the most out of those; blasting and control have been tremendously helpful, in light of past experience, at wiping out large numbers of enemies who've threatened to take out our melee characters; and finally, debuff + SoD tactics have killed (or at least crippled) most of the Boss we've come up against--but such creatures are fairly rare in our games, so, in terms of general utility, these spells are usually not worth as much as a well-placed fireball. I play casters like a swiss army knife, so I'll usually have at least a couple of Enervates up my sleeve, but it's a rare day I pull out the SoD's--unless I happen to know what we're going up against ahead of time, that is.

Again, note that these have usually been mid-low level games not played by optimizers (including all but one of the DMs over the years, and we even managed to thrash his monsters pretty savagely). It's been my experience that such a situation represents the "average" D&D game far better than a hardcore, 20-level multi-prestige-class Build Of Doom game, which tend to be more useful as thought-experiments than as actual playable models.

Karoht
2009-12-07, 06:33 PM
From my experience, this DM should have just said "NO! DON'T KILL MY DRAGON YET! I'LL LET YOU DO IT IN A FEW ROUNDS!"

...or he could have been prepared for how powerful his player's characters are...

Being prepared is the better way, indeed.

As for on the spot stuff...
I would have asked if the player planned on moving from the back to the front, and actually into the room in order to cast, seeing as line of sight is blocked. When they blunder into the room their magical presence activates an anti magic field that the caster will now have to get out of for anything of theirs to function. This would buy the dragon at least one action, enough to be a slight menace.

Next round, the caster attempts again, after moving out of the field. The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again. Upon a successful Knowledge: Arcana or similarly applicable skill, the caster realizes that the crystal is actually some form or Arcane Foci, one that acts as a magnet for offensive spells for a designated target, and tends to absorb any number of spells, usually between 3-10 depending on quality. Said Foci also typically has an astoundingly high SR. There is usually a control device to designate the target, like a ring or amulet. Upon realization of this and relaying relevant info to the party, the party can roll spot checks to spot what might be the control. Upon spotting a band of gold upon one of the dragon's horns, the spotter could then attempt to sunder said band. Or the melee (or ranger of the party) could go after the Foci. Or the caster could attempt to BLAST/Disintegrate/etc the foci and somehow overcome the SR.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-12-07, 06:36 PM
The issue with blasting is that you do the same thing everyone else does. The Barbarian and the Rogue already deal HP damage. So either you deal more than them, and they feel useless, or you deal less than them, and are useless. Or you can cast Haste, be more effective than them, but make them the ones who strike the killing blow. I'll take that option.

For those advocating Fireball to eliminate mooks, how often have you taken Whirlwind Attack or Great Cleave on meleers?

ericgrau
2009-12-07, 07:01 PM
Fireball at least gives something against 1-2 targets, and mass targets with good AoE even when you don't drop the first. Great cleave is awfully hard to actually hit multiple targets with and it has poor range.



Wizard: This dungeon is taking too long. I discharge my Moment of Prescience to give me a +25 to my Initiative check. (Rolls). Is it possible for anyone to beat an Initiative of 34? No? Good, I cast Quickened Enervation, and then Dominate Monster on the dragon. Does he make a DC 33 Will Save after losing 3 negative levels?
Yes, usually. Or his SR catches it. Or, at that level, he casts antimagic field. Unless you used half a dozen books to powergame your DCs and SR penetration far beyond what a wizard is normally capable of. Btw, congrats on giving him a -1 or -2 to his saves.

sambo.
2009-12-07, 07:06 PM
my $0.02:

having a couple of "You Take Damage NOW!" spells can be a very useful addition to any mages repertoire and can be used to great effect to help out the party.

but; focusing purely on blasting isn't a particularly good way to go.

Thrice Dead Cat
2009-12-07, 07:15 PM
my $0.02:

having a couple of "You Take Damage NOW!" spells can be a very useful addition to any mages repertoire and can be used to great effect to help out the party.

To this end, I'm a fan of things like Cloudkill or Enervation for effective HP damage.

Doc Roc
2009-12-07, 07:51 PM
I favor avasculate or it's bigger friend.
I also like DEATH BY THORNS. 1d4 rounds of incapacitation _if you save_.

Direct damage is you QQing while my warblade friend reduces you to pulp.

I've made Balors rage-quit.

Chaelos
2009-12-07, 08:00 PM
The issue with blasting is that you do the same thing everyone else does. The Barbarian and the Rogue already deal HP damage. So either you deal more than them, and they feel useless, or you deal less than them, and are useless. Or you can cast Haste, be more effective than them, but make them the ones who strike the killing blow. I'll take that option.

For those advocating Fireball to eliminate mooks, how often have you taken Whirlwind Attack or Great Cleave on meleers?

Ah, but the difference is your reach. The concept isn't so different from the God Wizard build, except that, with blasting, you play an Angry God. A melee character can hold a line or bowl over enemies adjacent to him, but an Angry God can rain fire and death down exactly where it will cause maximum devastation.

My favorite example of this came in a core-only game where our party of four (Paladin/Fighter, Bard, TalkyRogue and me, the Wizard), at level eight, were faced with a battalion strength invading army. We had managed to scrounge up a few dozen cavalry support NPC's, and, thanks to our knowledge of the terrain, we were able to shadow their army until it set up camp for the night. Our Rogue managed to take out two of their five casters in an ill-advised assassination mission (don't ask; wasn't my idea), and inadvertently tipped off the enemy we were coming.

I'm invisible and airborne, and I've already buffed the Paladin/Fighter up to dangerous proportions, but he and his cavalry were literally outnumbered twenty to one. The Bard is helping them out, but, again, there's only so much he can do. I've got the battlefield set up just the way I want it: our force's left and right flanks are protected via grease/web/solid fog spells, so the numbers don't matter so much for the moment.

Now comes the Angry God portion of the evening. I had devoted most of my level 3 spell slots to fireballs, except for one Haste and one for Wind Wall, and thanks to an earlier sidequest I had a Lesser Rod of Empowerment to play with. My first shot lands amidst the three surviving enemy mages (who happen to be close to a good portion of their archer force). (8d6)*1.5 damage wipes out the lot of them in one round; next round, I throw up a wind wall to prevent most of their surviving archer fire from coming into play.

Our fighting force has taken some losses, but they're doing well so far. They're about to get flanked, though, and the mercs are dropping very, very quickly. DM tells us that, in three more rounds, it'll just be the Paladin and the Bard left standing. Then the enemy cavalry makes a flanking maneuver and... runs straight into my solid fog spell. It's blasting time.

Fireballs rain down. Death and chaos ensue; our force holds the center, thanks entirely to the Paladin, and the enemy army breaks before I've even run out of spells.

It was a good day.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-12-07, 08:03 PM
Yes, usually. Or his SR catches it.
A great wrym has an SR of 28. A CL 25 caster has an 90% chance of passing.


Or, at that level, he casts antimagic field.
And he loses all his spells.

Mushroom Ninja
2009-12-07, 10:05 PM
Well, by the time I post this, most everything has probably been said about fireball as a blasting spell, but, here's what I've got playing around with the numbers on some 3rd level spells. For what it's worth:

Mookblasting
A comparison of Fireball, Stinking Cloud, and Sleet Storm

Level: 5
Spells: Fireball vs. Stinking Cloud vs. Sleet Storm
Party: 4 5th level characters
Your Spell DC: 18 (10(base) + 4(int) + 3(Level) +1 (Focus))

Encounter: 6 CR1s -- EL 5
Avg. HP: 12.24
Avg. Saves: Fort +3.00 Ref +2.85 (rounded to 3)

Fireball:
Your average damage on a failed save is 17.5. Your enemies have a 30% chance of success, so your weighted average damage is 12.25. This is higher than their average HP, so you should be able to blow the crap out of pretty much everything with a single shot assuming that they are all in a 20-radius sphere. A single casting of fireball should eliminate enough of the encounter to make the rest a pushover.

Stinking cloud:
Your enemies have a 30% chance of saving. If they fail, they become completely hosed for an average 3.5 turns. This means that, on average, they are hosed for 2.45 rounds. However, there is more to the spell. As long as the enemy is within the 20ft radius, they have to continue making saves on their turns if they saved. Also, getting out of the cloud can be difficult since it blocks sight past 5ft. Assuming the party is working well with you (i.e. they are waiting at the edges of the cloud to kill those coming out) and the enemies aren't immune (like undead), a single casting should make the encounter a pushover.

Sleet Storm:
The enemies have no sight whatsoever and must succeed balance checks to move at all. Even if they can move,it's only at half speed. Also, the 40-ft radius means that, even on a successful balance check, everyone but the guys on the edge are going to be stuck for a while. This means that you and your allies gets to deal with a steady trickle of mooks rather than a whole horde of them. A single casting should make most encounters easy.

Level: 7
Spells: Fireball vs. Stinking Cloud vs. Sleet Storm
Party: 4 7th level characters
Your Spell DC: 19 (10(base) + 5(int) + 3(Level) +1 (Focus))

Encounter: 6 CR2s -- EL 7
Avg. HP: 20.55
Avg. Saves: Fort +4.35 (rounded to 4) Ref +4.35 (rounded to 4)

Fireball:
Your average damage is 24.5 and their save chance is 30%. Therefore your weighted average damage is 17.15. This means that in an average casting of fireball you don't kill all of them. Although you knock them all down to less than 1/3 max HP, you don't reduce their damage output till your allies start hitting things.

Stinking Cloud:
Same as at Level 5

Sleet Storm:
Same as at Level 5

Level: 10
Spells: Fireball vs. Stinking Cloud vs. Sleet Storm
Party: 4 10th level characters
Your Spell DC: 20 (10(base) + 6(int) + 3(Level) +1 (Focus))

Encounter: 6 CR5s -- EL 10
Avg. HP: 56.33
Avg. Saves: Fort +7.47 (rounded to 7) Ref +5.82 (rounded to 6)

Fireball:
Your average damage is 35 and they have a 35% chance of saving. Your weighted average damage is 22.75 -- less than half of their average HP.

Stinking Cloud:
They have a 40% chance of saving meaning, if vulnerable, they are hosed for an average 2.1 rounds assuming they get out of the cloud in 1 round (which is not entirely likely).

Sleet Storm:
Works just as well as ever.



Source of Average values (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=386.0)

Pluto
2009-12-08, 01:04 AM
The issue with blasting is that you do the same thing everyone else does. The Barbarian and the Rogue already deal HP damage.

Eh.
If no one's running "control," there are problems.
But if you're blasting, you are the Barbarian or the Rogue.

Myrmex
2009-12-08, 02:37 AM
While I agree with you in general, I would add that the smartest Batman Wizard never talks about how great he is. He spends most of his time flying beneath the radar, casting helpful but low key spells and buffing friends (instead of himself), and only whips out the crazy awesomeness when he absolutely needs to. This kind of elastic power level is very difficult for a DM to plan for if everyone else in the party is unoptimized.


DM: You open the door, and you see a young red dragon, surrounded by a dozen kobold minions. Roll Initiative.

Wizard: This dungeon is taking too long. I discharge my Moment of Prescience to give me a +25 to my Initiative check. (Rolls). Is it possible for anyone to beat an Initiative of 34? No? Good, I cast Quickened Enervation, and then Dominate Monster on the dragon. Does he make a DC 33 Will Save after losing 3 negative levels?

DM: Um, did I say young red dragon surrounded by kobolds? I meant a Great Wyrm surrounded by War Trolls.


Now if the player is smart, he will rarely do this. But I've seen it happen.

That's a CR 13 vs. a ECL 15 party (at least). I imagine the fighter could have rushed it, followed by the rogue, and it would be dead the following round from SA dice.


What people are missing in the discussion of SoD spells is that some of them are better than dying. Quickened Dispel Magic+Dominate Person on the evil Emperor's personal bodyguard is basically a free meatshield that you can throw off a cliff if you feel like. Save-or-die isn't the same as save-or-give me a cohort at CR+2.

That spell is only going to nab you something useful once. Then the DM will sigh, kill it in an arbitrary fashion, and you'll realize Enchantment is probably the worst school ever (except for ray of stupidity and sleep).


The actual issue with blasting is that, yes, I can kit out a nightmare that meta's orbs into the dark heavens and calls down bloodied thunder.

No one else in the group is gonna have fun. And if I don't do that, I won't really be contributing that much.

A false dichotomy, to be sure.


The issue with blasting is that you do the same thing everyone else does. The Barbarian and the Rogue already deal HP damage. So either you deal more than them, and they feel useless, or you deal less than them, and are useless. Or you can cast Haste, be more effective than them, but make them the ones who strike the killing blow. I'll take that option.

Or, you deal more than them a couple times/day, say, with an UM build or non-nightstick DMM blaster-cleric build instead of using Arcane Thesis abuse + incantatrix. Or you are sneak attacking with rays. Or you prep a couple straight damage spells because you need to clear out a lot of mooks.


For those advocating Fireball to eliminate mooks, how often have you taken Whirlwind Attack or Great Cleave on meleers?

Frequently. With my current gaming group, 4 out of 5 meleers get great cleave.

Lycanthromancer
2009-12-08, 02:44 AM
<Battalion battle>Sounds to me as if the battlefield control kept you from being completely overrun. The grease spells, the solid fogs, and the wind wall basically kept your party alive long enough to allow those fireballs to do their jobs.

Otherwise, you probably would've lost on round 1. In abeyance, but inevitable.

Doc Roc
2009-12-08, 03:22 AM
A false dichotomy, to be sure.


How else am I to compete with the paladin who pushes out 300+ damage a hit with pounce?

Dimers
2009-12-08, 03:40 AM
The issue with blasting is that you do the same thing everyone else does. The Barbarian and the Rogue already deal HP damage. So either you deal more than them, and they feel useless, or you deal less than them, and are useless.

I like to have some direct-damage spells available for variety of damage type and placement. Unless the barbarian is a bit of a batman himself, he won't deal as well with high-DR creatures, incorporeal beings, critters that regenerate non-fire damage, teleporters who refuse to stay in one place, and so on. Psi is particularly nice for this, since you can choose your damage type upon casting instead of memorizing it or requiring feats to make it flexible. This doesn't make your point less valid -- it's still HP damage, and that makes the caster less special -- but the blaster does fill some holes in that category without necessarily being more or less useful.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 08:33 AM
You threw a Rust Dragon (Draconomicon?) against your PCs? IIRC, they have a breath weapon which destroys every metal item the PC has in their possession (though magic items get Saves). I'm all for being tough on PCs (I used one in a one-shot campaign against a party of Tome of Battle classes, so they were all equally nerfed but not entirely screwed), but potentially destroying everything valuable that the PCs own in 1 round seems a bit harsh. I'm glad they killed so quickly.

It's a rather brutal campaign, and a few of the characters have extradimensional storage, so it's not as dangerous as you'd think. But yeah, it did have the potential to cause some real annoyance. More importantly, the players didn't have to engage the dragon at that point, being extremely stealthy types. Granted, they didn't recognize it as a rust dragon, but they did know it was a dragon of an unusual type and of enough size to be a challenge.

I tend to take the approach of making challenges without a designated way of solving them. The players will find a way. Direct application of violence doesn't always have to be that way, but unless its a bad choice at least occasionally, they will use it for *everything*.

Hmm, how to tie this in with blasting. HP damage is the bread and butter of ways to kill things. Quite a few different ways exist, but damn near everything can be killed with hp damage. The biggest reason to blast is that it stacks with the damage done by the rest of the party. Your SoD is binary. Either it works, or it doesn't. If you get a weak damage roll, or they save for half, at least the damage makes it easier for the barb to take it down.

SaintRidley
2009-12-08, 09:02 AM
And he loses all his spells.


Fascinating. It appears that you cease to be a mighty wizard and become a fragile, pointy-eared monkey. While I? I am still a dragon.

Cyclocone
2009-12-08, 09:12 AM
Fascinating. It appears that you cease to be a mighty wizard and become a fragile, pointy-eared monkey. While I? I am still a powerless lump of inadequatly-defended flesh, that can easily be ripped into myriads of wet, lifeless shreds by any halfway decent fightan build.

Fixed that for you.

Zovc
2009-12-08, 10:25 AM
Being prepared is the better way, indeed.

As for on the spot stuff...
I would have asked if the player planned on moving from the back to the front, and actually into the room in order to cast, seeing as line of sight is blocked. When they blunder into the room their magical presence activates an anti magic field that the caster will now have to get out of for anything of theirs to function. This would buy the dragon at least one action, enough to be a slight menace.

Next round, the caster attempts again, after moving out of the field. The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again. Upon a successful Knowledge: Arcana or similarly applicable skill, the caster realizes that the crystal is actually some form or Arcane Foci, one that acts as a magnet for offensive spells for a designated target, and tends to absorb any number of spells, usually between 3-10 depending on quality. Said Foci also typically has an astoundingly high SR. There is usually a control device to designate the target, like a ring or amulet. Upon realization of this and relaying relevant info to the party, the party can roll spot checks to spot what might be the control. Upon spotting a band of gold upon one of the dragon's horns, the spotter could then attempt to sunder said band. Or the melee (or ranger of the party) could go after the Foci. Or the caster could attempt to BLAST/Disintegrate/etc the foci and somehow overcome the SR.

This is essentially exactly the same thing as whining about not 'wanting your dragon to die yet' when you just realize the wizard is the strongest party member. You're just giving a tactical scapegoat for the childish knee-jerk.

Also, just because blast spells work better than save or die spells against magic-pulling, spell-absorbing, blingity-bling dragon crystals doesn't make them any better of an offensive, 'shoot to kill' option than SoD.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 10:32 AM
This is essentially exactly the same thing as whining about not 'wanting your dragon to die yet' when you just realize the wizard is the strongest party member. You're just giving a tactical scapegoat for the childish knee-jerk.

Completely agree, actually. Bending rules wildly to attempt to make the players play the way you want them to is one of the more annoying forms of railroading.

If you enjoy blasters or dislike certain builds, tell them so up front. Don't take away their abilities midway through the game through use of DM fiat.


Also, just because blast spells work better than save or die spells against magic-pulling, spell-absorbing, blingity-bling dragon crystals doesn't make them any better of an offensive, 'shoot to kill' option than SoD.

True. If you have to use DM fiated mcguffins to make something better, there's a bigger underlying problem.

Keep in mind that the first reaction of most players when something doesn't work is not "I'll try completely redoing my character to operate in a different way". It's tweaking their current character to overcome the problem at hand. Thus, if you start bringing out stuff with SR, they'll look for CL boosters or ways to ignore SR. Turning this into a battle where you continually invalidate their new tactics with more fiat is a great way to ruin a campaign.

Person_Man
2009-12-08, 11:29 AM
Being prepared is the better way, indeed.

As for on the spot stuff...
I would have asked if the player planned on moving from the back to the front, and actually into the room in order to cast, seeing as line of sight is blocked. When they blunder into the room their magical presence activates an anti magic field that the caster will now have to get out of for anything of theirs to function. This would buy the dragon at least one action, enough to be a slight menace.

Next round, the caster attempts again, after moving out of the field. The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again. Upon a successful Knowledge: Arcana or similarly applicable skill, the caster realizes that the crystal is actually some form or Arcane Foci, one that acts as a magnet for offensive spells for a designated target, and tends to absorb any number of spells, usually between 3-10 depending on quality. Said Foci also typically has an astoundingly high SR. There is usually a control device to designate the target, like a ring or amulet. Upon realization of this and relaying relevant info to the party, the party can roll spot checks to spot what might be the control. Upon spotting a band of gold upon one of the dragon's horns, the spotter could then attempt to sunder said band. Or the melee (or ranger of the party) could go after the Foci. Or the caster could attempt to BLAST/Disintegrate/etc the foci and somehow overcome the SR.

Perhaps I misstated myself. I understand that Batman Wizards can be properly challenged by an intelligent DM who plans ahead of time, or a DM who knows the rules thoroughly enough that they can come up with new roadblocks on the fly. My point was that if a Blaster Wizard playing as part of an unoptimized party suddenly decides to whip out more powerful spells, then the DM has three options:

1) He allows the Wizard to easily win the encounter - the large dragon's head explodes.
2) He quickly (and sometimes drastically) increases the difficulty of the encounter - the large dragon with kobolds is now an elder great worm dragon with war trolls, traps, an anti-magic field, etc. This potentially puts the other non-optimized players at great risk.
3) He cheats - the large dragon mystically rolls 20 on important Saves against the Wizard (but not other weaker players), and/or happens to have an immunity to whatever the Wizard is casting, even though it's not normally a part of being a dragon.

The problem is not that the Wizard is powerful, it's that his power is elastic.

BRC
2009-12-08, 11:56 AM
Perhaps I misstated myself. I understand that Batman Wizards can be properly challenged by an intelligent DM who plans ahead of time, or a DM who knows the rules thoroughly enough that they can come up with new roadblocks on the fly. My point was that if a Blaster Wizard playing as part of an unoptimized party suddenly decides to whip out more powerful spells, then the DM has three options:

1) He allows the Wizard to easily win the encounter - the large dragon's head explodes.
2) He quickly (and sometimes drastically) increases the difficulty of the encounter - the large dragon with kobolds is now an elder great worm dragon with war trolls, traps, an anti-magic field, etc. This potentially puts the other non-optimized players at great risk.
3) He cheats - the large dragon mystically rolls 20 on important Saves against the Wizard (but not other weaker players), and/or happens to have an immunity to whatever the Wizard is casting, even though it's not normally a part of being a dragon.

The problem is not that the Wizard is powerful, it's that his power is elastic.
Also that it's easier to make a Powerful wizard than a powerful fighter. Clerics at least require a couple extra books for DMM cheese, but everything a Wizard needs to overshadow a party is right there in the PHB. A Fighter, for example, will need to dig through source books finding just that right combination of feats, and often it only works for a single trick (Like on a Charge). A Wizard just needs to take one spell.

Chaelos
2009-12-08, 11:58 AM
Sounds to me as if the battlefield control kept you from being completely overrun. The grease spells, the solid fogs, and the wind wall basically kept your party alive long enough to allow those fireballs to do their jobs.

Otherwise, you probably would've lost on round 1. In abeyance, but inevitable.

Absolutely the control spells kept us alive. But the death-by-fire was every bit as key to this battle, considering the way the DM drew up the enemy (Good attack, decent AC, low HP--perfect for mass-slaughtering via artillery). The entire point of the Angry God is that you seek to control the battlefield... but you're willing to do so by blast as well as control/debuff spells.

If you go by some of the guides out there--particularly for wizards--you would be mislead into thinking that blasting never has any uses at all. My entire point is that blasting is a decidedly underrated strategy that has, at times, saved the day for me and my party.

Lycanthromancer
2009-12-08, 12:11 PM
Absolutely the control spells kept us alive. But the death-by-fire was every bit as key to this battle, considering the way the DM drew up the enemy (Good attack, decent AC, low HP--perfect for mass-slaughtering via artillery). The entire point of the Angry God is that you seek to control the battlefield... but you're willing to do so by blast as well as control/debuff spells.

If you go by some of the guides out there--particularly for wizards--you would be mislead into thinking that blasting never has any uses at all. My entire point is that blasting is a decidedly underrated strategy that has, at times, saved the day for me and my party.I'm not saying fireball isn't ever useful. However, BFC would've done the same thing. In this case, a solid/acid fog, glitterdust, sleet storm, or Widened grease would've done much the same thing if used instead, all of which would've worked over multiple rounds, and they would've been useful in more situations, to boot. Granted, not all are level 3, but the point stands.

Direct damage is usually a bad option for a wizard, even in situations where direct damage is useful. Unfortunate, but true. If you can't auto-kill something, you're better off using a no-save-and-still-suck.

Yukitsu
2009-12-08, 12:17 PM
Perhaps I misstated myself. I understand that Batman Wizards can be properly challenged by an intelligent DM who plans ahead of time, or a DM who knows the rules thoroughly enough that they can come up with new roadblocks on the fly. My point was that if a Blaster Wizard playing as part of an unoptimized party suddenly decides to whip out more powerful spells, then the DM has three options:

1) He allows the Wizard to easily win the encounter - the large dragon's head explodes.
2) He quickly (and sometimes drastically) increases the difficulty of the encounter - the large dragon with kobolds is now an elder great worm dragon with war trolls, traps, an anti-magic field, etc. This potentially puts the other non-optimized players at great risk.
3) He cheats - the large dragon mystically rolls 20 on important Saves against the Wizard (but not other weaker players), and/or happens to have an immunity to whatever the Wizard is casting, even though it's not normally a part of being a dragon.

The problem is not that the Wizard is powerful, it's that his power is elastic.

My DM goes route 4. He suddenly makes the encounter much easier, meaning we wasted our power on the irrelevant encounter, and more importantly, don't get any EXP.

Zovc
2009-12-08, 12:38 PM
My DM goes route 4. He suddenly makes the encounter much easier, meaning we wasted our power on the irrelevant encounter, and more importantly, don't get any EXP.

I'd like to cite this as another example of a childish and/or underprepared DM. Not only is this immature of the DM, but he's punishing all players for the Wizard being a good mechanical pilot of his character. This will make everyone unhappy, and really is a pitiful course of action--everyone will be unhappy with another person in the group. "Man, he shouldn't be doing such powerful things." "Man, he overreacted." and "Man, I wish I would've actually got something from this."

EDIT - These are the complexes I'm trying to imply here:
((I should never be overpowered and/or surprised!)) ((I should be able to use the power you said I could have!)) ((I'm not a part of this conflict, and it's ruining the game for me.))

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 12:39 PM
3) He cheats - the large dragon mystically rolls 20 on important Saves against the Wizard (but not other weaker players), and/or happens to have an immunity to whatever the Wizard is casting, even though it's not normally a part of being a dragon.

Oh look, orbs to the face. Screw your SR, your saves, and your immunities.

What blaster allows his target to have saves anyway? Even if they dont abuse orbs, magic missile, rays, and other favored blasting spells routinely used deny saves. Plenty of others do partial damage on a failed save.

If you throw up a mob and your players come up with a way to kill it faster than you wanted, let it die. Use a bigger one next time. You shouldn't be routinely surprised by what your chars can do, though. I mean...as DM, you should know what chars they have.

Zovc is right. Regardless of who the players are annoyed at, they'll be annoyed. Not really a great goal. Punishing everyone in character because you dislike the actions of one(out of character) is always a terrible idea.

Doc Roc
2009-12-08, 12:41 PM
Or the... dragon could... teleport away? I mean? I'm so confused here. These are all ridiculous examples, because they ignore the fact that you can make the dragon's head explode with trivial ease using almost any selected subset of the sorcerer wizard list.

The problem is that blasting overlaps with powerful chargers, elegant warblades, well-designed rogues, and almost everything else. While the majority of the party lacks parity with the other subsets of the list. In cases where your damage isn't getting through, well, that's why you keep a couple MM rods around, a scroll of MDJ prepped by a sublime chord with minimum possible caster level, and two or three shots of orb of force prepared.


I think you are all wildly underestimating the depth and breadth of a practicing wizard's arsenal. There is no blasting. There is no controlling. There is only victory.

deuxhero
2009-12-08, 12:44 PM
Magic Missile
Scorching Ray
Seeking Ray
Unicorn Arrow
Orb of X
Enervation
Defenestrating Sphere
Howling Chain
Wings of Flurry
Disintegrate
Avasculate
Blackfire
Maw of Chaos
Streamers

That about covers it.

And... more than half? aren't evocation?

Doc Roc
2009-12-08, 12:52 PM
Why would I use evocation? I mean, I _like_ evocation, and I've built heavy-MM users who dealt hundreds of damage without it.
That was the joke Pharaoh was making. Pharaoh and I are a lil unusual, in that we've both brought evoker specialists to optimized tables, and not gotten a pitchfork to the throat. That doesn't mean it was good, or that those builds approached optimal.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 01:07 PM
And... more than half? aren't evocation?

While evocation is supposed to be blasterrific, blasting gets spread around to a lot of schools. Conjuration in particular got a few nice ones. I do like evocation, but you can ban it, and still blast pretty well.

Optimystik
2009-12-08, 01:36 PM
And... more than half? aren't evocation?

He was listing good blasting spells, not good blasting evocation spells.

Yes, that is indeed the majority of them.

Zovc
2009-12-08, 01:39 PM
I'd like to point out that the word "evocation" or even its root word "evoke" do not show up in OP's post.

Emmerask
2009-12-08, 02:18 PM
Completely agree, actually. Bending rules wildly to attempt to make the players play the way you want them to is one of the more annoying forms of railroading.



I think this is actually a pretty nice encounter which requires more then just a wizard using spell x to win but some teamwork...

I really donīt know why every intelligent encounter is said to be dm fiat or railroading sure if it happens every minor or random encounter then you would have a point in this case though it is a freaking dragon

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 02:20 PM
I think this is actually a pretty nice encounter which requires more then just a wizard using spell x to win but some teamwork...

I really donīt know why every intelligent encounter is said to be dm fiat or railroading sure if it happens every minor or random encounter then you would have a point in this case though it is a freaking dragon

Intelligent encounters are fine.

Saying "uhhh, yeah, I saved", when you did not does not constitute an intelligent encounter.

Emmerask
2009-12-08, 02:23 PM
Intelligent encounters are fine.

Saying "uhhh, yeah, I saved", when you did not does not constitute an intelligent encounter.

right but there was nothing about cheating rolls in the post you "quote quoted" it was about carfeull planning an encounter so that everyone in the group can shine :smallconfused:

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 02:26 PM
If the encounter can be solved using a single SoD, then no, it was not an intelligent encounter designed to allow the entire party to shine.

It was an encounter designed by someone who was not familiar with what the wizard could do.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 02:31 PM
right but there was nothing about cheating rolls in the post you "quote quoted" it was about carfeull planning an encounter so that everyone in the group can shine :smallconfused:

Ah, the McGuffin fight?

No. That's not careful planning. That's inventing a series of arbitrary obstacles to make the blaster irrelevant. It's just a different method of removing his power arbitrarily, and is no different than cheating die rolls.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 02:41 PM
Since there's disagreement, lets get into why this is an issue.


Being prepared is the better way, indeed.

As for on the spot stuff...
I would have asked if the player planned on moving from the back to the front, and actually into the room in order to cast, seeing as line of sight is blocked. When they blunder into the room their magical presence activates an anti magic field that the caster will now have to get out of for anything of theirs to function. This would buy the dragon at least one action, enough to be a slight menace.

AMF is not operating as per expected via casting. Presumably it's a trap, since the dragon isn't burning an action to activate it or cast it. However, there appears to be no mention of a way to circumvent it.

Result: It's an arbitrary removal of the first round for the caster by DM fiat.


Next round, the caster attempts again, after moving out of the field. The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again.

No explanation for how or why, and even worse, to something that you could not even detect to this point. Incidentally, if the dragon is blocking LoS, he's also blocking LoE. This merely leaves the caster going "WTF?"

Result: Congrats, you arbitrarily wasted the second round of the caster. Saying "no" when he tries to take his turn would have been equally fair.


Upon a successful Knowledge: Arcana or similarly applicable skill, the caster realizes that the crystal is actually some form or Arcane Foci, one that acts as a magnet for offensive spells for a designated target, and tends to absorb any number of spells, usually between 3-10 depending on quality. Said Foci also typically has an astoundingly high SR.

Yay for an arbitrary artifact with an epic spell you invented randomly. What CR is this fight again?


There is usually a control device to designate the target, like a ring or amulet. Upon realization of this and relaying relevant info to the party, the party can roll spot checks to spot what might be the control. Upon spotting a band of gold upon one of the dragon's horns, the spotter could then attempt to sunder said band. Or the melee (or ranger of the party) could go after the Foci. Or the caster could attempt to BLAST/Disintegrate/etc the foci and somehow overcome the SR.

How is the dragon activating this without using actions? What is the value of this device if the players get ahold of it, and what problems will that cause? Per RAW in Draconomicon, magical bands automatically resize to act as rings for humanoids, after all.

How does this make the encounter intelligent? Why is it significantly different from the caster making popcorn and watching TV till the fights over?

Zovc
2009-12-08, 02:51 PM
Next round, the caster attempts again, after moving out of the field. The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again.

I just thought about this, but if the dragon is standing in front of the crystal, wouldn't the crystal try to pull the spell through the dragon? I mean, the dragon is standing in between the Wizard and his target. I could see the crystal working if it was like, off to the left of the wizard and the dragon (the spell curves, or just fires in the direction of the crystal), but... it's behind the dragon.


You point your finger and utter the incantation, releasing a black ray of crackling negative energy that suppresses the life force of any living creature it strikes.

Enervate's description seems to explicitly imply that it is a ray, would it curve around the dragon and hit the crystal? If you say yes, it sounds to me like you're explicitly trying to foil everything the wizard does--he's (unknowingly) "tactically" positioning the dragon between him and the crystal so that his spells actually hit it.

Milskidasith
2009-12-08, 02:55 PM
The dragon, by blocking LoS, blocks LoE to the crystal. Nothing in the game, short of a few things abusable things (I think a psywar power, and Love's Pain), can ignore LoE. The spell would work fine unless the dragon moved out of the way.

If you wanted the dragon to say no as an immediate action, why not just have it cast Wings of cover? It's a very draconic spell, and doesn't even burn into your high level spell slots.

BRC
2009-12-08, 03:00 PM
Since there's disagreement, lets get into why this is an issue.



AMF is not operating as per expected via casting. Presumably it's a trap, since the dragon isn't burning an action to activate it or cast it. However, there appears to be no mention of a way to circumvent it.

Result: It's an arbitrary

Arbitrary dosn't seem to mean what you think it does.

If the Dragon is expecting a powerful wizard to come knock down his door, it's not "Arbitrary" that he sets up a defense against that.
If a DM uses undead against a party that includes a rogue, is that an Arbitary removal of the rogue's sneak attack damage.

If the DM uses a flying monster against a party with a non-flying melee specialist, is that an Arbitrary removal of that character's specialty with melee weapons. If a DM uses a Golem, is that an arbitrary removal of the spell caster's abilities. Is a Swarm and Arbitrary removal of the melee fighter's power. Are neutral foes an arbitrary removal of a Paladin's smite evil ability.

So what are the DM's options here, tailor each and every fight to be exactly what the party is built to perfectly handle (Nothing but Evil sneak-attackable monsters of the type the Ranger has as a favored enemy) or be accused of being arbitrary?


Mind you, I personally wouldn't use the AMF-trap, not because it's "Arbitrary", but because it's boring. If I wanted to limit a spellcaster, I would personally have a trap set to counterspell them, but it takes 1 round to recharge between counterspells, and it can't differentiate between spell power levels. So the Wizard would need to fight smarter than "Cast the spell that makes their heads go boom".


Really, in my ideal world, SoD's would exist, but would need to be used intelligently. Rather than spending several rounds wearing down an opponent's HP, the Wizard would need to spend several rounds probing defenses and figuring out how to successfully use the SoD. Or spend several rounds hitting the foe with Debuffs to lower their saves against SoD's. In fact, I would not object to giving people save boosts against Save or Die/Lose spells. The Wizard could still try Save-or-dieing every round, but chances are he'd just burn through his spells if he didn't lower his opponent's saving throws first. It wouldn't be arbitrary, everybody would get these same boosts, everybody would know about them ahead of time, a wizard would have to build a strategy around defeating them, and there is always a chance the target rolls badly enough that even with the boost they still fail their save.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 03:13 PM
Arbitrary dosn't seem to mean what you think it does.

If the Dragon is expecting a powerful wizard to come knock down his door, it's not "Arbitrary" that he sets up a defense against that.
If a DM uses undead against a party that includes a rogue, is that an Arbitary removal of the rogue's sneak attack damage.

No, that's a normal, expected part of sneak attack. It's just something that sneak attack does not work on, per the rules of sneak attack.

If the DM said "uhhh, no sneak attack for you" against a target that normally would be targettable by it, with no explanation, then yes, it would be arbitrary.


If the DM uses a flying monster against a party with a non-flying melee specialist, is that an Arbitrary removal of that character's specialty with melee weapons. If a DM uses a Golem, is that an arbitrary removal of the spell caster's abilities. Is a Swarm and Arbitrary removal of the melee fighter's power. Are neutral foes an arbitrary removal of a Paladin's smite evil ability.

No, no, no, and no. Those are normal, legal, expected tactics. Randomly inventing new, unforseeable ways of negating abilities are very different.

If the rogue wants to sneak attack undead, he can put grave strike on his weapon. Perhaps the melee specialist wants to buy a bow, or learn to fly. All of that is part and parcel of the game. Random mcguffins that strip you of your ability are different, as they cannot be countered or planned for.


So what are the DM's options here, tailor each and every fight to be exactly what the party is built to perfectly handle (Nothing but Evil sneak-attackable monsters of the type the Ranger has as a favored enemy) or be accused of being arbitrary?

This is well into strawman territory. I criticized his techniques as an arbitrary removal of power because they blatantly broke a number of rules in order to accomplish his goals. Not having power because the circumstance wouldn't normally, legally allow you to is not arbitrary.


Mind you, I personally wouldn't use the AMF-trap, not because it's "Arbitrary", but because it's boring. If I wanted to limit a spellcaster, I would personally have a trap set to counterspell them, but it takes 1 round to recharge between counterspells, and it can't differentiate between spell power levels. So the Wizard would need to fight smarter than "Cast the spell that makes their heads go boom".

This would be more reasonable. It's a challenge. One that is based in actual rules, and can be avoided(disable or don't trigger the trap. Or beat the caster level check. Or stay out of LOS to the trap.). It might boost the ECL a bit, but not stupidly so.


Really, in my ideal world, SoD's would exist, but would need to be used intelligently. Rather than spending several rounds wearing down an opponent's HP, the Wizard would need to spend several rounds probing defenses and figuring out how to successfully use the SoD. Or spend several rounds hitting the foe with Debuffs to lower their saves against SoD's. In fact, I would not object to giving people save boosts against Save or Die/Lose spells. The Wizard could still try Save-or-dieing every round, but chances are he'd just burn through his spells if he didn't lower his opponent's saving throws first. It wouldn't be arbitrary, everybody would get these same boosts, everybody would know about them ahead of time, a wizard would have to build a strategy around defeating them, and there is always a chance the target rolls badly enough that even with the boost they still fail their save.

SoDs are already pretty weak if you just throw them out there every round. Between the long list of things with immunities, SR, saves, etc...it's not actually that far off from how things are now.

BRC
2009-12-08, 03:33 PM
No, that's a normal, expected part of sneak attack. It's just something that sneak attack does not work on, per the rules of sneak attack.

If the DM said "uhhh, no sneak attack for you" against a target that normally would be targettable by it, with no explanation, then yes, it would be arbitrary.



No, no, no, and no. Those are normal, legal, expected tactics. Randomly inventing new, unforseeable ways of negating abilities are very different.

If the rogue wants to sneak attack undead, he can put grave strike on his weapon. Perhaps the melee specialist wants to buy a bow, or learn to fly. All of that is part and parcel of the game. Random mcguffins that strip you of your ability are different, as they cannot be countered or planned for.



This is well into strawman territory. I criticized his techniques as an arbitrary removal of power because they blatantly broke a number of rules in order to accomplish his goals. Not having power because the circumstance wouldn't normally, legally allow you to is not arbitrary.



This would be more reasonable. It's a challenge. One that is based in actual rules, and can be avoided(disable or don't trigger the trap. Or beat the caster level check. Or stay out of LOS to the trap.). It might boost the ECL a bit, but not stupidly so.



SoDs are already pretty weak if you just throw them out there every round. Between the long list of things with immunities, SR, saves, etc...it's not actually that far off from how things are now.
So what your saying is that, if a DM wants to limit his spellcasters, he should do so in a way that's either predictable and expected (So the Spellcasters can prepare to have their power limited in some way) or intuitive and counterable (so they can easily figure out what is limiting them, and a good way to stop it).

Alright, I can get behind that reasoning. It's okay to tell the Fighter he might need to bring a different type of sword, or to have somebody disarm him during the battle, but it's not okay to have his sword not work with no explanation.

So, the Dragon with the randomly-created ring of wizardnerfing, would you consider that an acceptable solution if, say, they had heard stories that this dragon was incredibly paranoid where wizards are concerned, and had long ago acquired an artifact to protect him from them?

Zovc
2009-12-08, 03:36 PM
...but it's not okay to have his sword not work with no explanation.

(For the record, this [quote] was a sarcastic statement in context, practically a question.)

Why would it be okay for a Fighter's sword not to work with no explanation?

Tyndmyr
2009-12-08, 03:38 PM
Possibly. Other changes would need to be made, like the LoE/LoS issue. And having such an artifact would increase the ECL by...quite a bit. Im not sure what the CR on such a trap would be, but undoubtably it'd be pretty high.

If the fighter only ever uses a spear, life sucks when he runs into zombies. If the wizard only ever preps fire damage nukes, life sucks when he runs into...anything with fire resistance. Thats perfectly normal.

I would normally be concerned about such an artifact falling into the hands of the players, though, at pre-epic levels. Could make the very powerful, or break WBL.

BRC
2009-12-08, 03:39 PM
(For the record, this [quote] was a sarcastic statement in context, practically a question.)

Why would it be okay for a Fighter's sword not to work with no explanation?
It wouldn't, which is my point.

Edit: And for the record, nothing in the post you quoted was intended to be sarcastic.

Zovc
2009-12-08, 03:43 PM
It wouldn't, which is my point.

Edit: And for the record, nothing in the post you quoted was intended to be sarcastic.

Sorry, then, I misinterpreted your post.

BRC
2009-12-08, 03:45 PM
Sorry, then, I misinterpreted your post.
Yup. Just as it's not right to deprive a Fighter of his weapon without the chance to acquire a more suitable one or to get the weapon back/stop it from being taken during the fight, it's not right to deprive a wizard of their spells without giving them some warning that they should prepare different ones or a way to remove the thing depriving them.

Karoht
2009-12-08, 05:44 PM
Since there's disagreement, lets get into why this is an issue.
AMF is not operating as per expected via casting. Presumably it's a trap, since the dragon isn't burning an action to activate it or cast it. However, there appears to be no mention of a way to circumvent it.
Result: It's an arbitrary removal of the first round for the caster by DM fiat.
Yes, the AMF is a trap. The wizard would have a reflex save, but how many wizards have strong reflex saves. Heck, might not even have been the wizard who set it off, but seeing as he was insistant on getting his actions out and cut off the DM who was about to mention the fighter tripping the trap, well, I wouldn't feel bad for that wizard at that point. If you claim you've never had this happen, you either play with no more than 2 people, or you're fibbing.
Conversely, the party that sends the wizard in first is asking to have the wizard die. And if the wizard is at the back, and the rogue isn't near the door to even make the trap search check (because they don't have xray vision), then yes, the wizard declaring that he's going to pull any SoD spell out, assumes that he's going to go up the front (again, can't shoot through party), which also assumes that he's probably going to set off the trap. So by asking first 'are you going up the front' and the wizard says yes with a dopey grin on his face, then he's asking for it. He had a choice. I play with a lot of wizards who do this, and every time they do, they pay for it. No DM fiat required.


No explanation for how or why, and even worse, to something that you could not even detect to this point. Incidentally, if the dragon is blocking LoS, he's also blocking LoE. This merely leaves the caster going "WTF?"When I said behind, I did not say 'behind blocking LoS/LoE.' I said behind. Then again, I took for granted that DnD players could use their imagination somewhat.
Had the caster been careful, or had perhaps looked around the room better, rather than taking for granted that the dragon would be the only thing in the room, they would have spotted it. However, when it's off in a darkened corner (which is behind the dragon and somewhat to the right for those who wish to knit pick), and looks like most of the other statues and other masonry that have been seen in this dungeon and would therefore been somewhat overlooked, (and probably not the first time they've encountered it, as THAT would be severely unfair). As for the homebrew nature of the trap/defense, are you surprised to see homebrew anything on this website?


Result: Congrats, you arbitrarily wasted the second round of the caster. Saying "no" when he tries to take his turn would have been equally fair.Not arbitrary. The wizard would have had all manner of ways around. Perhaps by not blundering into the room without being prepared, or letting the rogue do their job, or perhaps not being so zealous to outshine the party to make the big bad head go boom, they MIGHT have stopped to think and spotted most of this. In my experience, most players only need to make this mistake on about 4 separate occasions at most before they catch on.


Yay for an arbitrary artifact with an epic spell you invented randomly. What CR is this fight again?Once again, you are shocked to find homebrew on this site?
Who said the spell was epic? It has one effect, alter LoE by changing the intended target of the spell. The statue still takes all the effects of the spell. If you want a Feat that would be applicable, see Spell Reflection, with a few tweaks.


How is the dragon activating this without using actions?Hang on here. No offence, but we are still playing DnD 3.5 or something similar right? Seeing as so many magical artifacts have effects that use a free action, or a constant effect, why is it hard to imagine such being the case here? This is needless knit picking now. Ditch the snark, you have much more intelligent points being made in your posts.


What is the value of this device if the players get ahold of it, and what problems will that cause? Per RAW in Draconomicon, magical bands automatically resize to act as rings for humanoids, after all.Who said it was made for a humanoid? Who said it wasn't made for the Dragon? By the Dragon? By the Dragon's minions? By the Dragon's master? Yet more needless snark. Once again, use your imagination a bit more.
What is the value and what problems will it cause? Alright, now you have a relevant criticism. To answer the question, I'm going to ask, what value does it pose to the party? Can they even dismantle the trap in the first place? Does the mage blow it up first? Even if it is intact, can anyone in the party even figure out how it works, much less salvage any useful parts from it? Mostly, these are trivial issues to work out, mostly by associating a GP value to the parts as salvage if they disable it, as I doubt any of them will be able to repair it. But lets just assume that they get the control device AND the big heavy statue in 100% working order. Are they really going to lug it back to town? Carry it all around the dungeon? Does anyone in the party have a strength high enough to matter? No. And if they can figure out how to recreate the effect, is the ability to redirect a spell intended for target X and bend it to target Y really that gamebreaking? Hardly. Most wizards wouldn't bother with it, some Clerics (if they could cast it somehow) might use it to redirect a spell to the nice tough figher instead of the party rogue who has 3 HP left. No more game breaking than a contingency or wish, no more than a SoD.


How does this make the encounter intelligent? Why is it significantly different from the caster making popcorn and watching TV till the fights over?Oh gee, making the caster THINK before they act, and having to adjust tactics mid-fight. Yeah, that's totally not an intelligent encounter. Nope, fireballing a dragon or SoD'ing a dragon is totally more intelligent than having to puzzle solve during a combat, or find a workaround. Totally.

For the record, if I had a tippy mage to deal with in the party (a frequent problem I assure you) I work constructs and gizmo's like this into the story and encounters all the time. Traps that destroy 1D4 spell slots for the day (level determined at random), traps that cast silence or other debuffs which prevent casting. Traps that cast debuffs which force the party to remove them or work around. Statues that emit constant areas of Anti-Magic Field or other anti-casting debuffs. Entire rooms of silence very fun for stealth encounters too. At lower levels, stuff like this is a bit brutal to casters, at high levels it makes them think before they act, and makes every slot precious. Stuff that makes them think, 'do I risk wasting a spell on a SoD, or toss good ole reliable fireball?'

Or hey, great, the mage SoD'd the dragon. Whoop de doo, the rogue hiding to the side of the door who ambushed him on the way in doesn't care too much. Neither do the 4 other rogues who are behind the party. The Kobolds however, are quite happy that their rogue friends showed up to help them, and quite pissed that the dragon is dead. Enjoy. Is that DM fiat too? I wonder, when you get into encounters, does your DM show you every single one his pages of stuff? You know, to prove it's legit? To prove that there were indeed 10 orcs and not 8 or 6? Seriously.

tyckspoon
2009-12-08, 05:50 PM
When I said behind, I did not say 'behind blocking LoS/LoE.' I said behind. Then again, I took for granted that DnD players could use their imagination somewhat.


...

The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again

That is exactly what you said. I would tend to agree that if the caster rolls a Spot+Spellcraft when you describe the room and you tell him "the dragon is standing near one of those grounding crystals, like the ones that screwed with your spells when you fought the guards at the mouth of the cave" that this would be a fair approach. What you actually *said* was more in the line of "lol I made you waste a spell."

RagnaroksChosen
2009-12-08, 06:04 PM
Yes, the AMF is a trap. The wizard would have a reflex save, but how many wizards have strong reflex saves. Heck, might not even have been the wizard who set it off, but seeing as he was insistant on getting his actions out and cut off the DM who was about to mention the fighter tripping the trap, well, I wouldn't feel bad for that wizard at that point. If you claim you've never had this happen, you either play with no more than 2 people, or you're fibbing.
Conversely, the party that sends the wizard in first is asking to have the wizard die. And if the wizard is at the back, and the rogue isn't near the door to even make the trap search check (because they don't have xray vision), then yes, the wizard declaring that he's going to pull any SoD spell out, assumes that he's going to go up the front (again, can't shoot through party), which also assumes that he's probably going to set off the trap. So by asking first 'are you going up the front' and the wizard says yes with a dopey grin on his face, then he's asking for it. He had a choice. I play with a lot of wizards who do this, and every time they do, they pay for it. No DM fiat required.

When I said behind, I did not say 'behind blocking LoS/LoE.' I said behind. Then again, I took for granted that DnD players could use their imagination somewhat.
Had the caster been careful, or had perhaps looked around the room better, rather than taking for granted that the dragon would be the only thing in the room, they would have spotted it. However, when it's off in a darkened corner (which is behind the dragon and somewhat to the right for those who wish to knit pick), and looks like most of the other statues and other masonry that have been seen in this dungeon and would therefore been somewhat overlooked, (and probably not the first time they've encountered it, as THAT would be severely unfair). As for the homebrew nature of the trap/defense, are you surprised to see homebrew anything on this website?

No seeing homebrew on here isn't that uncommon however it is not proper to use home brew in examples such as this... As you can homebrew any thing it realy doesn't add to the discussion. By homebrewing you are breaking RAW and there for your argument goes down as it is no longer following the rules. There for you are no longer playing 3.5 you are playing a game loosely based on the 3.5 system and there for arn't realy playing the same game we are talking about.

Don't get me wrong i can understand where you are coming from (being a 2nd ed player my self) but it realy holds no value when you talk about homebrew.



Not arbitrary. The wizard would have had all manner of ways around. Perhaps by not blundering into the room without being prepared, or letting the rogue do their job, or perhaps not being so zealous to outshine the party to make the big bad head go boom, they MIGHT have stopped to think and spotted most of this. In my experience, most players only need to make this mistake on about 4 separate occasions at most before they catch on.

Once again, you are shocked to find homebrew on this site?
Who said the spell was epic? It has one effect, alter LoE by changing the intended target of the spell. The statue still takes all the effects of the spell. If you want a Feat that would be applicable, see Spell Reflection, with a few tweaks.
again with the mention of homebrew.

though by RAW if the player can't trace LOE to the object then the spell can't be moved to it. as it is an illegal target...



Hang on here. No offence, but we are still playing DnD 3.5 or something similar right? Seeing as so many magical artifacts have effects that use a free action, or a constant effect, why is it hard to imagine such being the case here? This is needless knit picking now. Ditch the snark, you have much more intelligent points being made in your posts.

Well we have already determined that you are not playing dnd 3.5 you are playing homebrew dnd.
though i do have to admit that he was wrong in this situation and that the effect by raw could be continuous... its going to be an expensive as hell item/ artifact...



Who said it was made for a humanoid? Who said it wasn't made for the Dragon? By the Dragon? By the Dragon's minions? By the Dragon's master? Yet more needless snark. Once again, use your imagination a bit more.
What is the value and what problems will it cause? Alright, now you have a relevant criticism. To answer the question, I'm going to ask, what value does it pose to the party? Can they even dismantle the trap in the first place? Does the mage blow it up first? Even if it is intact, can anyone in the party even figure out how it works, much less salvage any useful parts from it? Mostly, these are trivial issues to work out, mostly by associating a GP value to the parts as salvage if they disable it, as I doubt any of them will be able to repair it. But lets just assume that they get the control device AND the big heavy statue in 100% working order. Are they really going to lug it back to town? Carry it all around the dungeon? Does anyone in the party have a strength high enough to matter? No. And if they can figure out how to recreate the effect, is the ability to redirect a spell intended for target X and bend it to target Y really that gamebreaking? Hardly. Most wizards wouldn't bother with it, some Clerics (if they could cast it somehow) might use it to redirect a spell to the nice tough figher instead of the party rogue who has 3 HP left. No more game breaking than a contingency or wish, no more than a SoD.

I can say from personal experiance as both a player and a gm that yes pc's would bring that back with them and or try to lug it around... never mind casting shrink item on it or other some such spell...

I once had players dig out an adamintine door from the adventure in the back of the ebberon campain setting.




Oh gee, making the caster THINK before they act, and having to adjust tactics mid-fight. Yeah, that's totally not an intelligent encounter. Nope, fireballing a dragon or SoD'ing a dragon is totally more intelligent than having to puzzle solve during a combat, or find a workaround. Totally.

For the record, if I had a tippy mage to deal with in the party (a frequent problem I assure you) I work constructs and gizmo's like this into the story and encounters all the time. Traps that destroy 1D4 spell slots for the day (level determined at random), traps that cast silence or other debuffs which prevent casting. Traps that cast debuffs which force the party to remove them or work around. Statues that emit constant areas of Anti-Magic Field or other anti-casting debuffs. Entire rooms of silence very fun for stealth encounters too. At lower levels, stuff like this is a bit brutal to casters, at high levels it makes them think before they act, and makes every slot precious. Stuff that makes them think, 'do I risk wasting a spell on a SoD, or toss good ole reliable fireball?'
[/qote]
Again your traps that make casters loose spell slots are not raw and there for do not hold validity in this discusion(as far as i know there are no traps that do that).



[QUOTE=Karoht]
Or hey, great, the mage SoD'd the dragon. Whoop de doo, the rogue hiding to the side of the door who ambushed him on the way in doesn't care too much. Neither do the 4 other rogues who are behind the party. The Kobolds however, are quite happy that their rogue friends showed up to help them, and quite pissed that the dragon is dead. Enjoy. Is that DM fiat too? I wonder, when you get into encounters, does your DM show you every single one his pages of stuff? You know, to prove it's legit? To prove that there were indeed 10 orcs and not 8 or 6? Seriously.
Again this is homebrewing an unbalanced cr fight. never mind the artifact involved. though any good wizard would have a GTFO spell any way.

And no there is a certain amount of player gm trust involved but i would ask that there be an in game reason for stuff.. Such as if a random encounter of orcs mysteriously where immune to fire. if there wasn't i would be a bit irked. or if his answer was to thwart the fire user... or if he was like cuz.

Arakune
2009-12-08, 06:08 PM
Some gratuitous use of summoning before the fight could do, alongside with divinations.

Sinfire Titan
2009-12-08, 06:19 PM
Blasting, people who don't understand the true power of magic love it. Even people who do, sometimes love using it.

Now I'm curious. Is blasting really a bad option for a arcane caster, or just inferior to other things he could be doing?

The only thing inferior to blasting for a full caster is Enchantment. There are ways to do blasting right, but Enchantment as a whole is SoL.


Is it actually hurting the party to have the wizard use the generally inferior Fireball?

From the standpoint of a BC caster or a buffer? Yes, as it doesn't prevent the enemy from harming your party (which is the key point to playing GOD). From a debuffer's standpoint? Only if there aren't carrier effects on the damage.


The main problem with it is that the Fighter does the same job for less spell slots. Why would you cast Scorching Ray at level 3 if the 3rd level Fighter can dish out 40 damage a turn? Why cast Fireball when the Fighter's Spiked Chain can do something similar, but also knock them prone without metamagic?


That still kinda sucks though. The problem in my opinion is when those spells stop increasing in damage because they've hit the caster level caps.

This is also a problem with blasting spells. SoDs may not be as effective due to immunities/luck/saves, but the advantage they have is that they ignore HP or CL limitations. In fact, DD spells are the ones most likely to be limited by a maximum CL. Web doesn't care outside of duration, and Finger of Death doesn't care outside of SR and immunities. DD spells need to deal with SR, Resistances and Immunities, HP, and healing abilities.



Also, summons can often blast at the mid levels. Why use 3 spell slots when you can use 1 and get 1d4+1 blasters to spend their abilities for you?

Zovc
2009-12-08, 06:35 PM
Also, summons can often blast at the mid levels. Why use 3 spell slots when you can use 1 and get 1d4+1 blasters to spend their abilities for you?

And actions. X3

Arakune
2009-12-08, 06:56 PM
And actions. X3

Yeah. Get some summons with SLAs and even the above scenario (trap of not-anti-magic field) is solved.

Karoht
2009-12-08, 07:05 PM
...
Karoht said:

Originally Posted by Karoht
The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again
That is exactly what you said. I would tend to agree that if the caster rolls a Spot+Spellcraft when you describe the room and you tell him "the dragon is standing near one of those grounding crystals, like the ones that screwed with your spells when you fought the guards at the mouth of the cave" that this would be a fair approach. What you actually *said* was more in the line of "lol I made you waste a spell."

Right, k, I admit that I goofed there.
However, as other players reading this, are you telling me that you can't use your imagination to make minor tweaks to the scenario? Are you telling me that someone out there would read my suggestion and use it word for word in their campaign, without adding either their own twists on it? I thought we all played a game that relied heavily on imagination and flexability here. So lets use our imagination and go 'okay, there are other ways to disguise the presence of the effect' rather than knit picking over the exact placement of a statue, which could be anywhere in the room. For arguements sake, lets say it is a unlight candle bearing chandelier over top of the dragon. There, now that the placement issue is solved because people would rather knit pick...

For the comment of it being an unbalanced CR fight, no one has yet stated a CR here, therefore it can not be unbalanced by definition. More over, nothing I suggested has actually increased the difficulty to the point of being severely unfair towards the party. If anything, the difficulty might be one or two CR higher in terms of actual difficulty at best, mostly due to the fact that the biggest gun of the party has to think or solve a problem mid fight, rather than simply standing back and casting an SoD.

If you want a RAW suggestion however...
Great, Dragon was an illusion, cast over one of the kobolds. He was doing it to show off and look cool to his kobold friends, when you adventurers kicked in the door and made his brain go splat. So you killed a kobold illusionist. Bravo.

RagnaroksChosen
2009-12-08, 07:11 PM
Right, k, I admit that I goofed there.
However, as other players reading this, are you telling me that you can't use your imagination to make minor tweaks to the scenario? Are you telling me that someone out there would read my suggestion and use it word for word in their campaign, without adding either their own twists on it? I thought we all played a game that relied heavily on imagination and flexability here. So lets use our imagination and go 'okay, there are other ways to disguise the presence of the effect' rather than knit picking over the exact placement of a statue, which could be anywhere in the room. For arguements sake, lets say it is a unlight candle bearing chandelier over top of the dragon. There, now that the placement issue is solved because people would rather knit pick...

For the comment of it being an unbalanced CR fight, no one has yet stated a CR here, therefore it can not be unbalanced by definition. More over, nothing I suggested has actually increased the difficulty to the point of being severely unfair towards the party. If anything, the difficulty might be one or two CR higher in terms of actual difficulty at best, mostly due to the fact that the biggest gun of the party has to think or solve a problem mid fight, rather than simply standing back and casting an SoD.

If you want a RAW suggestion however...
Great, Dragon was an illusion, cast over one of the kobolds. He was doing it to show off and look cool to his kobold friends, when you adventurers kicked in the door and made his brain go splat. So you killed a kobold illusionist. Bravo.
I think you misunderstand...
In game and how people talk on here are two different things. We discuss RAW here or RAI. actual play are two different things..

Also you example of the dragon being an illusion would not raise the difficulty correct but then it would be just firing at an illusion which would nullify the original issue you where arguing.

Assuming no illusions your encounter would raise the CR assuming every thing you said to be true...
There being a very large dragon, some sort of rogues(weather they be kobolds or not), and normal kobolds, on top of that you've given an item to the dragon that is of artifact quality...

I belive the closest things to the artifact you have described was the suit of armour from BOVD, the one that the when some thing is cast at it it goes to one of the slaves chained to it.

Lamech
2009-12-08, 07:32 PM
If you want a RAW suggestion however...
Great, Dragon was an illusion, cast over one of the kobolds. He was doing it to show off and look cool to his kobold friends, when you adventurers kicked in the door and made his brain go splat. So you killed a kobold illusionist. Bravo. First off a trap to alter the spell effects is lets say... as powerful an ice assassin or time stop. Well actually its not even close to as powerful... So that makes it a level 9 spell or a CR ten trap IIRC. Not going to touch the ECL. So its fair game to have a trap floating around.

We get problems if one decides to randomly change the encounter mid-fight. It doesn't matter if you are deciding to spawn extra enemies, or downgrade the dragon, or add a new trap. Two obvious RAW solutions is something disrupts the casting (like a trap swarm), or the dragon has wings of cover.

We also get problems if all the people in the world have invested large amounts into magical traps, but haven't sprung for traps that will wreck fighters. If you drop a CR ten trap on the mage why not drop a forcecage trap on the fighters. Designing the world to screw over one player is almost as unfair as changing negating their ablities with randomly spawning magic traps.

Hyfigh
2009-12-09, 05:35 PM
I'm not a big fan of blasting personally. I'm in the party of "why waste spell slots on something the majority in the party can do for free?". This isn't to say that blasting doesn't have its place. I just agree with the masses that there is usually something much more efficient that can be done with those spell slots.

I do desperately disagree with Karoht. Not only did your original argument fundimentally not work, you keep adjusting things in a minor capacity to try and fix your arguements that everyone else seems to be shutting down. I have no problem trying to limit the arcane caster so that the others in the group can shine, but if he plays regularly like an ass, he shouldn't last too long in the group.

Arcanists should try to stay off the radar as much as possible so that when something difficult is thrown their way, the group can turn up the power output a little and breeze through the challange with the same relative ease as the previous engagements.

horseboy
2009-12-10, 09:02 PM
Next round, the caster attempts again, after moving out of the field. The first spell, the enervate, mysteriously is subverted to a crystaline structure towards the back of the room. One that the caster would not have been able to spot due to the Dragon blocking LoS yet again. Upon a successful Knowledge: Arcana or similarly applicable skill, the caster realizes that the crystal is actually some form or Arcane Foci, one that acts as a magnet for offensive spells for a designated target, and tends to absorb any number of spells, usually between 3-10 depending on quality. Said Foci also typically has an astoundingly high SR. There is usually a control device to designate the target, like a ring or amulet. Upon realization of this and relaying relevant info to the party, the party can roll spot checks to spot what might be the control. Upon spotting a band of gold upon one of the dragon's horns, the spotter could then attempt to sunder said band. Or the melee (or ranger of the party) could go after the Foci. Or the caster could attempt to BLAST/Disintegrate/etc the foci and somehow overcome the SR.
/train

That spell is only going to nab you something useful once. Then the DM will sigh, kill it in an arbitrary fashion, and you'll realize Enchantment is probably the worst school ever (except for ray of stupidity and sleep)..
Soooo, enchantment is the worst school ever because your DM bans all the good spells in it? :smallconfused:

Arbitrary dosn't seem to mean what you think it does.

If the Dragon is expecting a powerful wizard to come knock down his door, it's not "Arbitrary" that he sets up a defense against that.
If a DM uses undead against a party that includes a rogue, is that an Arbitary removal of the rogue's sneak attack damage.Parity would be closer to if you covered up the fact that they were undead and instead described them as normal, living things, then after the rogue went for their SA dice say, "No SA for you, they're undead, surprise!"


If you want a RAW suggestion however...
Great, Dragon was an illusion, cast over one of the kobolds. He was doing it to show off and look cool to his kobold friends, when you adventurers kicked in the door and made his brain go splat. So you killed a kobold illusionist. Bravo.You can only do that once or twice before you've earned the moniker "******* dm."

Tyndmyr
2009-12-11, 10:22 AM
Yes, the AMF is a trap. The wizard would have a reflex save, but how many wizards have strong reflex saves. Heck, might not even have been the wizard who set it off, but seeing as he was insistant on getting his actions out and cut off the DM who was about to mention the fighter tripping the trap, well, I wouldn't feel bad for that wizard at that point. If you claim you've never had this happen, you either play with no more than 2 people, or you're fibbing.

It wasn't described as a trap. That said, traps add to ECL, and an AMF trap is going to be a significant encounter booster unless you're playing at pretty high levels. It looks like you're now just bringing out "It's a trap, haha, you're screwed".

Also, at any level where the wizard would reasonably be dragon hunting, why would you expect that he's walking?


Conversely, the party that sends the wizard in first is asking to have the wizard die. And if the wizard is at the back, and the rogue isn't near the door to even make the trap search check (because they don't have xray vision), then yes, the wizard declaring that he's going to pull any SoD spell out, assumes that he's going to go up the front (again, can't shoot through party), which also assumes that he's probably going to set off the trap. So by asking first 'are you going up the front' and the wizard says yes with a dopey grin on his face, then he's asking for it. He had a choice. I play with a lot of wizards who do this, and every time they do, they pay for it. No DM fiat required.

Again, there are wizards who, at any significant level, walk through dungeons at the head of the party without some means of negating...damn near everything?

I presume that the wizard positions himself to have LOS to the target before casting. This does not require he always be in front. He may be flying. The hallway may be more than 5ft wide. After all, presumably the dragon travels through this passageway as well. His teammates may be smaller than him.


When I said behind, I did not say 'behind blocking LoS/LoE.' I said behind. Then again, I took for granted that DnD players could use their imagination somewhat.
Had the caster been careful, or had perhaps looked around the room better, rather than taking for granted that the dragon would be the only thing in the room, they would have spotted it. However, when it's off in a darkened corner (which is behind the dragon and somewhat to the right for those who wish to knit pick), and looks like most of the other statues and other masonry that have been seen in this dungeon and would therefore been somewhat overlooked, (and probably not the first time they've encountered it, as THAT would be severely unfair).

Already covered by others. Directly contradicts what you said before.


As for the homebrew nature of the trap/defense, are you surprised to see homebrew anything on this website?

There is a lovely homebrew section on this site, yes. This is not it.


Not arbitrary. The wizard would have had all manner of ways around. Perhaps by not blundering into the room without being prepared, or letting the rogue do their job, or perhaps not being so zealous to outshine the party to make the big bad head go boom, they MIGHT have stopped to think and spotted most of this. In my experience, most players only need to make this mistake on about 4 separate occasions at most before they catch on.

None of those were part of the original example. You're inventing a stupid wizard theme that didn't exist, and the topic is not about that. Pretty blatant strawman.


Once again, you are shocked to find homebrew on this site?
Who said the spell was epic? It has one effect, alter LoE by changing the intended target of the spell. The statue still takes all the effects of the spell. If you want a Feat that would be applicable, see Spell Reflection, with a few tweaks.

Spell absorbtion or reflection effects that soak 6-10 levels of spells are pretty much invariably 9th level spells. They are also all or nothing, so in practice, they stop 1-2 spells. Yours was drastically more powerful than any comparable 9th level spell. Thus, it's epic.

Adding epic level spell traps is going to dramatically skew ECL.


Hang on here. No offence, but we are still playing DnD 3.5 or something similar right? Seeing as so many magical artifacts have effects that use a free action, or a constant effect, why is it hard to imagine such being the case here? This is needless knit picking now. Ditch the snark, you have much more intelligent points being made in your posts.

This isn't standard. Even for artifacts, most take a standard action, or at least a swift action to use. Free action use stuff is mostly only found in earlier stuff, before the swift/immediate action mechanic was sorted out.

However, anything that boosts action economy is more powerful. Remember you compared spell reflection to this? This is BETTER than a quickened spell reflection, both in action economy and in power of effect. So, it ends up very superior to a 13th level spell slot.


Who said it was made for a humanoid? Who said it wasn't made for the Dragon? By the Dragon? By the Dragon's minions? By the Dragon's master? Yet more needless snark. Once again, use your imagination a bit more.

I used my imagination. It said, UMD cures all. My memory says that the Draconomicon describes how magical toys made for dragons resize themselves to fit humanoids specifically so adventurers can loot the magic gear they use.


What is the value and what problems will it cause? Alright, now you have a relevant criticism. To answer the question, I'm going to ask, what value does it pose to the party?

Well, an AMF trap and an epic-level trap that gives me effective immunity to spells...you can't find value in that?


Can they even dismantle the trap in the first place?

Why would you bother dismantling it? It's a gold band on the wearer, and a crystal. Possibly also a decorative housing and such. This doesn't seem hard.


Does the mage blow it up first? Even if it is intact, can anyone in the party even figure out how it works, much less salvage any useful parts from it?

As long as it's not completely destroyed, you can fix it with a cantrip.

Figure out how it works? UMD. Screw salvage, use it as is.


Mostly, these are trivial issues to work out, mostly by associating a GP value to the parts as salvage if they disable it, as I doubt any of them will be able to repair it. But lets just assume that they get the control device AND the big heavy statue in 100% working order. Are they really going to lug it back to town? Carry it all around the dungeon? Does anyone in the party have a strength high enough to matter? No.

Seriously, you go dragon hunting and carry the loot back yourself, with no magical aid? With a wizard in the party? Shrink is an obvious option. So are bags of holding, tenser's floating disks, etc. There are a number of easily accessible ways to solve this that are routinely used.

If something is immensely valuable, the party *will* figure out a way to get it.


And if they can figure out how to recreate the effect, is the ability to redirect a spell intended for target X and bend it to target Y really that gamebreaking? Hardly. Most wizards wouldn't bother with it, some Clerics (if they could cast it somehow) might use it to redirect a spell to the nice tough figher instead of the party rogue who has 3 HP left. No more game breaking than a contingency or wish, no more than a SoD.

The ability to redirect spell targets is pretty powerful. Notice how spells that do anything like this are rather high level? SoDs are generally weak in comparison. An epic level version of the same is ludicrously powerful, probably as much so as having a dedicated counterspeller in the party.


Oh gee, making the caster THINK before they act, and having to adjust tactics mid-fight. Yeah, that's totally not an intelligent encounter. Nope, fireballing a dragon or SoD'ing a dragon is totally more intelligent than having to puzzle solve during a combat, or find a workaround. Totally.

Randomly changing the goalposts via ignoring the rules is not intelligent. It's just annoying. If fireballing the dragon to death worked in the first place, you failed at encounter design already. Stop trying to cheat your way out of it, nobody will actually be fooled.


For the record, if I had a tippy mage to deal with in the party (a frequent problem I assure you) I work constructs and gizmo's like this into the story and encounters all the time. Traps that destroy 1D4 spell slots for the day (level determined at random), traps that cast silence or other debuffs which prevent casting. Traps that cast debuffs which force the party to remove them or work around. Statues that emit constant areas of Anti-Magic Field or other anti-casting debuffs. Entire rooms of silence very fun for stealth encounters too. At lower levels, stuff like this is a bit brutal to casters, at high levels it makes them think before they act, and makes every slot precious. Stuff that makes them think, 'do I risk wasting a spell on a SoD, or toss good ole reliable fireball?'

Traps that cast invented spells(especially spell slot destroying ones) are pretty far from actual D&D. Silence or AMF are usable, but add to the ECL of the encounter. Also, both are solvable by a appropriately leveled caster, yknow.

And I fail to see how all these anti-caster shenanigans make using a fireball preferable.


Or hey, great, the mage SoD'd the dragon. Whoop de doo, the rogue hiding to the side of the door who ambushed him on the way in doesn't care too much. Neither do the 4 other rogues who are behind the party. The Kobolds however, are quite happy that their rogue friends showed up to help them, and quite pissed that the dragon is dead. Enjoy. Is that DM fiat too? I wonder, when you get into encounters, does your DM show you every single one his pages of stuff? You know, to prove it's legit? To prove that there were indeed 10 orcs and not 8 or 6? Seriously.

It's usually pretty obvious when someone goes into "you killed my toy, now I will make you pay" mode. I don't really need to look through notes to see when someone is holding a grudge and acting childish.

A good clue is magically appearing hordes of previously unmentioned, unrelated mobs that you didn't get a spot or listen check for, who love to target whoever was just successful.