Why are Orbs Conjuration?

[Mr. Zolrane]

So, I had an experience the other day. I was thumbing through my new copy of Complete Arcane (Yes, I am behind the times), and noticed the Orb of ____ line of Spells. I said to myself, "Hey, these are rather nice, and can help the blaster mage when he encounters spell resistance or those pesky evaders. All in all, a fine addition to the Evocation school... EGAD, what's this? They're conjuration!? That makes no sense; this is the most straightforward 'Pump fire into their rear-end until it falls off' spell I've ever seen!"

So yeah... why exactly is a line of spells which are blasting in its purest form conj, rather than evo? Has anyone ever heard a satisfactory explanation for this from Wizards?

[Caliphbubba]

I think you partially answered this yourself when you noted they were useful against Spell Resistance. Stuff that is Conjured isn't an ongoing effect, while things that are Evoked are. At least this is my line of thinking.

[Veyr]

The fluff reason is because they do not channel magical fire (etc.) a la Evocation, but create non-magical fire (etc.) a la Conjuration (Creation) (which is their subschool). This justifies (from a fluff perspective, and then only if you don't think too hard) them being SR: No.

Is this a good idea? Not in my opinion.

[Emperor Ing]

Becaus Evocation can't have nice things. Especially at moderate to high spell levels.

[Shadowknight12]

Not only that, they can be cast against creatures immune to magic (since Magic Immunity is merely unbeatable SR).

They're Conjuration because WotC has a conjuration fetish. Meaning, your guess is as good as any. They're Evocation in my games.

[Cog]

An interesting idea I've seen here is to make them dual-school (PHB 2, perhaps elsewhere) for conjuration and evocation. From the fluff, it makes sense that they're conjuration, but this way you can't ban evocation and still pick them up, and if you specialize in either conjuration or evocation you can gain those benefits with them.

[imperialspectre]

3.5's magic schools aren't about role protection, they're about fluff. The designers wanted orbs of totally-real-fire and totally-real-force summoned from another plane and thrown at the target, so they called them conjuration [creation]. It didn't hurt that now you could blast semi-effectively into an antimagic field, which you can't with evocations.

[supermonkeyjoe]

It's definitely a game mechanic rather than a fluff decision, fluff wise it makes no sense to conjure and propel a completely non-magical orb of magical force.

[Kylarra]

Technically we have precedent for a magical energy attack with SR:no in core (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/acidArrow.htm).

[Mr. Zolrane]

Not only that, they can be cast against creatures immune to magic (since Magic Immunity is merely unbeatable SR).

They're Conjuration because WotC has a conjuration fetish. Meaning, your guess is as good as any. They're Evocation in my games.


Um, that... kinda makes sense. Though I never thought I never thought of magic immunity as unbeatable SR, I thought of it as immunity. Is that found in RAW somewhere that I'm just unaware of. Regardless, I'm probably going to rule that the Orbs ignore SR but not MI. Also I will probably rule that they're evo as well.


3.5's magic schools aren't about role protection, they're about fluff. The designers wanted orbs of totally-real-fire and totally-real-force summoned from another plane and thrown at the target, so they called them conjuration [creation]. It didn't hurt that now you could blast semi-effectively into an antimagic field, which you can't with evocations.

One rule I'm actually pondering is making it so AMFs function normally if you're trying to cast on the inside, but merely require a CL check (perhaps with spell deflection if you fail) to cast into them from outside. /rabbit trail


Technically we have precedent for a magical energy attack with SR:no in core (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/acidArrow.htm).

That is true. Then again, Acid Arrow sucks. And should probably be evocation too now that I think about it.

[Shadowknight12]

Um, that... kinda makes sense. Though I never thought I never thought of magic immunity as unbeatable SR, I thought of it as immunity. Is that found in RAW somewhere that I'm just unaware of. Regardless, I'm probably going to rule that the Orbs ignore SR but not MI. Also I will probably rule that they're evo as well.

It's not an interpretation. It's RAW. Check out the golem's description in the monster manual or the SRD. Magic Immunity is not magic immunity. It cannot be, or else the game starts acting wonky.

[Kylarra]

There's a lot of things in 3.x that "should be done differently". Of course, what those are vary from person to person, but I'm just saying that there's precedent for an explicitly magical attack to be able to fired into an AM field, and overcome magic immunity. :smalltongue:

[Psyren]

I fluff them as near-zero sentience, highly unstable elementals, created on the Material and programmed to only do one thing - suicidally charge their target and transfer the energy holding them together on impact.

This explains a number of rules vagaries regarding them; such as why a fire orb burns hotter than mundane fire, why you don't need to actually throw them (that would be a ranged attack rather than a ranged touch attack), and how they are able to bypass SR/immunity.

As for making them evocation (either through conversion or dual-school), doing so disables one of their primary advantages, i.e. being able to pass through an AMF without suppression.

[Talya]

To put it simply:
An evocation version of Orb of Fire would blast something with magical fire.
This spell is conjuration because it conjures an intense, non-magical orb of fire, and fires it at its target. After it is conjured and launched, it exists physically without magic required to power it anymore. You can even fire an Orb of [energy] spell into an antimagic field and it functions fine. You cannot conjure one inside an antimagic field, but if you conjure it from the outside, and fire it in, it won't lose cohesion until after it does its job. That's the intent of the spell. If you're going to fire a single target energy blast that is unaffected by SR or antimagic fields, Evocation wouldn't make sense.

[Veyr]

Technically we have precedent for a magical energy attack with SR:no in core (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/acidArrow.htm).
And note how that is also Conjuration (Creation). I find the concept dubious, but WotC was consistent about it.

[Eldariel]

And note how that is also Conjuration (Creation). I find the concept dubious, but WotC was consistent about it.

All Acid-spells are indeed Conjuration, since Acid isn't evoked but rather created. It isn't even really an energy type like cold (obv. only by D&D physics), heat and electricity, but it is treated as an element so it's superficially similar. Acid Fog, Vitriolic Sphere and all that really drive this point home. Only heat, cold, sonic and electricity (and force obv) fall under Evocation. Makes sense, since acid is substance while the other types are energy.


I fluff them as near-zero sentience, highly unstable elementals, created on the Material and programmed to only do one thing - suicidally charge their target and transfer the energy holding them together on impact.

This explains a number of rules vagaries regarding them; such as why a fire orb burns hotter than mundane fire, why you don't need to actually throw them (that would be a ranged attack rather than a ranged touch attack), and how they are able to bypass SR/immunity.

As for making them evocation (either through conversion or dual-school), doing so disables one of their primary advantages, i.e. being able to pass through an AMF without suppression.

This is really the only fluff that I find makes sense for them. Of course, it'd have to be Conjuration: Summoning rather than Conjuration: Creation (unless they're actually without sentience), I suppose.

[Kylarra]

Well if you want to be technical about it, the Orbs of <blargh> line are all acid orbs that deal <blargh> type damage.

[Gullintanni]

It's definitely a game mechanic rather than a fluff decision, fluff wise it makes no sense to conjure and propel a completely non-magical orb of magical force.

That's not true at all. Evocation uses Force [Invisible Magic] whereas Conjuration uses Force [Physics]. Gravity, Inertia, etc. We can probably assume that conjured force, in this scenario, is ballistic force as opposed to simply raw magical energy.

[JaronK]

The basic answer: because Evocation can't have nice things.

Seriously though, it's spells like the Orbs and Maw of Chaos and Shadow Evocation and such that make Evocation such an easy school to ban... the other schools just do it better, for almost any given value of it.

JaronK

[Talya]

Evocation just needs better spells, that's all. Every once in a while, they created one (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/forcecage.htm) that keeps up with the other schools, in a way a shadow evocation cannot emulate.

[FMArthur]

There's also Streamers, a preposterously good Evocation blasting spell from some FR splat. That spell alone is almost enough to carry Evocation into being the properly powerful blasting school that it generally is not. Most of the time Evocation's best points are some 'just say no' force-based defenses.

[Talya]

There's also Streamers, a preposterously good Evocation blasting spell from some FR splat.

Huh. Can't find that one.

[Amnestic]

Huh. Can't find that one.

Shining South.

[Cog]

Well, there's three ways of reading Streamers's effect, with only one being absurdly powerful.

[Psyren]

Surrounds you with ribbons. If you so much as sneeze, they wreck your ****.

No save, but they are subject to SR though.

[ericgrau]

Covered about 93 times before. Try a google search including site:www.giantitp.com for the gory details.

Short version is WotC wanted some damage spells with some minor special effect as a bit of a 4e pretest (I'm paraphrasing their own words btw). Except they screwed up the rest about 7 different ways which is all anyone playing 3.5e ever pays attention to and/or exploits.

Since acid has come up here, conjuring weak acid (i.e., within the limitations of real materials) actually makes sense as it is a material and not merely an energy type.

[Cog]

Surrounds you with ribbons. If you so much as sneeze, they wreck your ****.
The question is, do they:

Constantly attack as if they had a readied action available to attack with,
Ready an attack each round, following the standard action limits, or
Ready an attack. No description is given of each streamer readying again, so each streamer only gets the one.

I think the last is closest to RAW. "A readied attack"; "When the target next takes any sort of action". A case might be made for the second reading, but the first - the one most people seem to go by - just doesn't match up with the text by my reading.

[NecroRick]

The basic answer: because Evocation can't have nice things.

JaronK

{Scrubbed}
Evocation has the best spells.

Check it out:

This is iconic (and deals massive damage if done right)
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Blade_Barrier

Use the concentration skill trick to get amazing amounts of damage
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Call_Lightning

You can't ask for more than this
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Miracle

Play some caster level tricks with this one and it's mass save or die - with no save. (!) (!!!!!)
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Holy_Word

[dragonsamurai77]

You're Delusional. Evocation has the best spells.

Check it out:

This is iconic (and deals massive damage if done right)
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Blade_Barrier

Use the concentration skill trick to get amazing amounts of damage
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Call_Lightning

You can't ask for more than this
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Miracle

Play some caster level tricks with this one and it's mass save or die - with no save. (!) (!!!!!)
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Holy_Word

There is something all of those spells have in common, though: they're divine spells. A divine caster doesn't care what school a spell is in because it's almost completely irrelevant. When referring to spell schools, it is generally implied that you are referring only to arcane spells, as Wizards are the only casters who care about schools, in that they can specialize and thus ban other schools. From an arcane perspective, Evocation has very little in its favor.

[Veyr]

Also, neither Blade Barrier nor Call Lightning is a particularly good spell.

[Psyren]

The question is, do they:

Constantly attack as if they had a readied action available to attack with,
Ready an attack each round, following the standard action limits, or
Ready an attack. No description is given of each streamer readying again, so each streamer only gets the one.

I think the last is closest to RAW. "A readied attack"; "When the target next takes any sort of action". A case might be made for the second reading, but the first - the one most people seem to go by - just doesn't match up with the text by my reading.

Even if you go with the third, and weakest, interpretation - you're still looking at 20d10 untyped damage at level 18, divisible among up to 4 different creatures as you choose, from 100+ feet away, no save. Using either of the other two readings results in orders of magnitude more.


{Scrubbed]Evocation has the best spells[/U].

All of those are divine spells, making them irrelevant. (Clerics and Druids don't have to ban schools - wizards do.)

[Cog]

Even if you go with the third, and weakest, interpretation - you're still looking at 20d10 untyped damage at level 18, divisible among up to 4 different creatures as you choose, from 100+ feet away, no save.
But requiring an attack roll, so miss chances still overcome them; the attack is delayed, meaning that your opponent's allies might have a chance to deal with them first (and if you split that damage up, it becomes much less than the d6/level standard for midlevel spells); and while the spell's damage scales rapidly, through 11th level it's only 5d10 (roughly 8d6), and so forth. Granted, at 12th level it suddenly becomes very potent, though by then it's falling behind the Disintegrate that you've gained access to.

Sure, the other readings are stronger. As I noted, they also follow the RAW of the spell the least.

[Stegyre]

There is something all of those spells have in common, though: they're divine spells.
Unless I miss my guess, that was exactly his point. :smallwink:

[Psyren]

Well first, if the target has a miss chance, Disintegrate suffers too. In addition, you only get one shot to hit somebody, whereas Streamers gives you up to four attack rolls; it also bypasses Ray Deflection. Third, Disintegrate comes online at least two levels later than Streamers. Finally, Disintegrate is fort partial, and a successful save reduces the damage to peanuts - a flat 5d6 at all levels.

Streamers is at least comparable, if not coming out on top.

[Talya]

{Scrubbed} Evocation has the best spells[/U].

Check it out:



Hahahaha! NecroRick, I sense you have suddenly acquired Darkvision, Low-Light Vision, Regeneration 5, and Scent, and possibly grown a size category. :smallsmile:

Elegant work, though.

[faceroll]

Becaus Evocation can't have nice things. Especially at moderate to high spell levels.

Wall of Force and Contingency are pretty boss. Forcecage is neato, too.


But requiring an attack roll, so miss chances still overcome them; the attack is delayed, meaning that your opponent's allies might have a chance to deal with them first (and if you split that damage up, it becomes much less than the d6/level standard for midlevel spells); and while the spell's damage scales rapidly, through 11th level it's only 5d10 (roughly 8d6), and so forth. Granted, at 12th level it suddenly becomes very potent, though by then it's falling behind the Disintegrate that you've gained access to.

Sure, the other readings are stronger. As I noted, they also follow the RAW of the spell the least.

Disintegrate underwhelms me. Love using it on PCs though. :)

[Eldariel]

Disintegrate underwhelms me. Love using it on PCs though. :)

Disintegrate is misunderstood. People think it's used for Vaarsuviusing people while in fact, it's mostly a landscaping tool (Undead and company are treated as parts of the landscape for these purposes).

[NecroRick]

Also, neither Blade Barrier nor Call Lightning is a particularly good spell.

There are two basic approaches to Call Lightning

Step (1)
Cast Call Lightning

Step (2)
Win

Alternately:

Step (1)
Cast Call Lightning

Step (2)
Perform tricks to get concentration as something other than a standard action

Step (3)
Go about your business

Step (4)
Win

--------

Amount of damage from typical casting of Call Lightning: 15d6
Comparing that to Disintegrate makes Disintegrate look bad (if you could even cast Disintegrate at fifth level, which you can't, but if you could it would only deal 10d6. Pathetic really - and Disintegrate is normally considered the gold standard of beyotch slapping).

[Toliudar]

Amount of damage from typical casting of Call Lightning: 15d6
Comparing that to Disintegrate makes Disintegrate look bad (if you could even cast Disintegrate at fifth level, which you can't, but if you could it would only deal 10d6. Pathetic really - and Disintegrate is normally considered the gold standard of beyotch slapping).

Just on the off-hand chance that you're not just trolling:

The real cost of doing that much damage with call lightning is of course the number of actions required. And swift concentration and the like do nothing with this spell - they allow you to maintain concentration on a spell with duration: concentration without spending a standard action. That's not what happens with this spell. Totally different thing.

[faceroll]

Disintegrate is misunderstood. People think it's used for Vaarsuviusing people while in fact, it's mostly a landscaping tool (Undead and company are treated as parts of the landscape for these purposes).

Sure.
But it's not very good to bring it up in a discussion on blasting, IMO, as it allows a save for a piddling amount of damage, and also requires a touch attack (which are actually kind of pesky to make vs. anything that stands a chance of failing a fort save).


Call Lightning

Uh, 3d6/round, save half, SR: yes, and lightning damage isn't much to write home about. It's nice if your DM will let you use swift concentrate to call it down as a swift action. Note, though, that anything with Lightning resist 5 is immune to half the damage, and anything with light resist 10 is immune to almost all of it.

[HunterOfJello]

The spells aren't evocation because the material they're creating isn't magical. The spellcaster uses conjuration to create some real acid, cold, electricity, fire, force, or sound that is instantaneously thrown at a target.

The spell line functions in a way that is very similar to the evocation school, but the two schools are similar in their methods. The generally accepted difference seems to be that evocation creates magical energy effects while conjurations occasionally uses magic to create real energy effects.

[Talya]

There are enough good Evocations to make going Elven Generalist appealing, if not optimal. (Because, if you're going Generalist, you might as well get something for it.)

That streamers spell makes me sad--because the FR campaign I played a sorceress in for 5 years+ is over and that spell would have been thematically perfect for her.

[Hecuba]

Not only that, they can be cast against creatures immune to magic (since Magic Immunity is merely unbeatable SR).

They're Conjuration because WotC has a conjuration fetish. Meaning, your guess is as good as any. They're Evocation in my games.


The earlier (3.0 IIRC) spells on which they were originally based were evocation as well. My impression was that the move was primarily done for fluff reasons, but I'd have to look much closer at the changes to defend position that with any confidence.

[Shadowknight12]

The earlier (3.0 IIRC) spells on which they were originally based were evocation as well. My impression was that the move was primarily done for fluff reasons, but I'd have to look much closer at the changes to defend position that with any confidence.

I have no knowledge of the previous spells you mention, but the reason they're in Conjuration has been expounded upon by other people on the thread. Whether we like it or not, there are reasons to support this. I personally feel that if Conjuration can do Evocation's job better (because, as it has been mentioned before, Conjuration creates "real" fire/cold/acid/etc while Evocation creates "magical" fire/cold/acid/etc, and "real" energy damage has all the advantages of "magical" energy damage with far less weaknesses), then Evocation has failed as a school. Conjuration, in my opinion, should not be an offensive school. It should have a handful of damaging tricks, sure, like those crappy acid spells, but that's it.

That's my opinion, however, and I understand why others might think differently.

[herrhauptmann]

{Scrubbed} Evocation has the best most Classic and Iconic spells[/U].

Fixed that for ya.

Question for everyone:
If conjuration conjures nonmagical fire/acid/cold/whatever, then shouldn't it then get stopped/reduced by anything that has DR/magic as well as anything that has DR of the appropriate element?
It's now going to become a new houserule of mine actually. Probably won't be an issue, because I'm the biggest powergamer I know, but there it stands.

I've got a guess on why evocation ends up subpar. And it might have been mentioned in other places, but as far as I'm concerned, I'm making this statement first.
a)WotC has always considered blasting wizards to be powerful.
b)Evocation which has almost entirely blasting spells, must then be very powerful.
c)Conjuration just has minor effects like summoning, not very powerful at all. :smallamused: So to make conjuration 'equal' in power to evocation, it had to get a bunch of damage spells. But since they couldn'tjust take the fireball and make it conjuration, they had to change it.
I mean, no one's going to buy a source book that has "All new spells, which are just like the ones we already sold you, just from different schools!" So they took each evocation spell and changed many parts of it, so it's now not even recognizable. And also by chance, extremely powerful.


The earlier (3.0 IIRC) spells on which they were originally based were evocation as well. My impression was that the move was primarily done for fluff reasons, but I'd have to look much closer at the changes to defend position that with any confidence.

Now I'm not sure, but I think that most of the spells in 3.0 got their schools from previous editions. (Back when evocation was powerful, because 10d6 damage actually was a serious threat to even a level 15 fighter.) With very few of them crossing schools in the AD&D/3E shift, unlike the 3.0/3.5 shift.

[Talya]

Fixed that for ya.

Question for everyone:
If conjuration conjures nonmagical fire/acid/cold/whatever, then shouldn't it then get stopped/reduced by anything that has DR/magic as well as anything that has DR of the appropriate element?
It's now going to become a new houserule of mine actually. Probably won't be an issue, because I'm the biggest powergamer I know, but there it stands.


DR does nothing against energy damage. This has nothing to do with whether or not it is magical. You can stand in a campfire and DR still doesn't apply.

Energy Resistance DOES apply. It also applies whether or not the energy is magical.

[Heliomance]

Personally, I houserule that they're evocation, SR: Yes.

[NecroRick]

Personally I always thought the meta-reason for adding those spells to conjuration is to throw a bone to specialists.

Evocation already has boatloads of blaster spells. Adding more blaster spells isn't going to achieve anything because players will cherry pick the 'best' ones anyway.

[Veyr]

Personally I always thought the meta-reason for adding those spells to conjuration is to throw a bone to specialists.

Evocation already has boatloads of blaster spells. Adding more blaster spells isn't going to achieve anything because players will cherry pick the 'best' ones anyway.
Except now there is absolutely no downside to banning Evocation, because the best blasting spells are in Conjuration.

[Fax Celestis]

Amount of damage from typical casting of Call Lightning: 15d6

Standard actions required for such: 5, plus a round (not a full-round, but a round) to cast the spell.

5 lightning bolts (5 standard actions) cast by an equally-leveled caster: 5d6 each, for 25d6, over a larger area.

[Hecuba]

I have no knowledge of the previous spells you mention, but the reason they're in Conjuration has been expounded upon by other people on the thread. Whether we like it or not, there are reasons to support this.

Ahh. Found them. New (or new then) spells introduced in Tome and Blood, with the lists beginning on page 83. "{Quasi Element X} Orb", with the "lesser"s are level 2, the standards are level 4. And they are in fact evocation. I wonder if they're ever listed as specifically updated elements.

Edit: Ooh-- dimension lock. I had forgotten about that one.

Update: Yep-- R. Baker lists (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041105a&page=3) them as specific updates of of the earlier spells

[faceroll]

Except now there is absolutely no downside to banning Evocation, because the best blasting spells are in Conjuration.

Best single target blasting spells, anyway.

[Veyr]

Most of the time, that's what you want anyway. If you're dealing with large numbers of enemies, either they're relatively weak, in which case it doesn't really matter what you use, or this is an encounter you should be running from or finding some alternate solution for.

Yes, I'm sure there are cases where Fireball is better than Orb of Fire, but most of the time I'd expect the opposite to be the case.

[faceroll]

Most of the time, that's what you want anyway. If you're dealing with large numbers of enemies, either they're relatively weak, in which case it doesn't really matter what you use, or this is an encounter you should be running from or finding some alternate solution for.

An alternate solution, like optimized multi target blasting. Armies of mooks are actually pretty dangerous if you know what you're doing as a DM, and they don't add anything to the official CR.


Yes, I'm sure there are cases where Fireball is better than Orb of Fire, but most of the time I'd expect the opposite to be the case.

In my experience, fireball isn't actually that bad. There are typically multiple dangerous opponents, and doing 30 damage to each isn't so awful. The problems with fireball, as you well know, are resistances, and SR, which the orb can get around nicely, and typically, a solid fog or black tentacles or what have you is much more action efficient.

[Shadowknight12]

Ahh. Found them. New (or new then) spells introduced in Tome and Blood, with the lists beginning on page 83. "{Quasi Element X} Orb", with the "lesser"s are level 2, the standards are level 4. And they are in fact evocation. I wonder if they're ever listed as specifically updated elements.

Huh, that's quite interesting. Odd, how they moved them to Conjuration despite previous evidence that they should be in Evocation. Very odd.

[Eldariel]

Huh, that's quite interesting. Odd, how they moved them to Conjuration despite previous evidence that they should be in Evocation. Very odd.

They were probably reschooled 'cause the writers figured they don't really make sense in Evo (Evocations allow Spell Resistance. Period. That's the reason SR exists in the first place) and thus were moved into Conj. Tele too, though Tele was moved from Trans (dunno why really; Teles should be Evocation for both, balance and fluff-reasons - or fluff-wise, they should either be universal or their own school as they make sense in none of the existing ones).

[Psyren]

People seem to be missing the point of this exercise. The whole reason behind rating schools to begin with is that specialist and focused specialist wizards (as well as some PrCs) have to ban some of them.

Conjuration may - repeat, may - be slightly worse at dealing with crowds, but it can still pull it off, in addition to rocking single-target blasting, and bringing a ton of utility to the table that Evocation simply can't match.

Conjuration has a ton of AoE even just in core. Your very first AoE spell is likely to be Grease, and Glitterdust is AoE as well. And it only gets better from there - Stinking Cloud, Solid Fog, Black Tentacles, Acid Fog , and the deadly Cloudkill. These are your AoE tools. Or you can summon something to cast your fireballs and flamestrikes for you if you really want them.

Outside core it gets truly ridiculous. Arc of Lightning, Blast of Sand, Vitriolic Sphere, Nauseating/Acid Breath, Deadly Lahar etc. Evo falls further and further behind. And we haven't even looked at the other things Conjuration can do yet, like teleportation or creating items.

[Illven]

People seem to be missing the point of this exercise. The whole reason behind rating schools to begin with is that specialist and focused specialist wizards (as well as some PrCs) have to ban some of them.

Conjuration may - repeat, may - be slightly worse at dealing with crowds, but it can still pull it off, in addition to rocking single-target blasting, and bringing a ton of utility to the table that Evocation simply can't match.

Conjuration has a ton of AoE even just in core. Your very first AoE spell is likely to be Grease, and Glitterdust is AoE as well. And it only gets better from there - Stinking Cloud, Solid Fog, Black Tentacles, Acid Fog , and the deadly Cloudkill. These are your AoE tools. Or you can summon something to cast your fireballs and flamestrikes for you if you really want them.

Outside core it gets truly ridiculous. Arc of Lightning, Blast of Sand, Vitriolic Sphere, Nauseating/Acid Breath, Deadly Lahar etc. Evo falls further and further behind. And we haven't even looked at the other things Conjuration can do yet, like teleportation or creating items.

You know it's things like this that make me want to make a what each school has to give a specialist, and what you lose by banning them. Kind of like the why is each class in it's tier.

[Psyren]

You know it's things like this that make me want to make a what each school has to give a specialist, and what you lose by banning them. Kind of like the why is each class in it's tier.

Conjuration is at the top
Transmutation is a close second
Illusion comes third.

Necromancy and Abjuration are average.

Evocation and Enchantment are typically bringing up the rear. Personally I rate enchantment lower as Evocation still has cool things it can do, but unfortunately Illusion takes both their jerbs (Will saves and the rare evo you would need like Contingency.)

Divination is mushroom (unbannable.)

[Shadowknight12]

Conjuration is at the top
Transmutation is a close second
Illusion comes third.

Necromancy and Abjuration are average.

Evocation and Enchantment are typically bringing up the rear. Personally I rate enchantment lower as Evocation still has cool things it can do, but unfortunately Illusion takes both their jerbs (Will saves and the rare evo you would need like Contingency.)

Divination is mushroom (unbannable.)

I would personally rate Abjuration far higher than that (coming in third after Transmutation), but that's just because of how potent Dispel Magic is. I would concede that it only reaches game-breaking potential with splat support, though.

[Illven]

Conjuration is at the top
Transmutation is a close second
Illusion comes third.

Necromancy and Abjuration are average.

Evocation and Enchantment are typically bringing up the rear. Personally I rate enchantment lower as Evocation still has cool things it can do, but unfortunately Illusion takes both their jerbs (Will saves and the rare evo you would need like Contingency.)

Divination is mushroom (unbannable.)

Yes but the reasons why might not be so obvious to a new player, and one could argue that you might want to specialize in divination since you only lose one spell school.

[Veyr]

A lot of the problem with Abjuration from a Wizard's point of view is that the Abjuration spells on the Sor/Wiz list aren't particularly better than the Abjurations on the Cleric list. If you have a Cleric in the party, he's probably already preparing Dispel Magic, which means it's less important that you do.

[Shadowknight12]

A lot of the problem with Abjuration from a Wizard's point of view is that the Abjuration spells on the Sor/Wiz list aren't particularly better than the Abjurations on the Cleric list. If you have a Cleric in the party, he's probably already preparing Dispel Magic, which means it's less important that you do.

I completely agree, which is why I think that it needs splat support to reach its true potential. However, I think that the strongest point of Abjuration (and this is something that is seen more on the wizard list than the cleric's) is the "anti-magic" aspect of it. A properly prepared Abjurer can utterly destroy most other spellcasters. It can dispel summons, Banish called creatures, dispel a transmuter's self-buffs, counterspell/energy-resist the conjurer's Orbs, impede the conjurer's teleportations, shield himself from the necromancer's effects, etc. And with things like Spell Theft and Reaving Dispel, it can turn a caster's assets into disadvantages.

The only problem with Abjuration is that it's too reactive. Conjuration and Transmutation are proactive. You cast a spell and you win the game. Abjuration hinges too heavily on what the opponent brings to bear. Or, failing that, it just protects you from stuff. That's hardly game-breaking.

[Illven]

Do I have permission to use the last few post in a what each school has to offer by specializing, and what you lose by giving it up?

[Talya]

Blasting is suboptimal as a wizard, generally. The orbs get excepted from that because they also put your target out of commission for a full round.

As a sorcerer, blasting is not terrible. If you're in a melee-heavy party, it's amazing how much a single Delayed Blast Fireball right off the bat makes them look better through the rest of the fight, as they actually kill stuff fairly quickly. (Because everything they are fighting is already missing 70 hit points.) Thing as a sorcerer, is you don't have to prepare to blast. You can opportunisticly fire off an area nuke if you've ever got a good opportunity to do so.

[Cerlis]

not sure why its weird. Conjuration. you conjure things. whether they are items to help you or forces from another plane to hurt your enemies.


I'm conjuring fire and throwing it at you. I'm conjuring ice and throwing it at you.


Evocation isnt blasting. Evocation is evoking . doesnt evocation have many spells that "summon" something ( the spectral horse i think, and either mage armor or magic shield i think). the difference is its evoking it rather than conjuring it

Conjuration-summoning it with magic. The magic is in the summoning and any ties you make to it to control it.

Evocation-Creating it with magic. Thus it is still magic and susceptible to SR.

[NNescio]

not sure why its weird. Conjuration. you conjure things. whether they are items to help you or forces from another plane to hurt your enemies.


I'm conjuring fire and throwing it at you. I'm conjuring ice and throwing it at you.


Evocation isnt blasting. Evocation is evoking . doesnt evocation have many spells that "summon" something ( the spectral horse i think, and either mage armor or magic shield i think). the difference is its evoking it rather than conjuring it

Conjuration-summoning it with magic. The magic is in the summoning and any ties you make to it to control it.

Evocation-Creating it with magic. Thus it is still magic and susceptible to SR.

Phantom Steed is Conjuration. Mage Armor is Conjuration. Shield is Abjuration.

The "Creation" subschool also belongs to Conjuration. Phantom Steed, Mage Armor, and the various Orb of X spells are also Conjuration (Creation) spells.

Evocation is also explicitly mentioned as having a certain 'affinity' for blasting:


Evocation

Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing. Many of these spells produce spectacular effects, and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage.

Most Evocation "creations" tend to be short-lived energy constructs of some sort. Creation effects are usually more often found in the realm of Conjuration instead.


Conjuration

Each conjuration spell belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures, or some form of energy to you (the summoning subschool), actually transport creatures from another plane of existence to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport creatures or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation). Creatures you conjure usually, but not always, obey your commands.

A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it.

The creature or object must appear within the spell’s range, but it does not have to remain within the range.

[ffone]

I fluff them as near-zero sentience, highly unstable elementals, created on the Material and programmed to only do one thing - suicidally charge their target and transfer the energy holding them together on impact.

This explains a number of rules vagaries regarding them; such as why a fire orb burns hotter than mundane fire, why you don't need to actually throw them (that would be a ranged attack rather than a ranged touch attack), and how they are able to bypass SR/immunity.


Ranged touch attack doesn't mean "not thrown", it means "isn't stopped by armor" (presumably the energy burns/freezes/conducts/oozes through it).

For example - alchemist's fire and acid flasks. Definitely thrown.

The "kamikaze elemental" fluff is hilarious. I might steal it!

[Shadowknight12]

Do I have permission to use the last few post in a what each school has to offer by specializing, and what you lose by giving it up?

Sure, no problem with me.

[faceroll]

Conjuration is at the top
Transmutation is a close second
Illusion comes third.

Necromancy and Abjuration are average.

Evocation and Enchantment are typically bringing up the rear. Personally I rate enchantment lower as Evocation still has cool things it can do, but unfortunately Illusion takes both their jerbs (Will saves and the rare evo you would need like Contingency.)

Divination is mushroom (unbannable.)

It's a toss up between Gate and Shapechange, really. Personally, I rank Transmutation higher than Conjuration because Shapechange cheese is sooooo good.


People seem to be missing the point of this exercise. The whole reason behind rating schools to begin with is that specialist and focused specialist wizards (as well as some PrCs) have to ban some of them.

Conjuration may - repeat, may - be slightly worse at dealing with crowds, but it can still pull it off, in addition to rocking single-target blasting, and bringing a ton of utility to the table that Evocation simply can't match.

Conjuration has a ton of AoE even just in core. Your very first AoE spell is likely to be Grease, and Glitterdust is AoE as well. And it only gets better from there - Stinking Cloud, Solid Fog, Black Tentacles, Acid Fog , and the deadly Cloudkill. These are your AoE tools. Or you can summon something to cast your fireballs and flamestrikes for you if you really want them.

Outside core it gets truly ridiculous. Arc of Lightning, Blast of Sand, Vitriolic Sphere, Nauseating/Acid Breath, Deadly Lahar etc. Evo falls further and further behind. And we haven't even looked at the other things Conjuration can do yet, like teleportation or creating items.

Acid Fog and Cloudkill *can* be really great, if you target isn't acid resistant or immune to poison. The real advantages of conjuration isn't the damage, it's the totally unique ability to shut down massive swathes of the battlefield at will. But that's not blasting. Blasting ends things; BF control saves things for later.

And the whole "just summon a friend" mentality, I have never seen pulled off outside of Gate abuse or *maybe* that partial caster build that people like to rub about. Malvoker? Summoning a CR-5 monster just isn't that great. It has crap to-hit and crap HP and crap AC. If it ever poses a mild threat, it just gets focused fire to smithereens or cleaved by something big.

Summoning for useful SLAs, I can see. But you'd be hard pressed to replace your warblade with a SMVII.

[NNescio]

Five levels in Malconvoker basically trades one CL for a free Twin spell when summoning 'Evil' creatures. Plus a free Extend, if they can make the bluff check, and other bennies.

Still inferior to a properly tricked out Batman/God wizard at the end of the day, but it's a rather decent option for a dedicated summoner.

[MeeposFire]

It's a toss up between Gate and Shapechange, really. Personally, I rank Transmutation higher than Conjuration because Shapechange cheese is sooooo good.



Acid Fog and Cloudkill *can* be really great, if you target isn't acid resistant or immune to poison. The real advantages of conjuration isn't the damage, it's the totally unique ability to shut down massive swathes of the battlefield at will. But that's not blasting. Blasting ends things; BF control saves things for later.

And the whole "just summon a friend" mentality, I have never seen pulled off outside of Gate abuse or *maybe* that partial caster build that people like to rub about. Malvoker? Summoning a CR-5 monster just isn't that great. It has crap to-hit and crap HP and crap AC. If it ever poses a mild threat, it just gets focused fire to smithereens or cleaved by something big.

Summoning for useful SLAs, I can see. But you'd be hard pressed to replace your warblade with a SMVII.

I don't know. Sure you can shapechange into something but I can gate that same creature in AND do something else at the same time. I have an action advantage. Of course there is no reason to not use both...