[3.5] Make Blasting Viable via Simple Fixes? (PEACH)

[legomaster00156]

Warning: likely very newbish blasting fix on the way.

So, inspired by this post (http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=162378), I've decided to set about on the near-ultimate quest: making magical nuking a decent choice. This will, at least partially, be a collection of ideas from that very thread. I will be going over the 3.5 Sorcerer/Wizard Core list only (minus a few, popular spells not in Core), but hopefully, if this works, I can give you enough help to balance out other Evocation spells.

Conjuration (creation) vs. Evocation (Abjuration, too!)
Before we start, allow me say this: Conjuration (creation) is a terrible, terrible idea, and is a stain on WotC's existence, forever. Here's why.

In effect, an evocation draws upon magic to create something out of nothing.

a creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates.
It pretty much exists for no reason other than to make Evocation an even more useless school of magic. I truly believe that the Creation line and Genesis/the Create Demiplane line should be Evocation-based. Upon solid viewing of the spell list, I also came up with Abjuration-based Prismatic Wall and Prismatic Sphere. But let's move on to the actual blasty spells.

Spell Rant
Let's start with some of the basics when it comes to the spells themselves, by taking some of the better blasty spells that aren't even in Evocation. The ones that come to mind are the Conjuration-based Orbs and Fog spells, and the Transmutation-based Disintegrate.

Orb spells
The Orb spells' placement makes no sense at all, but I've already discussed my blinding hatred of Conjuration (creation). Now, the thing is that, as a general rule, you don't allow spell resistance to apply, while every nearly-half-decent Evocation spell does. The solution here is... actually, we'll need more than one solution, but for now, let's move these abominations over to Evocation, where they belong.

Disintegrate Rant
Now, I'll admit that I actually (somewhat) understand Disintegrate's school choice (turning bodies to dust is sort of Transmutation-based), but what I don't understand is why it outdamages every single Evocation spell up until this point and beyond.
2d6 untyped damage/level, requiring only a touch attack and a failed save (and SR penetration, if applicable) at medium range, is actually better than, say, Chain Lightning (also a level 6 spell): maximum 20d6 lightning damage vs. one enemy, half damage to one secondary target per level; SR applicable; Reflex for half damage.
And, let's face it, a Mazimized Disintegrate (240 damage; 60 damage on a successful save) is often better than a Meteor Swarm (+3 save DC relatively, SR applicable, Reflex save for damage damage from the fire damage; average damage when hit by every single meteor without a save being 24 bludgeoning damage + 36 fire damage). The only real thing a Meteor Sarm has going for it is multiple targets, and that does not make up for it in the slightest.
The only thing preventing me from moving this spell to Evocation is that it actually works better in Transmutation. It stays, but I may be coming back to nerf it later.

Spell Level Rant
Finally, spell levels. Frank Trollman (http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/olderProducts/pathfinderRPGBeta/feedback/alpha1/combatMagic/evocationsShouldBeLowerLevel) brings up an excellent point in that the Evocation spell balance is terrible when it comes to levels. Is Delayed Blast Fireball really as impressive as Resurrection? Greater Teleport? Empowered Disintegrate? Empowered Harm? Limited Wish??? The answer, of course, is "absolutely not!" So, let's go over the blasty spells and take them to appropriate levels.

L1: Magic Missile, Burning Hands, Shocking Grasp, Gust of Wind (It's not actually blasty, but come on! It's a freaking gust of wind!), Flaming Sphere
L2: Scorching Ray, Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Ice Storm, Cone of Cold
L3: Shout, Wall of Fire, Chain Lightning
L4: Freezing Sphere, Delayed Blast Fireball, Polar Ray (being generous, here), Sunburst (if you change it so that is dispels Darkness spells of lower than 5th-6th level)
L5: Mage's Sword (it's actually pretty decent), Prismatic Spray, Clenched Fist
L6: Greater Shout, Crushing Hand
L7: Meteor Swarm

Might I be putting them at lower spell levels than they deserve? Maybe a bit. I welcome feedback on this issue. However, I find the Meteor Swarm is simply nothing compared to Summon Monster VIII (pull in a few Celestial Lions, they'll do the damage for you) or, even worse, PAO (I don't need to explain it's brokenness). So, obviously, Evocation will need some 8th/9th-level blasting spells now that I've taken them away. Remember: at these levels, they're competing with PAO, Shapechange, Gate, Wail of the Banshee, and Wish. Suggestions are welcome. Here is one that I personally enjoyed the idea of for a 9th-level spell.


Lavawell, where you have a geyser of lava come up from the earth right into someone. They take 20 dice of damage and are entangled. Then they take 20 dice of damage at the beginning of every turn they stay in the Lava Well, and they have to make a Reflex Save or be unable to move like they were bound in a Web that happened to be made of flaming stone. And you know what? That's not even that good (it's just 140 damage in two resistance chunks on a successful save). It should probably create a growing pool of lava for some long period of time.

Blasterbane
Next, we will discuss the +5 Unholy Blasterbane Greataxes: saving throws and spell resistance.

Reflex saving throws
The less severe problem is enemies with high saving throws. Now, ideally, you should be able to target every saving throw effectively. This is not the case: every decent blasting spell targets Reflex. Wizards of the Coast then went and made Evasion, just to screw blasters even harder. This presents two questions: How can I make my saving throw DC's harder to beat, and how can I make my enemy's saving throws weaker?
The first question's answer lies in feats. Many people would consider Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus to be traps, and in most cases, they are correct. However, if one wizard can make use if it, it's the Evoker. +2 to your Evocation save DC's should not be underestimated. In addition, I shouldn't have to tell you that you should cast Fox's Cunning on yourself, or have your party buffer do it for you. A wand should do it.
The next question can be answered with other spells. The thing is, if you're a specialist wizard (or, Bahamut bless you, a sorcerer), we can't be certain that you have ready access to saving-throw-decreasing spells.
And even if you do, between Fox's Cunning, Spell Focus/Greater Spell Focus, and whatever save-dispelling spell you found, we probably have -8 to saving throws, at most. You can still easily be screwed by a Rogue with Lightning Reflexes and a Cloak of Resistance. But what can an Evoker do about this? Blasters get no buffing or nerfing spells at all.

Spell Resistance
And then there's the even worse problem of spell resistance, and few ways to counter it. These ways include boosting your caster level to astronomical levels (very difficult), getting Spell Penetration (spends one of your extremely limited feats), and a very, very few number of SR-reducing spells (which, once again, you may not have access to). So, what happens to the average Evoker when faced with, say, a Drow? The answer is simple: they lose. So, what's the answer?

The Answer
The answer once again lies in stealing from the *shudder* Conjuration (creation) school. Along with Orbs, it gives you access to the Fog spells, most notably Acid Fog, which will allow you to (along with Evocation's famous Wall spells) trap a creature inside a horrible cube of suffocating death. Even a Drow Rogue can only survive so long against an Evoker when they have this trap on their side. Behold: another reason that these spells should actually be in Evocation.

Summary
So, in a nutshell, what is truly required to make blasting an effective strategy?

1. Better high-level spells, and several spells need to be brought down in level.
2. The accursed Conjuration (creation) spells should be brought over to Evocation, as should creation-style spells like Prismatic Wall and Prismatic Sphere.

What? That's all? Yes, it is. Is this at all unreasonable? Of course not. And is it breaking the spirit of Evocation? No. So, why is Evocation left to rot? There's no reason. With these simple fixes, blasting, the most fun play style, and yet the second most useless (right after Divination), becomes a viable option.

[Yitzi]

Taking them one at a time:

1. I can sort of see how creation would go into conjuration and not make evocation useless, so long as it can't create anything containing large amounts of energy (so acid and a few weak fire effects are ok, serious energy effects are not).
The Orb spells are of course needing either removal or weakening (for acid)/a school switch and SR (everything else).
2. The thing that makes Disintegrate sufficiently weak as compared to evocation is that it's not an overpowered damage spell, it's a destruction effect that can be resisted with enough hit points. That's why it has a relatively minor effect on a successful save (rather than half damage) and affects only a single target. Maximized Disintegrate is nasty, but most of the time you might as well just use Finger of Death instead.
3. The thing about spell levels is that unlike other categories of spells, blasty spells scale more or less linearly with level. The two approaches to this are either to make them scale superlinearly like the others (the way to do this would be with heavy metamagic use), or to make their competitors scale more or less linearly as well (by making the heavily impressive effects far harder to achieve). Because wizards are so powerful as it is, I prefer the latter approach.
4. Yes, every good blasting spell targets reflex. This is only a problem for someone who absolutely insists on solving every problem with blasting, and such a person has less problems (due to Reflex Half rather than Reflex Negates, as well as Reflex tending to be one of the weaker saves for most enemies) than his equivalents who insist on solving every problem with save-or-die spells or on solving every problem with enchantments. It's not as if focusing on blasting spells means you can't round things out with a few other spells. (And even if you did, that's why you're in a party; everyone has problems they can't handle personally.)

As for spell resistance, every other caster not using broken (i.e. ignores spell resistance and does damage like a spell that doesn't) has the same problem. A typical drow has SR equal to his CR+10 or CR+11, so you should be bypassing it about half the time. That's often enough to make him a beatable opponent (especially with a party to help).


Basically, what you're trying to do is make Evocation be able to stand on its own against any opponent. That is unreasonable; in a balanced form of D&D, not only will every school be unable to stand on its own against every single opponent, every class will have opponents it can't handle on its own.

For instance, let's look at some other schools:

Abjuration: Other than Imprisonment, banishment-type spells, and some traps, this school has no offensive abilities at all. Its weakness (when taken by itself) is...pretty much everything.
Conjuration: Looks nifty, but against anyone with half-decent energy resistance the blastier spells (which all do damage over time or very weak damage) are next to useless, and a single barbarian with Great Cleave will tend to turn your summons into mush quite quickly.
Divination: It's harder to find something that won't win against someone with purely divination spells.
Enchantment: An elven monk with Iron Will and Protection from Evil will give an enchanter frustration. Or better yet, anyone with Mind Blank.
Illusion: Again, while useful it doesn't really have any way to harm someone who's immune to fear except by weaker imitations of other schools (evocation and conjuration, both of which are not too hard to counter.)
Necromancy: A cleric with Death Ward is immune to most of the spells in this school.
Transmutation is really the only school that doesn't have notable weaknesses, and even it will tend to lose against someone who's adequately prepared if overpowered spells are banned.

The real reason blasting is so unviable is that it isn't overpowered like most of the other options a wizard has; the solution isn't to improve blasting but to weaken the other wizards. A blasting-focused (but not pure-blasting) wizard is a quite respectable tier 3 or strong tier 4.

[Seerow]

Have you considered rather than importing the Orb Spells, removing them, and making a +1 or +2 metamagic usable for evocation only that allows your evocation (and only evocation) spells to bypass SR?

[Phosphate]

Transmutation is really the only school that doesn't have notable weaknesses, and even it will tend to lose against someone who's adequately prepared if overpowered spells are banned.

Which is precisely the REAL problem that must be addressed.
I agree that disintegrate fits more in transmutation than evocation. So it stands to reason that the only valid way to put this beautiful, beautiful spell into evocation is to....destroy transmutation! :D

Don't be mad at me just yet. All former transmutation spells could be easily redistributed. Here:



Universal: Mending, Erase, Alter Self, Spider Climb, Secret Page, Fabricate, Transmute Mod to Rock, Transmute Rock to Mud, Control Weather, Polymorph Any Object

Conjuration: Rope Trick, Blink, Shrink Item, Stone Shape, Passwall, Control Water, Move Earth, Ethereal Jaunt, Etherealness

Evocation: Mage Hand, Open/Close, Animate Rope, Feather Fall, Knock, Levitate, Pyrotechnics, Fly, Overland Flight, Telekinesis, Disintegrate, Reverse Gravity

Abjuration: Magic Weapon, Flame Arrow, Keen Edge, Greater Magic Weapon, Stone to Flesh

Necromancy: Enlarge Person, Expeditious Retreat, Jump, Reduce Person, Bear's Endurance, Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, Gaseous Form, Haste, Slow, Water Breathing, Mass Enlarge Person, Polymorph, Mass Reduce Person, Animal Growth, Baleful Polymorph, Mass Bear's Endurance, Mass Bull's Strength, Mass Cat's Grace, Flesh to Stone, Transformation, Statue, Iron Body, Temporal Stasis, Shapechange

Enchantment: Eagle's Splendor, Fox's Cunning, Owl's Wisdom, Mnemonic Enhancer, Mass Eagle's Splendor, Mass Fox's Cunning, Mass Owl's Wisdom, Mage's Lucubration,

Divination: Message, Darkvision, Whispering Wind, Time Stop

[Shadow Lord]

Why does Necromancy have Shapechange?

[NeoSeraphi]

*facepalm* You think that transformation and shapechange are necromancy effects? That's not just a reach. It's downright ridiculous. Shapeshifting is a major part of magic in legends, and that's what the transmutation school is all about.

Disintegrate does outdamage pretty much everything. It's not the best damaging spell, however, that right belongs exclusively to harm. (Automatically maximized 1d10/level, max 15d10, targets Will rather than Reflex and ignores Evasion/Improved Evasion completely, and can even be used to heal as well, as a 6th level spell)

The best part is that any wizard with Arcane Disciple (Destruction) can use his familiar to deliver harm as a touch spell, so they don't have to risk their neck for it. True, such a wizard could only cast one harm per day, but as I just stated, harm is the ultimate damage-dealer and therefore it can pretty much end an encounter (if you're only fighting one enemy)

If not, there's always mass harm. It's not quite as good as harm, but it's much much better than meteor swarm (20d12 in an AOE, Will Half? Yes please!)

And of course there's the fact that negative energy is the least resisted energy in the game. (Only undead are "immune" to it, as opposed to the ridiculous number of plants, dragons, outsiders, and elementals that are immune to the different energy types) This is assuming that a construct's immunity to "necromancy" effects doesn't give it immunity to negative energy (Way to go, WotC. That line is so incredibly vague)

So, you want better blasting? Stop looking at the sorcerer and the evocation school. And don't even think about Conjuration (Creation) or Transmutation either. Necromancy is the best blasting school in the game, and the dread necromancer can take down many more enemies than a non-Mailman sorcerer. (I've seen it done. It's freaking scary)

Edit: Dread Necromancers also get access to the most broken blasting buff feat in the game, Mastery of Day and Night (Player's Guide to Eberron) which grants free Maximize Spell to all your cure and inflict spells with no increased casting time or level adjustment. Want some metamagic abuse? How about a -3 adjustment for Maximize Spell on every single one of your damage spells other than harm, and that's just because harm is already maximized! (Note: Does not actually affect greater harm or mass harm, so it's not quite as broken as I made it sound, but it's still really damn good)

Edit 2: Wow, what a massive derail. I'm really sorry OP. Stupid me and my stupid rant. Here, let me make it up to you with some actual helpful advice. *scolding self*

Lowering spell levels is a good idea. The problem with spells with damage caps is that as you advance through your career as a wizard, you gain access to higher level spells that consume higher level spells lots, but they deal just as much damage as your lower level spells (this is partly due to how auto-scaling works [which they fixed pretty well with psionics in my opinion] and partly to do with how WotC was so in love with the d6 that they never thought to actually mix it up when they were writing damage spells)

So how do you fix that and make the evocation spells seem more unique and different from each other? Unfortunately, it's not an easy task. To make an evocation spell feel like its actually worth learning, you have to give it some kind of effect other than damage, so it's not just an Energy Substituted fireball anymore. That, along with the different ranges and AOE spreads, combined with some higher damage caps, higher damage dice, and perhaps some world-changing effects (such as grease, or creating a hole in the earth, or conjuring a storm) will make evocation spells more special and different.

To most players, that will be enough, even though you might not increase their power. Just making the spells different from each other will make them interesting, and people might not be so quick to ban the school.

Also, do something about shadow evocation. Seriously, that spell is not cool.

[Kenneth]

I would like to add a few pennies into this thread.

2nd ed evocationw hile still not as powerful as conjuration ( in only that why use 1 spell to blast something when you can use 1 spell to summon something that can use the same blast spell 3 times per day?)

it was definately much better than its 3rd ed itineration. for example in 2nd and 1st ed it was not just evocation it was evocation/invokation

stinking cloud was evo/Invo , as was energy drain.. which was dual school with necromancy :)

the biggest difference was not the amount fo damage done but the HP of everything

you see back in teh dya when a 20th level fighter had 110 ish HP average a fireball from a 10th level wiazrd was still a big threat capable of dealing a bit over half the fighter's max HP, and the fighter may or may not have had any fire resiatnce (chances were he didn't becuase there wasn't super magicmart back in 1st and 2nd days)

with 3rd ed the HP of everything went through the roof, but spell damage did not.. now a 20th wizard has teh average HP of 2nd ed 20th fighter and you can imagine what the fighter has (closer to 250-270) so that 10d6 fireball is paltry and in addition chances are the fighter has fire resiatnce 15 or 20 so he can just sya 'eh i won't even make the save' and ignore a fourth of it ( or more accurate half of the damage rolled)


for me evocation spells up to 3rd level are perfect.. but from 4th level to 7th level the damage needs to be increased by 50% at minimum and 8th and 9th level evocation spells need again at least a 50% increase in damage as well as secondary effects to the spells. why would any mage in theri right minde take metoer swarm over shapechange right now?

easy.. they wouldn't not only is metero swarms dmage only marginally better than a fireball's but at that high of a level, is anything NOT immune to fire damage?

if polar ray is an 8th level spells it should be doing 1d10 dmg per caster level AND oh.. i don't know also deal like 6 dex damage or daze for 1d4 rounds

polar ray actually looks god that way right you cna either be a 15th level wizard casting polar ray and dealing 15d6 damage ( really only 50% more damage than a 3rd level spell?) OR you could be a 15th level wizard doing 15d10 damage and either dazeing or dealing some dex dmg to the target?

which one of those to you seem more like an 8th level spell?


another big problem is that most of the conjuration blast spells are in my opinion evocation/invokation spells.

anyways like is tated at the start just my pennies on the subject rant over i feel a lot better now :)

[Yitzi]

Which is precisely the REAL problem that must be addressed.

Well, one of them. But the solution to that isn't to destroy transmutation, it's to nerf the more powerful transmutation buffs (e.g. polymorph, shapechange, etc.) and transmutation attack spells (including disintegrate) so that it's a useful school but not one capable of doing everything on its own.


Universal: Mending, Erase, Alter Self, Spider Climb, Secret Page, Fabricate, Transmute Mod to Rock, Transmute Rock to Mud, Control Weather, Polymorph Any Object

Conjuration: Rope Trick, Blink, Shrink Item, Stone Shape, Passwall, Control Water, Move Earth, Ethereal Jaunt, Etherealness

Evocation: Mage Hand, Open/Close, Animate Rope, Feather Fall, Knock, Levitate, Pyrotechnics, Fly, Overland Flight, Telekinesis, Disintegrate, Reverse Gravity

Abjuration: Magic Weapon, Flame Arrow, Keen Edge, Greater Magic Weapon, Stone to Flesh

Necromancy: Enlarge Person, Expeditious Retreat, Jump, Reduce Person, Bear's Endurance, Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, Gaseous Form, Haste, Slow, Water Breathing, Mass Enlarge Person, Polymorph, Mass Reduce Person, Animal Growth, Baleful Polymorph, Mass Bear's Endurance, Mass Bull's Strength, Mass Cat's Grace, Flesh to Stone, Transformation, Statue, Iron Body, Temporal Stasis, Shapechange

Enchantment: Eagle's Splendor, Fox's Cunning, Owl's Wisdom, Mnemonic Enhancer, Mass Eagle's Splendor, Mass Fox's Cunning, Mass Owl's Wisdom, Mage's Lucubration,

Divination: Message, Darkvision, Whispering Wind, Time Stop
[/spoiler]

You call that "easily"? The ones I bolded don't really fit at all: Abjuration getting "offensive" buffs is just absurd, as is necromancy getting stuff that affects the body, as is putting Time Stop in divination of all places.
And Disintegrate still doesn't belong in Evocation, since it doesn't involve manipulating energy. It's more similar to Flesh to Stone than to a standard blasting spell, both in usage and in concept.

[bobthe6th]

blasting should be outside of normal magic entirely... really, it should be an option for lower powered games.

so simple fix for blasting... make a sorcerer like casting class, but give it a spells known choice of blasting archetypes. stuff like warlock blast shape/essence invocations. boom, magic can now be played without blowing all other classes away. heck, give them some rituals that require a spell craft check+caster level check to do really important magic stuff like teleport.

[Yitzi]

blasting should be outside of normal magic entirely... really, it should be an option for lower powered games.

I'd agree, except that the "lower powered games" (blasters and noncasters) is a more "normal" power level.


so simple fix for blasting... make a sorcerer like casting class, but give it a spells known choice of blasting archetypes. stuff like warlock blast shape/essence invocations. boom, magic can now be played without blowing all other classes away. heck, give them some rituals that require a spell craft check+caster level check to do really important magic stuff like teleport.

That's too much; teleport, while useful, doesn't step on anyone else's toes unless it's possible to teleport into sensitive enemy-controlled areas.

[bobthe6th]

then make some SLA feats available to casters. so they can still get utility, it just costs feats...

also, self plug... I just finished most of a pure blaster class that seems to make blasting viable... might find it useful....
blaster (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222683)

[DeAnno]

So, I think one thing that needs to be said first is that Blasting and Evocation are two different things. Heck, the best spells in the Evocation school are Contingency and Wall of Force. Blasting is simply dealing damage at range with magic.

Your rant seems mainly to rail about the troubles of the Evocation specialist when trying to blast. I agree that the solution to this is to bring the Creation subschool over to Evocation, and you can even bring Disintegrate as well if you like. As for lowering spell levels, most of the spells you lowered aren't that great anyway, so lowering them won't cause any problems.

You do touch on a few questionable points however, which I'd like to clear up. First of all, when trying to blast, you never ever ever want to use a spell that allows a save. This is why Fireball has issues, and also is why Disintegrate is bad (for damage purposes). Scorching Ray and the Orb spells are good examples of spells which don't allow saves, but target touch AC instead, which is a much more viable tactic. Spell Focus is indeed a complete trap, even if it applies to every spell you use: +5% chance of forcing a failed save is simply not even close to worth a feat, better to avoid saves all together.

Spell Resistance on the other hand, is mostly a joke to a well prepared blaster. True Casting (which must be quickened by some means or another) and Assay SR both provide (stacking) +10 bonuses to SR checks. It's pretty easy to get these going, and poof, you don't need to worry about SR. Of course SRless spells like Orbs are better, but SR really isn't such a big deal.

For a more thorough look at optimized blasting, feel free to check out the Mailman in my sig, or my upcoming revised handbook on Direct Damage with Sorcery.

[Yitzi]

Your rant seems mainly to rail about the troubles of the Evocation specialist when trying to blast. I agree that the solution to this is to bring the Creation subschool over to Evocation, and you can even bring Disintegrate as well if you like.

Why? While some spells are put in Creation by SC and don't belong there, the acid spells do. And an Evocation specialist can still cast non-evocation spells, so he'll do just fine if a few of his favorite spells are from other schools.


You do touch on a few questionable points however, which I'd like to clear up. First of all, when trying to blast, you never ever ever want to use a spell that allows a save.

Not true. There is (unless splatbooks added some more broken spells) no area-effect damage spell that doesn't allow a save, and one of the main advantages of being a blaster is the ability to take out large groups of weak enemies easily with AoO spells.


Spell Resistance on the other hand, is mostly a joke to a well prepared blaster. True Casting (which must be quickened by some means or another) and Assay SR both provide (stacking) +10 bonuses to SR checks. It's pretty easy to get these going, and poof, you don't need to worry about SR.

Well, unless the DM is smart and bans those spells.

[motionmatrix]

Spell Resistance on the other hand, is mostly a joke to a well prepared blaster. True Casting (which must be quickened by some means or another) and Assay SR both provide (stacking) +10 bonuses to SR checks. It's pretty easy to get these going, and poof, you don't need to worry about SR. Of course SRless spells like Orbs are better, but SR really isn't such a big deal.


Well, unless the DM is smart and bans those spells.

Banning spells simply because they are good tactics is illogical. I understand that many feel that magic, especially at higher levels, is out of control, but the fact is that auto banning something because it cancels a protection makes no sense.

Under this logic we should ban see invisibility, since it automatically counters invisible effects. Same argument could theoretically break down the whole game.

As a DM, I allow my players to use Assay SR, but I only let it stack with permanent (read: feats and class features) bonuses to SR checks. It makes absolute sense that casters, who aim at changing reality, would create a spell that is meant to make their other spell have an easier time bypassing the second biggest defense vs. magic (saves and touch ac being equally first). I understand that when my players want to use a spell, they want it to actually hit the monster and do something, not watch him shrug it off effortlessly.

I do not believe that SR should automatically be bypassed, it is there for a reason. But logically, as a wizard learns spells from different elements to bypass different resistances, he will also find ways to make those spells "penetrate" those defenses. Otherwise a fighter should never be able to use a Magic weapon or magic fang effect, since it gives him a bonus to bypass a defense.

Check out this thread, its about high level evocations:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12221826&posted=1#post12221826

[Yitzi]

Banning spells simply because they are good tactics is illogical. I understand that many feel that magic, especially at higher levels, is out of control, but the fact is that auto banning something because it cancels a protection makes no sense.

Under this logic we should ban see invisibility, since it automatically counters invisible effects. Same argument could theoretically break down the whole game.

There are three very important differences between the two cases:

1. Invisibility affects everyone, and so would be too powerful if it could not be countered (in fact, even with See Invisibility it's too powerful because See Invisibility is for casters only). SR only affects casters, and so even if it amounted to total immunity to all spells would not be too broken on a creature without too much else (since the noncasters can still kill the thing.)

2. Invisibility is close to an absolute defense; if you can't see something, you usually can't attack it at all. "Standard" SR (CR+11) allows even an unoptimized wizard to have a 50% chance of success, which isn't too much worse than what their noncasting counterparts get.

3. SR was originally created without Assay SR or True Casting. Invisibility has never existed without See Invisibility, as otherwise it's obviously broken.


It makes absolute sense that casters, who aim at changing reality, would create a spell that is meant to make their other spell have an easier time bypassing the second biggest defense vs. magic (saves and touch ac being equally first).

It likewise makes sense, though, that SR-based creatures, who aim at being resistant to casters, would get their primary ability of that sort to be something that cannot easily be bypassed with magic.


I understand that when my players want to use a spell, they want it to actually hit the monster and do something, not watch him shrug it off effortlessly.

By the same logic, do you give noncasters an ability that gives them +10 to hit?


Otherwise a fighter should never be able to use a Magic weapon or magic fang effect, since it gives him a bonus to bypass a defense.

You're comparing relatively common strong (often 70% or more total effect reduction) defenses to somewhat rare medium-strength (about 50% total effect reduction) defenses.

[motionmatrix]

I meant them as samples, not direct correlations to this situation.

It is the nature of any role playing game that later stuff written will eventually be stronger than previous stuff. For example, take a look at what was the first prestige classes published, and compare to what came out after.

So the argument "they never intended for this to be bypassed" is silly; they should take into account that this game does not just strive for original writing from the end users, but requires it as part of its functioning.

In terms of available options, there is pretty much only two: you are either a caster, and truly depend on your magic, or the opposite and try not to depend on it at all (e.g. fighter). So a defense that has the capacity to automatically cancel one of the two available styles of play is not as trivial as you make it sound.

And yes, noncasters do have a +10 to attack, more in fact, depending on level. Add in all the abilities they get, feats, magic items, etc. and you will notice that a fighter can choose to boost whatever method of attack he wants, whether that is just straight up damage, or fancy footwork, tripping and what not.

I do not disagree that True Casting and Assay SR should not stack, but banning them both makes no sense. There is no reason that same wizard could not just be an acid wizard that just bypasses SR automatically (add in energy admixture to stop acid immunity/resistance from stopping him), without having to at least cast another spell that has a duration to help him.

A caster using Assay SR or True Casting (not both) is using his actions and charges to make sure he beats SR. This is only true because SR becomes a matter of fact in mid-late game. Don't forget that most spells that allow SR usually require an attack roll or a saving throw as well. Most spells have more than one failure clause.

The other part of this is on the DM, which determines what number ultimately that SR is going to be. By RaW, the DM has the last call, so there is no reason for him to let all his creatures become useless because he doesn't feel like simply adding a +10 or +15 to the SRs.

If you as a player really want to let both spells stack go ahead, but then all my monsters that are supposed to be useful against casters will have a comparative SR bonus. I will not make the SR bonus the same as the bonus you just gained to beat it.

I simply want SR to work with a lesser effect (what those spells were intended for); rather than cancel 50% of your spells, it now only cancels 30%? (if I allow both to stack and make no changes to my creatures, you are looking at a spell failure rate below 5%, and besides being laughable, it is not amusing, just game breaking).

But not every creature I throw at you would have these bonuses, since that would just mean your choice as a player is truly meaningless.

Go fight like that against most golems, it won't make much of a difference. There is usually something written in D&D that will trump something else.

I call this the Ranger effect: yea favored enemy is nice, but it only works when the DM places creatures that apply.

[NeoSeraphi]

In terms of available options, there is pretty much only two: you are either a caster, and truly depend on your magic, or the opposite and try not to depend on it at all (e.g. fighter). So a defense that has the capacity to automatically cancel one of the two available styles of play is not as trivial as you make it sound.


Only two options huh? That sounds pretty trivial to me, actually. Apparently you haven't heard of a slightly less popular, but still fun playing style known as a "gish". It's a fighter/wizard type, and they have their own prestige classes, even a few base classes (Bard, duskblade, and cleric)

Gishes rely on spells that do not ignore SR to aid them in combat. (Black tentacles to keep opponents down, stinking cloud to keep them from attacking, ghoul touch for extremely cheap cou'de'graceing)

[motionmatrix]

I am aware of Gish, I did not mean to dismiss them. I simply meant the game is built on two basic pillars:

You use magic as your main way to interact with the world (combat), or you don't. That is not to say that magic is not part of every class (most weapon based classes eventually get a magic weapon) but rather how you use your actions in situations.

Even gish, while being half and half, very rarely rely on both equally. You are going to choose one side more than the other (I am sure this blanket statement can be proven wrong, I do not mean to stereotype, just generalize), and the other usually turns into a crutch, whether that be out of combat utility or in combat bonuses.

I played a rogue/wizard for a long time, and they are such a blast, but the fact is, that in combat, most of my defenses were magic, including some that boosted my natural nimbleness as a rogue. My main weapon was shocking grasp, and trust me I put it to really good use with sneak attack. I did have a shortsword, but it only came out when I was out of spells or the enemy really was not meant to be fought directly with arcana.

But the fact was, that my number one tactic was to constantly cast reduce person on myself, climb into the enlarged barbarian's back and with my staff of fire (best bang for the buck), be his shoulder launcher.

So you could say that my Gish actually used another character altogether for his non-combat side.

No I am not dismissing them, or any other style of play; I simply made my previous statement from a position that was looking at the game mechanics as whole, sort of a bird's eye view, if you will.

And by adding the Gish into the formula, you make my point on how truly powerful SR is. They have an even harder time (assuming they are not a full caster) beating it, making Assay SR something necessary for their spells to have any effect if SR is applicable.

[Yitzi]

I meant them as samples, not direct correlations to this situation.

Then they don't really constitute such a strong argument.


It is the nature of any role playing game that later stuff written will eventually be stronger than previous stuff.

And that's a problem if it means that you have to keep buying splatbooks in order to remain relevant.


In terms of available options, there is pretty much only two: you are either a caster, and truly depend on your magic, or the opposite and try not to depend on it at all (e.g. fighter).

Not at all. Even if you don't go Gish, a fighter can still use potions, and can still get buffed by party members.


So a defense that has the capacity to automatically cancel one of the two available styles of play is not as trivial as you make it sound.

Since when are there only two styles of play? Sure there's "primary attack caster" and "fighter", but (even leaving aside hybrid classes like Gish) there's also "support caster", which can easily ignore enemy SR simply by casting on allies.

Yes, SR will seriously hurt (though not auto-win, as it's still a 50% success rate) an all-caster party. That's a feature, not a bug; parties aren't supposed to be all-caster or all-noncaster.


And yes, noncasters do have a +10 to attack, more in fact, depending on level. Add in all the abilities they get, feats, magic items, etc. and you will notice that a fighter can choose to boost whatever method of attack he wants, whether that is just straight up damage, or fancy footwork, tripping and what not.

Yes, if you add it all up he can boost them...and enemy AC increases accordingly. Enemy SR does not increase by more than 1/level, so caster level to beat SR shouldn't increase by much more than that (or any more than that for someone who's not investing a significant resource like a feat).


There is no reason that same wizard could not just be an acid wizard that just bypasses SR automatically

Of course there is...acid spells tend to be on the weak side compared to others (at least in Core, and that's how things should be, to keep the wizard power levels under control.)


add in energy admixture to stop acid immunity/resistance from stopping him

Energy admixture applying to acid makes no sense, as to tell the truth acid isn't really an energy attack (even if Protection from Energy and Resist Energy can be used against acid too).


A caster using Assay SR or True Casting (not both) is using his actions and charges to make sure he beats SR.

Why, what level spells are they? If it's not at least close to the spell being boosted, then he's still coming out way ahead.


This is only true because SR becomes a matter of fact in mid-late game.

Not fully; of the three main categories of high level enemies (outsiders, dragons, PC-class enemies), two have a slightly weak SR, but the third doesn't (except for monks). So it's a consideration, but not a matter of fact.


Don't forget that most spells that allow SR usually require an attack roll or a saving throw as well.

True. So I suppose it is workable.

It's still unbalanced, though, when compared to the resources available to non-splatbook-buyers.


The other part of this is on the DM, which determines what number ultimately that SR is going to be.

The problem is, if he makes it high enough for SR to be a consideration when using Assay SR, then it's too high for the caster who doesn't have access to Assay SR to even have a chance. Which is fine when the party has only one caster who sometimes uses SR-relevant spells, but can be a problem when there are two.


I simply want SR to work with a lesser effect (what those spells were intended for)

Maybe you'd better post what each one does; I was under the impression that each gave +10 to the check.


I call this the Ranger effect: yea favored enemy is nice, but it only works when the DM places creatures that apply.

Of course, that's a bit of a misnomer, since if you're playing Ranger with a focus on favored enemy you're doing it wrong.

[Tenno Seremel]

You can move Disintegrate to Evocation by redefining it to "supercharging target with destructive energy".

[DeAnno]

Not true. There is (unless splatbooks added some more broken spells) no area-effect damage spell that doesn't allow a save, and one of the main advantages of being a blaster is the ability to take out large groups of weak enemies easily with AoO spells.

I admit it's hard to avoid saves when Multitargeting, but Hail of Stone (SC) and Acid Rain (HoB) both do AoE damage and do not allow saves or SR. Both are rather low damage for their level, and Hail of Stone has an annoying 1 round casting time naturally, but these are solvable problems, whereas Evasion saves vs Reflex are not. I'll admit that Will Half and Fort Half aren't that bad to blast with since Mettle is rare, but outside weird stuff like Doom Scarabs (PHBII) those are hard to find.

Of course Wings of Flurry has its adherents but I've never been totally sold despite high damage totals (It's certainly the best Reflex Half option though).

[NeoSeraphi]

I'll admit that Will Half and Fort Half aren't that bad to blast with since Mettle is rare, but outside weird stuff like Doom Scarabs (PHBII) those are hard to find.

Evasion is pretty rare too, it's just that DMs seem to enjoy using more NPCs that are rogues or monks than hexblades or crusaders. (For some reason)

The above is also why dread necros are the best blasters (BARRING Mailman-level optimization). The sorcerer must accept the fact that negative energy blasting is the way of the future.

[motionmatrix]

Then they don't really constitute such a strong argument.

Just because it is not a direct correlation, does not mean it is not a valid point; once you set a precedence, it becomes an argument point to allow other things to be exploited.


And that's a problem if it means that you have to keep buying splatbooks in order to remain relevant.

That is up to the dm and the group to determine what they use. My arguments aside, you are ultimately the one that decides whether or not you allow any particular spells or abilities. My group was extremely heavy into any book they could get, regardless of source.

I have seen some games go insane. There is a spell, iirc, that I think is called dragon clap. It was for every casting class, level 5. you pick a target, there is no save, no sr. They are effectively wrapped in a personal antimagic field that kills everything and anything beyond normal.

We took down a darklord (Ravenloft) like it was a joke because of it. After that game was finished, we agreed to only use Core, and slowly reintroduced WotC only books. Other things eventually made their way back, but crazy stuff like that is why Assay SR exists, because the more splatbooks you use, the crazier you feel you need to be.


Not at all. Even if you don't go Gish, a fighter can still use potions, and can still get buffed by party members.

Since when are there only two styles of play? Sure there's "primary attack caster" and "fighter", but (even leaving aside hybrid classes like Gish) there's also "support caster", which can easily ignore enemy SR simply by casting on allies.

And how is any of that relevant? we are supposed to be discussing fixes for viable blasting, not the intrinsically abusive spells outside core and how they destabilize game functions.

I made a generalization, and how SR affects one side of that generalization. The one relevant to blasting. A blaster is probably not going to be a gish, neither a fighter. We got lost in the theoretical argument.

Support casters do not blast, so it doesn't actually matter for this argument either.

So the question is, how do we fix SR as far as evocations (or blast spell, that are not evocations) are concerned?

Banning these spells does not help blasting, it hurts it. Allowing them to stack (in the specific case of these two spells) would be detrimental to the game.


Yes, SR will seriously hurt (though not auto-win, as it's still a 50% success rate) an all-caster party. That's a feature, not a bug; parties aren't supposed to be all-caster or all-noncaster.

Once I hit level 18, I was unable to consistently affect enemies at all because of SR. I stopped using blasts completely, almost anything that affects the enemy directly for that matter. That is sad, because blasting is fun. When I discovered Assay SR, I managed to start using blasting again. And it wasn't broken. Sometimes it still did not work, usually some of the targets would save and there were plenty of half hurt critters for the rest of the party to pick at.

Just like you don't want me to make blanket judgements, you should not assume that a party is 4 players in the four classic classes. Which is what you are practically saying with that.

I would be scared of a group of clerics and wizards. Very few things would have a hard time dealing with them.


Yes, if you add it all up he can boost them...and enemy AC increases accordingly. Enemy SR does not increase by more than 1/level, so caster level to beat SR shouldn't increase by much more than that (or any more than that for someone who's not investing a significant resource like a feat).

Not fully; of the three main categories of high level enemies (outsiders, dragons, PC-class enemies), two have a slightly weak SR, but the third doesn't (except for monks). So it's a consideration, but not a matter of fact.

Creatures that rely on SR usually have high SR, and if you are allowing those spells, then you are most likely, as a DM, using splat creatures that have comparable SR.


Of course there is...acid spells tend to be on the weak side compared to others (at least in Core, and that's how things should be, to keep the wizard power levels under control.)

Now we get to the point of your argument, you feel the wizard power level is out of control. That's on you, your dm, and your group what you guys can handle.

Many feel Mid to High level evocation does not compare to other options.

Since the OP is following Frank Trollman's suggestions, such as changing fireballs to 2nd level, you completely missed the OP point.


Energy admixture applying to acid makes no sense, as to tell the truth acid isn't really an energy attack (even if Protection from Energy and Resist Energy can be used against acid too).

Not by RAW, iirc, and to be honest, not by RAI either. Acid is an energy, and it is completely acceptable to make a "lighting (acid) arrow" that bypasses SR.



It's still unbalanced, though, when compared to the resources available to non-splatbook-buyers.

Again, that is besides the point. We are trying to up the power of blasting, not keep it the same. But I agree, we are not trying to break the game in the process.


The problem is, if he makes it high enough for SR to be a consideration when using Assay SR, then it's too high for the caster who doesn't have access to Assay SR to even have a chance. Which is fine when the party has only one caster who sometimes uses SR-relevant spells, but can be a problem when there are two.

you are right. Perhaps its time the dm had a chat with a power player about how no one else in the group want to try to keep up with him.


Maybe you'd better post what each one does; I was under the impression that each gave +10 to the check.

No one is arguing that.


Of course, that's a bit of a misnomer, since if you're playing Ranger with a focus on favored enemy you're doing it wrong.

Not the point. Everyone specializes in something, and the DM can bring that forward, or leave it in the background. A diplomacy heavy bard in a forever dungeon campaign is screwed. But that was [most likely] the bard's choice.

[bloodtide]

1.Moving all the energy attack spells to Evocation just makes sense. And it's something I did a long, long time ago. I see Conjuration(Creation) as just making (non-combative) stuff. Create Water is a Conjuration(Creation) spell. If a spell makes something, with the sole purpose of causing harm/damage AND magically accelerates/enhances/targets the made stuff, then that is an Evocation. So Ray of Frost is an Evocation.

2.Evocation already makes matter. Ice Storm and Wall of Ice both make ice; Stone Sphere makes stone and Tidal Surge makes water. Yet, the powers that be almost always put spells that create matter into Conjuration(Creation). So again, any spell that makes matter for the pure function of attack, gets moved to Evocation.

3.Evocation should have most, if not all, the Elemental attack spells, of the energy types. Yet Evocation only gets [Fire] in most books, with a dip or two into [Air] and [Earth]. So again, they should get the direct damage elemental type spells that create matter just for the attack. Also add the [Water] type spell. As all 'matter' made by an Evocation is temporary and creating 'ice' is the same as creating 'water'.

4.Most [Force], [Sonic], [Light] and [Darkness] type spells should be Evocation. Other schools can dip and cross over to get some of the effects, as you don't want ALL the descriptors in one school. So if a school description trumps Evocations 'create energy', then it's ok. For example Mage Armor is fine as an abjuration(though a better fix is to give Evocation Mage Armor and give Abjuration an equal 'mage deflection' type spell).

5. The [Acid] type, should fall under [Earth]/[Water] and should be a Evocation effect. As again, making acid is not different from making water and no different then making ice.

[Yitzi]

You can move Disintegrate to Evocation by redefining it to "supercharging target with destructive energy".

Of course, that changes the whole concept.


I admit it's hard to avoid saves when Multitargeting, but Hail of Stone (SC) and Acid Rain (HoB) both do AoE damage and do not allow saves or SR. Both are rather low damage for their level, and Hail of Stone has an annoying 1 round casting time naturally, but these are solvable problems, whereas Evasion saves vs Reflex are not.

Of course Evasion saves are a solvable problem: Against those few enemies, use a different spell (or even a different character to do the damage.) Just because an attack type doesn't work against everyone doesn't mean it's underpowered.


Just because it is not a direct correlation, does not mean it is not a valid point; once you set a precedence, it becomes an argument point to allow other things to be exploited.

Unless there is a point of difference that can cause the cases to be different.


My group was extremely heavy into any book they could get, regardless of source.

Ok, if the whole group is like that, then that's ok. But it shouldn't be the default, because it's easier for a high-book player to accomodate a low-book game than the other way around.


And how is any of that relevant? we are supposed to be discussing fixes for viable blasting, not the intrinsically abusive spells outside core and how they destabilize game functions.

Because it means that "viable blasting" means "can use blasting viably most of the time", not "can use blasting viably all of the time". Unless the goal is a dedicated blaster class and you have a problem with not every character contributing to every encounter (in which case you've got far bigger problems than blasters.)


Support casters do not blast

They can occasionally. Just like a blaster can occasionally be a support character.


So the question is, how do we fix SR as far as evocations (or blast spell, that are not evocations) are concerned?

What do you mean by "fix"? What percent of usual effectiveness, and in what percentage of encounters?


Banning these spells does not help blasting, it hurts it.

No more than it hurts direct-offense casters in general.


Once I hit level 18, I was unable to consistently affect enemies at all because of SR.

If it has SR, that's because casters aren't supposed to be able to consistently affect it; so long as you've got roughly 50% or better chance, you should do ok.


Just like you don't want me to make blanket judgements, you should not assume that a party is 4 players in the four classic classes. Which is what you are practically saying with that.

Not at all. Quite a bit of variety is possible. But if it doesn't have some degree of party balance, it will have notable vulnerabilities.


Creatures that rely on SR usually have high SR

Not really; 11+CR is usual, and that's pretty "medium". High SR like a roper is quite rare.


and if you are allowing those spells, then you are most likely, as a DM, using splat creatures that have comparable SR.

Then you're just turning SR into a spell tax on top of its normal effect.


Now we get to the point of your argument, you feel the wizard power level is out of control. That's on you, your dm, and your group what you guys can handle.

But because evocation power is not out of control, that suggests that rather than fixing blasting by bringing it up to other wizards, it's better to nerf the other options so that blasting is a viable option that way.


Acid is an energy

Just in terms of realism (well, realism for a fantasy world), that makes no sense.


We are trying to up the power of blasting, not keep it the same.

I thought we were trying to make blasting viable. That can be done by upping its power, or keeping it the same and lowering the power of the things it's being compared to.


1.Moving all the energy attack spells to Evocation just makes sense.

Yes, the question is whether acid is a type of energy.

Now, moving Conjuration(Creation) to evocation also makes sense in a lesser way (I can see arguments for it, but not so strong as to say it has to be done). But that's another question.


I see Conjuration(Creation) as just making (non-combative) stuff.

Why should magic distinguish between combative and non-combative stuff? If it creates something, whether plain water or acid, it should be Creation, whether that's Conjuration(Creation) or Evocation(Creation).

2.Evocation already makes matter. Ice Storm and Wall of Ice both make ice[/quote]

I suppose that makes sense. So they should be in Creation.


3.Evocation should have most, if not all, the Elemental attack spells, of the energy types.

It should have anything that uses energy (actual energy, not acid or ice) to attack. "Attack spells" is not really an in-universe concept, so it should not affect spell school.

4.Most [Force], [Sonic], [Light] and [Darkness] type spells should be Evocation.[/quote]

Definitely.


Other schools can dip and cross over to get some of the effects, as you don't want ALL the descriptors in one school.

I'd say that other than defensive force effects in abjuration, those four you mentioned should be all in evocation; elemental and alignment descriptors would be more spread-out, though.


For example Mage Armor is fine as an abjuration(though a better fix is to give Evocation Mage Armor and give Abjuration an equal 'mage deflection' type spell).

Abjuration already has Shield.


5. The [Acid] type, should fall under [Earth]/[Water] and should be a Evocation effect. As again, making acid is not different from making water and no different then making ice.

Exactly; it's no different than making water or ice, so all of those should go in the Creation subschool, whichever school you put that in. I'd say Conjuration if you're looking to change less, Evocation if you want a larger reworking from a conceptual viewpoint. But either is ok.

[bobthe6th]

when you start complaining about acid being an energy, I point to the fact it is an energy in every facet of its relation to the rules. any way there is acid, it is considered an energy. many outsiders have specific resistance to it. the acid train is long gone and decided.

simple fix idea number two... just use psionics! it has such better blasting rules.

[DeAnno]

Of course Evasion saves are a solvable problem: Against those few enemies, use a different spell (or even a different character to do the damage.) Just because an attack type doesn't work against everyone doesn't mean it's underpowered.

Unless you have super meta knowledge of the monster manuals, not to mention if your DM changes them up, it can be difficult to tell if a monster has evasion. For a PC-like character with a mess of class levels and GEAR (hello Ring of Evasion), it is practically impossible to tell if they have evasion. Wasting an entire turn figuring out the enemy has a high reflex and evasion and is effectively immune to your attack is a very bad thing. Elemental resistances are much easier to account for before the fact because they often depend on the creature's subtype or other obvious characteristics, and are not very large in any case.

Additionally, for a Sorcerer, it is especially important for your attacks to work consistently since you cannot be devoting too many spells known to attack spells (even on a blaster). This problem is compounded if you're playing heavily on Arcane Thesis, and in general it is preferred to have one or two extremely reliable blasts.

[Yitzi]

when you start complaining about acid being an energy, I point to the fact it is an energy in every facet of its relation to the rules. any way there is acid, it is considered an energy. many outsiders have specific resistance to it. the acid train is long gone and decided.

The rules treat it like energy, because it is a damage type like the energies are. But conceptually it is not a type of energy, and spell schools and SR dependency are based on the concept.


simple fix idea number two... just use psionics! it has such better blasting rules.

How so?


Unless you have super meta knowledge of the monster manuals, not to mention if your DM changes them up, it can be difficult to tell if a monster has evasion.

True, but most don't. And once you see it take no damage from your fireball, then you know it has evasion; it's not like you're one-shotting the target anyway. (Now, that's a real argument for why blasting is inferior to other spells at higher level.)


Wasting an entire turn figuring out the enemy has a high reflex and evasion and is effectively immune to your attack is a very bad thing.

Why? At the levels where it's at all likely, combat should (barring a save-or-die wizard with high DCs or a glass cannon melee build such as ubercharger) last enough rounds that one turn every so often isn't such an issue. And even if one enemy does turn out to have evasion...unless they all do, you haven't really wasted the turn.

Also, having to worry about evasion is a relatively minor concern compared to what the other wizards have to worry about (Death Ward, Mind Blank, Protection from X, access to Dispel, etc.)


Additionally, for a Sorcerer, it is especially important for your attacks to work consistently since you cannot be devoting too many spells known to attack spells (even on a blaster).

You don't have to devote that many. One spell every 2 or 3 spell levels that's a ray rather than an area effect should do the job. (After all, it's not as if you're suffering from a low DC due to the low level.)

[Lord Vukodlak]

How so?


Psionics lets you swap energy types on the fly allowing you to more easily bypass energy resistances. Cold and fire get +1 point of damage per die. Electricity increases the save DC and while sonic deals less damage -1 point of damage per die. Cold also uses a fortitude save instead of reflex which can be extremly painful for a rogue.

Then you have energy current which is quite deadly when combined with the power that lets your psicrystal take over the concentration. And when one of the foes dies(or negates it completely) It can arc to a new target within range.

[bobthe6th]

as said above, rather than being trapt in a particular form blasting psionicly is just a shape. powers only get outdated as there area is smaller than newer powers, but they still have uses.

[bloodtide]

Why should magic distinguish between combative and non-combative stuff? If it creates something, whether plain water or acid, it should be Creation, whether that's Conjuration(Creation) or Evocation(Creation).
[

We are talking more about the creation of energy then just 'making stuff'. Any thing that uses kinetic energy/gravity/such to hurl a something created should be Evocation. Acid arrow does not just create an arrow, it also fires it off at 150 miles per hour at a target.

Evocation creates the 'combative' force of magic.

[DeAnno]

True, but most don't. And once you see it take no damage from your fireball, then you know it has evasion; it's not like you're one-shotting the target anyway. (Now, that's a real argument for why blasting is inferior to other spells at higher level.)

That's actually pretty dependent on your level and the encounter setup. Once you get to the back five levels (16-20) it's pretty easy to jack up your damage total high enough to one shot (or at least one-round) most things, and lots of those things will be dangerous enough to one shot you.

[Yitzi]

Psionics lets you swap energy types on the fly allowing you to more easily bypass energy resistances. Cold and fire get +1 point of damage per die. Electricity increases the save DC and while sonic deals less damage -1 point of damage per die. Cold also uses a fortitude save instead of reflex which can be extremly painful for a rogue.

Of course, on the flip side you can't do decent damage with what amounts to a lower-level spell. It has its ups and its downs.


Then you have energy current which is quite deadly when combined with the power that lets your psicrystal take over the concentration. And when one of the foes dies(or negates it completely) It can arc to a new target within range.

Yeah, that can be impressive. Of course, if the enemies manage to move out of range then you've just forced range.

And of course it only affects a single individual fully and only a few at half, so it's really only so great against a single enemy who you don't need to kill right away.


We are talking more about the creation of energy then just 'making stuff'. Any thing that uses kinetic energy/gravity/such to hurl a something created should be Evocation. Acid arrow does not just create an arrow, it also fires it off at 150 miles per hour at a target.

So you think that if it creates something with a velocity, its primary feature is imparting the velocity, not the creation?

Also, if imparting kinetic energy counts as Evocation, then you'd better move Telekinesis and Mage Hand there too. (Actually, that's not a bad idea.)


That's actually pretty dependent on your level and the encounter setup. Once you get to the back five levels (16-20) it's pretty easy to jack up your damage total high enough to one shot (or at least one-round) most things, and lots of those things will be dangerous enough to one shot you.

Really? The only ways I know of to do that are to use a non-blaster caster or a glass cannon melee build, and the only way they can one-shot you on a regular basis is if you're not focusing on defense that much; if you're counting those, then Evasion and saves are the least of the blaster's problems.

[Terazul]

So wait, are we fixing Blasting, or Evocation? :smallconfused: Because those are two similar, but still distinctly different things, and I really can't tell based upon the first post.

[bobthe6th]

They seem rather intertwind. Fixing one fixes the other, I think...

[Lord Vukodlak]

Blasting is best made viable with a party of heavy melee hitters. Blasting can stack with what the rest of the party is doing. An empowered cone of could stacks well with a enlarged fighter using a spiked chain on a large group of enemies.

[motionmatrix]

Ok, if the whole group is like that, then that's ok. But it shouldn't be the default, because it's easier for a high-book player to accomodate a low-book game than the other way around.

You are right. But that does not mean the low book player cannot:

a- use his friend's books.
b-write their own stuff.
c-scour the net for free stuff. There is plenty we have written all over for anyone to steal for their own use.


Because it means that "viable blasting" means "can use blasting viably most of the time", not "can use blasting viably all of the time". Unless the goal is a dedicated blaster class and you have a problem with not every character contributing to every encounter (in which case you've got far bigger problems than blasters.)

agreed, trying to blast 100% of the time, and expect it to work 100% of the time, is just ridiculous.


They can occasionally. Just like a blaster can occasionally be a support character.

I have yet to meet a blaster that is willing to play support. Most won't have anything but personal buffs and blasts. I could, however, see a support doing a bit of blasting. Most likely a staff.


What do you mean by "fix"? What percent of usual effectiveness, and in what percentage of encounters?

Any chance to miss by more than 50% is too much. SRs that regularly beats 50% of a caster's spells forces the caster to use non SR spells or specialize in SR beating which is a pain, considering that its not just the % chance from SR, but also saves and attack rolls.

As to how to fix it? I don't know, give evokers a bonus to all SR checks equal to 1/4 of their level. That removes SR breaking spells out of the picture altogether, and still gives evokers a chance to beat the SR. For that matter, you should also get more pumps to your DCs. Most of your evoker spells that are blasts will have a reflex save, and be lower level, and evasion is rather common. So you are either screwed with SR monsters or screwed with ring of evasion wearing npcs.


If it has SR, that's because casters aren't supposed to be able to consistently affect it; so long as you've got roughly 50% or better chance, you should do ok.

But its not 50%, once you take into consideration saves and attack rolls.
And at higher levels, the fact is that creatures get just as crazy as the casters do.


Then you're just turning SR into a spell tax on top of its normal effect.

If you are the DM that uses super high SR forcing your players to use those spells. It could also start with the player using the spells first. Everyone losses.


But because evocation power is not out of control, that suggests that rather than fixing blasting by bringing it up to other wizards, it's better to nerf the other options so that blasting is a viable option that way.

But evocation is not only not out of control, it's sucky even if you balanced everything else down, especially after level 11.


I thought we were trying to make blasting viable. That can be done by upping its power, or keeping it the same and lowering the power of the things it's being compared to.

See above.


Exactly; it's no different than making water or ice, so all of those should go in the Creation subschool, whichever school you put that in. I'd say Conjuration if you're looking to change less, Evocation if you want a larger reworking from a conceptual viewpoint. But either is ok.

The fact is that Evocation and Creation issues exist because wotc probably did not want all the elements in one school.

[Yitzi]

You are right. But that does not mean the low book player cannot:

a- use his friend's books.

Works for a close-knit group, not so much for an online game.


b-write their own stuff.

If they have the writing talent, and the DM accepts it.


c-scour the net for free stuff. There is plenty we have written all over for anyone to steal for their own use.

Again, assumes the DM accepts it. (That said, I would like to play the Spellbinder class posted here a while back in some game...it looks like it'll be great fun to play, possibly matching or even beating my current favorite (arcane trickster)).


I have yet to meet a blaster that is willing to play support. Most won't have anything but personal buffs and blasts.

A caster who isn't willing to play support at least some of the time has no business being a caster (unless, of course, it's a tier 2+ game.)


Any chance to miss by more than 50% is too much.

Depends a lot on the other features. A spell that would, if successful, one-shot a boss should have a high miss chance, or else anyone who can't do the same (including blasters, by the way) will be too underpowered.

What matters isn't really miss chance, but expected effectiveness/round and durability.


SRs that regularly beats 50% of a caster's spells forces the caster to use non SR spells or specialize in SR beating which is a pain

Not such a pain (2 feats will raise that 50% to 70%), but yes, it does force a change in tactics. But that's ok; wizards aren't supposed to be one-trick ponies.


As to how to fix it? I don't know, give evokers a bonus to all SR checks equal to 1/4 of their level.

Then you'll have people grabbing evoker for the bonus and preparing all but their bonus spells as save-or-die spells. That idea (or something similar; I'd say a flat bonus is better) can work (and probably is in fact required) for a dedicated blasting class, but not for just a school specialization.


For that matter, you should also get more pumps to your DCs. Most of your evoker spells that are blasts will have a reflex save, and be lower level

Not necessarily (about the lower level).


and evasion is rather common.

Not all that much.


or screwed with ring of evasion wearing npcs.

A ring of evasion is 25,000 gp (quite a bit on an NPC budget), and still doesn't help them if they don't have a high save. Also, if you're using a blast, that's because there's a lot of enemies, so each one will have CR lower than your level (which further decreases the chance that they'll save.)


But its not 50%, once you take into consideration saves and attack rolls.

True, but that's not a problem with SR. Also, touch attacks are easy against most enemies, and most enemies don't have evasion so saves won't be that big a problem. Some creatures will give evokers trouble, but that's true of any balanced class or build.


And at higher levels, the fact is that creatures get just as crazy as the casters do.

Examples please?


If you are the DM that uses super high SR forcing your players to use those spells. It could also start with the player using the spells first. Everyone losses.

My point exactly. Either it's a spell tax if you increase the SR to compensate, or makes SR not significant enough if you don't; the only good options are banning those spells, or making it so it can't boost a spell above its own level (thus keeping it at a real cost.)


But evocation is not only not out of control, it's sucky even if you balanced everything else down, especially after level 11.

How so? Why is evocation inferior to, say, a non-ubercharger barbarian?


The fact is that Evocation and Creation issues exist because wotc probably did not want all the elements in one school.

Maybe...personally, I don't think that justifies it, after all, most of the other categories are all in one school.

[YouLostMe]

Yitzi, most of what you said was quite true. But you've got some big holes.


A caster who isn't willing to play support at least some of the time has no business being a caster (unless, of course, it's a tier 2+ game.) Ladies and gentlemen, this is an apt example of the morality known as "STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE". Truly, this has nothing to do with game balance.


Not such a pain (2 feats will raise that 50% to 70%), but yes, it does force a change in tactics. But that's ok; wizards aren't supposed to be one-trick ponies.
There is an ENORMOUS difference between "change in tactics" and "has to use only OP no-SR spells, or toss spells and pray they're actually useful". And 2 feats is 30% of all feats gained ever for your average caster (the wizard is an exception, and he's already broken). That's definitely a HUGE pain.


Not necessarily (about the lower level). Actually, this is pretty much always true. At levels like 5, you have a few of your best spells, and then a much larger host of your weaker ones. So you cast your best spells maybe 3 times, and then you have to cast your weak spells 9 times! Survey says: You will definitely be casting weaker spells more often than strong spells.


A ring of evasion is 25,000 gp (quite a bit on an NPC budget), and still doesn't help them if they don't have a high save. Also, if you're using a blast, that's because there's a lot of enemies, so each one will have CR lower than your level (which further decreases the chance that they'll save.)I had to quote this so I could agree with it. Not only are the opponents most likely going to be weaker, but a ring of evasion is competing with every other interesting medium magic ring in the game for flavor purposes AND all of the NPCs are in danger of the DM saying "you're a crowd of faceless soldiers to the PCs. Everyone just gets +X to AC, attacks, and saves, plus 2d4 copper if the PCs loot you."

In lieu of that, he could also just pull a monster from the Monster Manual, like most DMs do for bad guys.


Examples please?
Literally go to your monster manual. Find something of high CR. And gape. Dragons are ridiculously powerful, Mariliths can hide and just ruin your day with shadow projections of themselves, flying objects (or creatures), and will send you on a wild goose chase with their teleportation. Formian queens are a combination of a sorcerer, a walking tank, AND a antennae.


How so? Why is evocation inferior to, say, a non-ubercharger barbarian?When in a conversation about balancing things, you should always assume that when someone says "inferior", they mean "inferior to the balance point we were discussing", not "LOL IT IS TEH WEAKER EVAR". Your nitpicking reduces the signal-to-noise ratio, so stop that.

In other news evocation spells have fixes (http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=162377). I think the important bit is on the 7th post down.

[Yitzi]

Ladies and gentlemen, this is an apt example of the morality known as "STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE". Truly, this has nothing to do with game balance.

That wasn't so much "stop liking what I don't like" (I don't have any particular dislike for casters who want to be primarily offensive, so long as that desire doesn't arise from an aversion to teamwork), more "if you're going to play a class in a manner other than the way it seems to have been intended to be played, don't complain when the result is underpowered."


There is an ENORMOUS difference between "change in tactics" and "has to use only OP no-SR spells, or toss spells and pray they're actually useful".

Indeed. The former allows for things like "buff allies" and "summon".


And 2 feats is 30% of all feats gained ever for your average caster (the wizard is an exception, and he's already broken). That's definitely a HUGE pain.

That depends whether he needs that many feats for anything else.


Actually, this is pretty much always true. At levels like 5, you have a few of your best spells, and then a much larger host of your weaker ones. So you cast your best spells maybe 3 times, and then you have to cast your weak spells 9 times! Survey says: You will definitely be casting weaker spells more often than strong spells.

Ah, I thought that by "lower level" he meant like half the max level. One or two levels lower than the max level should work ok, as long as you're not targeting the enemy's good save. (Naturally, this means pure blasters have problems against certain classes; when there is a class that's meant to be used for pure blasters, then it will have to deal with such issues.)


Literally go to your monster manual. Find something of high CR. And gape.

The Balor is certainly high CR, and doesn't seem to have any overpowered abilities other than "pretend to be a wizard a bit" (which would of course be depowered when wizards are.)


Dragons are ridiculously powerful

They're impressive, but I don't see anything that a party of blaster-level power couldn't handle.


Mariliths can hide and just ruin your day with shadow projections of themselves

Until your party rogue finds them (hint: They have to have line-of-effect to all projected images) and you can take them out.


flying objects (or creatures)

And you can attack them.


and will send you on a wild goose chase with their teleportation.

That's what Dimensional Anchor or Dimensional Lock is for.


Formian queens are a combination of a sorcerer

Yeah, so that's just repeating "casters are overpowered"


a walking tank

Nope, no walking for the queen. (This is a notable vulnerability, and one that the party can exploit.


AND a antennae.

What good is that, once the lesser formians have been dealt with?


When in a conversation about balancing things, you should always assume that when someone says "inferior", they mean "inferior to the balance point we were discussing", not "LOL IT IS TEH WEAKER EVAR". Your nitpicking reduces the signal-to-noise ratio, so stop that.

I'm not nitpicking, I'm arguing that once everything else is balanced down, the blaster is at at a good place. That's signal, not noise.

[YouLostMe]

That wasn't so much "stop liking what I don't like" (I don't have any particular dislike for casters who want to be primarily offensive, so long as that desire doesn't arise from an aversion to teamwork), more "if you're going to play a class in a manner other than the way it seems to have been intended to be played, don't complain when the result is underpowered." That statement is against what you originally said. Do you think it's allowed for a caster to play support or not?


Indeed. The former allows for things like "buff allies" and "summon".Did your wizard prepare those spells this morning? Did the sorcerer think to learn those spells? Does your beguiler have summons on his spell list at all?


That depends whether he needs that many feats for anything else.So your argument has gone from "Doesn't even matter" to "It matters if he wants feats or not". Well, all of a sudden, that 2 feat tax matters because there exist characters who want feats AND need to penetrate SR. Argument resolved!


Ah, I thought that by "lower level" he meant like half the max level. One or two levels lower than the max level should work ok, as long as you're not targeting the enemy's good save. (Naturally, this means pure blasters have problems against certain classes; when there is a class that's meant to be used for pure blasters, then it will have to deal with such issues.)I agree with this, though we need to keep in mind that the Evoker's go-to save is Reflex.


The Balor is certainly high CR, and doesn't seem to have any overpowered abilities other than "pretend to be a wizard a bit" (which would of course be depowered when wizards are.)Wait, did you just admit that a high-CR creature is crazy like a caster? Which you were just trying to refute? Well... OK then.


They're impressive, but I don't see anything that a party of blaster-level power couldn't handle.Um. Right. So their sorcerer spells (self-buffs, ignoring all those damage and maxing defenses), plus high breath weapon damage, plus feat AoE if you have bad will instead of reflexes, PLUS the fact that they're big enough to grapple all the party at once... My friend, you have obviously never fought a dragon.


Until your party rogue finds them (hint: They have to have line-of-effect to all projected images) and you can take them out. How did the party rogue find the marilith? The party rogue has been on the ground because of telekinesis that originated from the projected image so you can't track it.


And you can attack them.I think you've forgotten how telekinesis works. You can throw dead things just as well as you can living things. Hell, you can throw anything less than 375 pounds as a Marilith, so you can literally toss PCs in the air.


That's what Dimensional Anchor or Dimensional Lock is for.Let me reiterate the beginning of this conversation: High-CR monsters get crazy the way casters do. So yeah, you could probably toss those things out and hit the marilith. But you could alternatively grant someone a ridiculous movement speed so that they could run around the entire course of the battlefield and nuke the marilith, or you could use divination beforehand and find it.


Yeah, so that's just repeating "casters are overpowered"
... I think you've forgotten what you're arguing. This monster is as difficult to beat as a caster, and it takes a caster level of balance to beat this monster. You're refuting yourself.


Nope, no walking for the queen. (This is a notable vulnerability, and one that the party can exploit

What good is that, once the lesser formians have been dealt with?.Excellent job nitpicking. Did you perhaps not notice the word "tank" written in there? Also, do you plan on dispatching all of the formians in the Queen's Chambers before attacking her? Because that might be one of the worst ideas ever in the history of D&D tactics, next to rushing the commoner railgun.


I'm not nitpicking, I'm arguing that once everything else is balanced down, the blaster is at at a good place. That's signal, not noise.And yet the argument is that since encounters are stronger than the blaster, the blaster should be stronger. If everything was balanced up, the blaster would be at a good place because it would be balanced up. You might think your statement is signal, but I really don't see it.

[Kenneth]

here is an idea.. instead of arguing over what or what was not said hows about you go back to page one and look at my suggestion here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12218410&postcount=7)

and tell me what you think about that?

[Grod_The_Giant]

here is an idea.. instead of arguing over what or what was not said hows about you go back to page one and look at my suggestion here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12218410&postcount=7)

and tell me what you think about that?

I agree with you. As is, a lot of higher-level evocations work exactly the same as lower-level ones, they just have a higher damage cap. As I see it, there are three solutions:

Remove caster level caps from all spells. Right now, they're a drain on damage dealing (not evocation, damage dealing) and nothing else. This also means that a blaster will have a lot more staying power than other classes.
Have higher level evocations start imposing secondary effects, with increasing power from, say, a fireball leaving targets dazzled on a failed save, all the way up to ninth level spells that either make you EXPLODE and die instantly, or else take a crapton of damage on a successful save.
Make it easier to swap out elemental damage types, to make things like fire resistance less of an issue
Have more evocations with different saves. Maybe cone of cold has a Fortitude save. The hypothetical explode-or-pain spell could have a will save.


I will say that Reflex half is better than Will negates. And if everything in your campaign has evasion, you're either playing in a themed campaign or the DM is putting deliberate effort into making you, specifically, useless. In the first case, you should have known better, or been offered a chance to change things once the theme emerged and made you ineffective. In the latter, you're screwed no matter what you do.

[Yitzi]

That statement is against what you originally said. Do you think it's allowed for a caster to play support or not?

Of course.


Did your wizard prepare those spells this morning? Did the sorcerer think to learn those spells? Does your beguiler have summons on his spell list at all?

We're discussing blasters, so beguilers aren't even in the equation. (If there were a blaster equivalent to the beguiler, then you'd have a point, at least as regards that class.) As for wizards and sorcerers...why would they provide only direct-attack spells if SR is a possible concern?


So your argument has gone from "Doesn't even matter" to "It matters if he wants feats or not".

It wasn't "doesn't even matter", it was "not such a big deal that it can be called "a HUGE pain"".


Well, all of a sudden, that 2 feat tax matters because there exist characters who want feats AND need to penetrate SR.

Why do they need everything? Is it such a problem if some monsters are too much for them to handle alone?


I agree with this, though we need to keep in mind that the Evoker's go-to save is Reflex.

And the necromancer's is Fortitude, and the enchanter's is Will. That's why there are two banned schools rather than seven.


Wait, did you just admit that a high-CR creature is crazy like a caster? Which you were just trying to refute?

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I wasn't denying that some high-CR creatures are crazy like casters. What I was denying is that some high-CR creatures are crazy in a way that will make them too difficult if the more powerful spells are nerfed.


Um. Right. So their sorcerer spells (self-buffs, ignoring all those damage and maxing defenses)

Even if they self-buff up the wazoo, that's nothing a Dispel Magic can't handle easily (since their CL is so low).


plus high breath weapon damage

So someone had better cast Protection from Energy. (By the way, dragon breath weapon damage is around that of a blaster of their CR, and they can only breathe once every 1d4 rounds.)


plus feat AoE if you have bad will instead of reflexes

A relatively weak fear effect (shaken), and Remove Fear is a first-level spell.


PLUS the fact that they're big enough to grapple all the party at once

But they tend not to use grapple tactics (except for Crush and Snatch), and Freedom of Movement should be quite available by the time it becomes a concern.


How did the party rogue find the marilith? The party rogue has been on the ground because of telekinesis

Then the marilith has to maintain concentration (or he can get up), so there's plenty of time for the other party members to just look in every hiding place that has LoE to the projected image.


that originated from the projected image so you can't track it.

You can track to the image (if that's even hidden) and then track from that to the Marilith.


I think you've forgotten how telekinesis works. You can throw dead things just as well as you can living things. Hell, you can throw anything less than 375 pounds as a Marilith, so you can literally toss PCs in the air.

One at a time. Not a very effective strategy against a 17th level party.


Let me reiterate the beginning of this conversation: High-CR monsters get crazy the way casters do.

Except that those sorts of spells aren't really examples of how crazy casters can get.


... I think you've forgotten what you're arguing. This monster is as difficult to beat as a caster, and it takes a caster level of balance to beat this monster. You're refuting yourself.

Maybe I just didn't make it clear what I'm arguing. I'm not claiming that high-level monsters can be reasonably beaten without caster help; that's absurd. What I'm saying is that even if casters were nerfed down to tier 3, that would not make high-level monsters unreasonably difficult.


Excellent job nitpicking. Did you perhaps not notice the word "tank" written in there?

Did you not notice that I only argued on the "walking" part? Yes, it's a tank; it's meant to be a boss. But it's immobile, and that gives a clever party a lot of interesting options that make the encounter much easier.


Also, do you plan on dispatching all of the formians in the Queen's Chambers before attacking her?

Why not? A bit of blasting should easily clear out everything except the queen and maybe the mymarchs, and those aren't too plentiful and are quite weak compared to your level 17 party.
If you don't like that, you can simply use the same hit-and-run tactics you'd be using against the queen anyway; if the formians follow then you can engage them without the queen interfering (an easy win for you), and if they don't then it'll work against them just like it does against the queen.


And yet the argument is that since encounters are stronger than the blaster, the blaster should be stronger.

Or the encounters weaker. Since the encounters are also stronger than the fighter, the barbarian, the non-CoDzilla divine caster, and the rogue, I'd say that's the better way to go, particularly since the encounters and the non-blaster wizards will be fixed by the same fixes (since it's the same factors contributing to both of them.)


If everything was balanced up, the blaster would be at a good place because it would be balanced up.

Yes, if everything (including noncasters) was balanced up. That's what's known as a balanced tier 2+ game; it's a lot more work than a balanced tier 3 game, and it is quite vulnerable to the rocket tag effect. (There are ways to get around that vulnerability, but the result looks more like Exalted than D&D.)


here is an idea.. instead of arguing over what or what was not said hows about you go back to page one and look at my suggestion here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12218410&postcount=7)

and tell me what you think about that?

I think it gets one thing very right, but another somewhat wrong: What it gets right is that the reason blasters and noncasters are so much weaker in the current version is that the HP of everything went up substantially, so evocation scales linearly with level while HP scales slightly superlinearly. (Save-or-lose spells scale even faster than HP in a sense, as not only is a success equivalent to all the target's HP, but then the spells get more powerful on top of that.) So while your fix won't be perfect (unless HP scales sublinearly, blasters will still be weaker than nonblasters), it will definitely help a substantial amount.

The problem with your fix, however, is that it runs into another phenomenon, namely that as spell durations increase and spells/day increase, fight duration should probably increase to go along with it. Balancing via a decrease to HP will mean that fight duration will not increase, while balancing via depowering save-or-lose spells will mean that fight duration will increase. So while your solution is definitely a good simple fix, I don't think it's anywhere near the best one.


I agree with you. As is, a lot of higher-level evocations work exactly the same as lower-level ones, they just have a higher damage cap. As I see it, there are three solutions:

Remove caster level caps from all spells. Right now, they're a drain on damage dealing (not evocation, damage dealing) and nothing else. This also means that a blaster will have a lot more staying power than other classes.
Have higher level evocations start imposing secondary effects, with increasing power from, say, a fireball leaving targets dazzled on a failed save, all the way up to ninth level spells that either make you EXPLODE and die instantly, or else take a crapton of damage on a successful save.
Make it easier to swap out elemental damage types, to make things like fire resistance less of an issue
Have more evocations with different saves. Maybe cone of cold has a Fortitude save. The hypothetical explode-or-pain spell could have a will save.


That's four, not three. I have a fifth: Make non-evocations also not increase in power in a qualitative way for most purposes. (This is the approach I took in the fix linked in my sig.) Whether to go that way or with boosting blasting depends on whether you think nonblasting casters are too powerful or not.

[Kenneth]

I think it gets one thing very right, but another somewhat wrong: What it gets right is that the reason blasters and noncasters are so much weaker in the current version is that the HP of everything went up substantially, so evocation scales linearly with level while HP scales slightly superlinearly. (Save-or-lose spells scale even faster than HP in a sense, as not only is a success equivalent to all the target's HP, but then the spells get more powerful on top of that.) So while your fix won't be perfect (unless HP scales sublinearly, blasters will still be weaker than nonblasters), it will definitely help a substantial amount.

The problem with your fix, however, is that it runs into another phenomenon, namely that as spell durations increase and spells/day increase, fight duration should probably increase to go along with it. Balancing via a decrease to HP will mean that fight duration will not increase, while balancing via depowering save-or-lose spells will mean that fight duration will increase. So while your solution is definitely a good simple fix, I don't think it's anywhere near the best one.


Uh.. where are you getting that i say you need to decrease HP? actually all that I said was 1) that blast spells above 3rd levle need to have their damage capabilities increase substntially and the highest level ones (8th and 9th) need to have secodnary effects

and 2) Pust some of the older edition evo/invo spells back into teh invo/evo school in 3rd ed

not in one place did i say anything about decreasing HP overall for anybody.

not today.. for it is too late, but def tomorrow i am going to do a quick and dirty fi xon evocation spells in honor of thise thread as well as other such as your lost me's 9th leve vo threa da while back.. hopefully people shall enjoy it.

[NeoSeraphi]

I agree with you. As is, a lot of higher-level evocations work exactly the same as lower-level ones, they just have a higher damage cap. As I see it, there are three solutions:

Remove caster level caps from all spells. Right now, they're a drain on damage dealing (not evocation, damage dealing) and nothing else. This also means that a blaster will have a lot more staying power than other classes.

Nothing else? :smalleek:

Cure wounds series, vigor series, ray of enfeeblement, shapechange, polymorph and alter self, to name just a few. Level caps are very necessary. Remove them from damage spells, if you like. But then you are essentially screwing over psionics as we know it. The only thing psionics has going for it is the ability to make lower level powers viable at higher game. If caps are removed from magic, that will make spells strictly superior to psionics in every way, not just in most ways.
[/QUOTE]



Have higher level evocations start imposing secondary effects, with increasing power from, say, a fireball leaving targets dazzled on a failed save, all the way up to ninth level spells that either make you EXPLODE and die instantly, or else take a crapton of damage on a successful save.

Having damage spells dealing save-or-dies completely negates the purpose of being a blaster instead of a SoD user. Additionally, it removes the one benefit that higher level evocation should have over SoDs (able to kill monsters that are immune to death effects, which is much more relevant at 20th level than it is at 12th)



Make it easier to swap out elemental damage types, to make things like fire resistance less of an issue

As I suggested at the beginning of the thread, higher level negative energy effects, as well as force effects, will make this not an issue. Energy Substitution is a feat for a reason, and it's actually a fairly nice concept for a feat (A customization of your character's class features that benefits you and rewards you for choosing customization over power)



Have more evocations with different saves. Maybe cone of cold has a Fortitude save. The hypothetical explode-or-pain spell could have a will save.

AOE elemental effects are supposed to have Reflex saves. This is to make the rogue and monk better, and it also makes more sense than using Fortitude or Will. Evasion may be an issue for blasters, but giving them the answer to it is not a good thing. It's one of the very few defenses that PCs have against NPC casters (and dragons). If you want to deal with Evasion, use an actual Fortitude or Will effect instead (a save-or-die or save-or-suck, instead of a blast)




I will say that Reflex half is better than Will negates. And if everything in your campaign has evasion, you're either playing in a themed campaign or the DM is putting deliberate effort into making you, specifically, useless. In the first case, you should have known better, or been offered a chance to change things once the theme emerged and made you ineffective. In the latter, you're screwed no matter what you do.

Evasion is actually easily countered. A character loses evasion if he is helpless. So you hold monster the creature first, then blast it to hell. Simple and elegant.

[bobthe6th]

but psionic blasting already has powers going weak. energy ray is weak sauce compared to energy missle (one target<five targets). most of the time you get a new blast power, it is flat out better than the last one

[DeAnno]

Evasion is actually easily countered. A character loses evasion if he is helpless. So you hold monster the creature first, then blast it to hell. Simple and elegant.

The whole reason Evasion is a problem is that the way save bonuses scale vs save DCs is broken. A Will negates spell (SR: Yes and Mind Affecting for good measure :smallfrown:) is even less likely to be useful than a Reflex half blast.

The whole thing stems from the fact that as you progress in 3.5e, it turns more and more into Rocket Tag. When playing Rocket Tag, if you miss, you die. Therefore, effects which have a reasonable chance of missing or failing to work are simply not viable. This is why battlefield control is good: it never misses, it always does what you wanted it to do. Blasting is only good under similar circumstances, when it reliably does what you wanted it to do (murder people).

The problem isn't really one with blasting as much as 3.5e as a whole, which is a ridiculously offense-biased system at high levels. You can't come at blasting with the mindset that you have to be fair to the defender, since all viable forms of attack in this system are entirely unfair to the defender.

Of all the ideas I've seen so far, the one I like most is varying up blast save types like Psionics does, and perhaps even scale DCs independent of spell level somehow. The main problem with Evasion is that outside of high OP you can't multitarget without provoking it, and little dodgy numerous mooks you need to multitarget are the most likely sorts of things to have evasion. With some Fort Half or Will Half blasts, and DCs that actually scale with 1/2 HD like saves are supposed to, you can make fairly intelligent decisions about what to use to force a failed save, and even if you can't force the failed save you can at least get half damage. It never really made sense to me that Cone of Cold was Reflex: Half anyways.

[NeoSeraphi]

The whole reason Evasion is a problem is that the way save bonuses scale vs save DCs is broken. A Will negates spell (SR: Yes and Mind Affecting for good measure :smallfrown:) is even less likely to be useful than a Reflex half blast.

Well, hold monster isn't the only paralysis spell out there. :smallfrown: But I see your point.



Of all the ideas I've seen so far, the one I like most is varying up blast save types like Psionics does, and perhaps even scale DCs independent of spell level somehow. The main problem with Evasion is that outside of high OP you can't multitarget without provoking it, and little dodgy numerous mooks you need to multitarget are the most likely sorts of things to have evasion. With some Fort Half or Will Half blasts, and DCs that actually scale with 1/2 HD like saves are supposed to, you can make fairly intelligent decisions about what to use to force a failed save, and even if you can't force the failed save you can at least get half damage. It never really made sense to me that Cone of Cold was Reflex: Half anyways.

I still don't think Evasion is that common at high levels. Maybe it comes from fighting Gargantuan monsters too often, but most creatures I fight have 14 or less Dex past level 12. (To be honest, my DMs have never been big fans of outsiders, as introducing them into a plot often means less believability and requires more in-depth explanation than is worth a single encounter, at least in their opinion)

And as for cone of cold being Reflex Half, why is that so hard to believe? It's basically turning you into a silver dragon and breathing on people. It's the one that makes the MOST sense for Reflex Half.

[YouLostMe]

Of course.My bad, I meant to ask if it were OK for a caster to NOT play support. Because you said that if they don't, then they don't deserve to be a caster.


We're discussing blasters, so beguilers aren't even in the equation. (If there were a blaster equivalent to the beguiler, then you'd have a point, at least as regards that class.) As for wizards and sorcerers...why would they provide only direct-attack spells if SR is a possible concern?Um... I was just addressing your refute that 50% spell failure from standard SR wasn't bad for the game. So beguilers are in this equation.


It wasn't "doesn't even matter", it was "not such a big deal that it can be called "a HUGE pain"".Your quote was "not such a pain". I point you to the place where people play most--levels 1 through 6. If you're a human, that's 4 feats. So during the last leg of the game, you've only lost 50% of all the feats you'll ever have over the campaign. Now if you were planning on taking other feats, that's a big tax. And my point stands.


Why do they need everything? Is it such a problem if some monsters are too much for them to handle alone?This is a per-day resource that determines whether or not you are useful in combat. When you are fighting something with equal SR, your spells fail to go off 50% of the time. And that's not on "some monsters". Tons of monsters have that. In addition, monsters tend to stack large numbers for their saves on top of THAT. So basically what you're doing is wasting your actions AND your per-day resources when your spell doesn't go off. Not only does that mean you didn't contribute to combat, but you've also become less effective for the rest of the day because of any lost spells. So yes, SR to auto-cancel spells is a bad idea.


And the necromancer's is Fortitude, and the enchanter's is Will. That's why there are two banned schools rather than seven.The enchanter has SoDs. The necromancer has SoDs. Evocations are not SoDs. BEEP please try again.[/quote]


Sorry if I wasn't clear. I wasn't denying that some high-CR creatures are crazy like casters. What I was denying is that some high-CR creatures are crazy in a way that will make them too difficult if the more powerful spells are nerfed.

[Followed by a bunch of spells for beating monsters I suggested]Ummm.... motionmatrix said "And at higher levels, the fact is that creatures get just as crazy as the casters do.", and you asked for examples. I am showing you creatures that are crazy examples whose only real remedies are solutions by casters, are you're "refuting" me by listing off all of these spells. So I'm not sure whether you've flip-flopped sides or changed your opinion, or aren't considering the point I made.


Even if they self-buff up the wazoo, that's nothing a Dispel Magic can't handle easily (since their CL is so low). You said "nothing a blaster level party can't handle". So the blaster a) needs to learn dispel magic, and b) needs have it prepared, and c) needs to spend time casting it


So someone had better cast Protection from Energy. (By the way, dragon breath weapon damage is around that of a blaster of their CR, and they can only breathe once every 1d4 rounds.)Right, your blaster-level party has that AND dispel magic? We're stretching boundaries here. Also, if the party is level 5, is your caster thinking "damn, I need some dispel magic instead of SoDs" when he gets up in the morning, or when he learns his spells as a sorcerer? Also, which does he cast first?


A relatively weak fear effect (shaken), and Remove Fear is a first-level spell. Now you're just being silly. Remove fear is competing with glitterdust and grease and lahm's finger darts and even stuff like true strike. You might have a wand of that, if you're really into preparing stuff, and that will take time to get out and use (time for the dragon to beat you).


But they tend not to use grapple tactics (except for Crush and Snatch), and Freedom of Movement should be quite available by the time it becomes a concern.Oooh, another spell for your "blaster-level party" to have known and prepared ahead of time! And I was definitely talking about Crush and Snatch, since those are incredibly useful.


Then the marilith has to maintain concentration (or he can get up), so there's plenty of time for the other party members to just look in every hiding place that has LoE to the projected image.All right, so the party walks into a place and see a marilith. Somebody gets hit with a blade barrier or a flying rock or perhaps tripped, and they try to hit the marilith and realize its an illusion. They then try to find the marilith. Depending on how large the area is, they may spend 2-4 turns on this. All the while getting hit by flying rocks and blade barriers, and perhaps finding more hidden shadow mariliths (pretending to be concentrating on telekinesis) and trying to hurt those, assuming the marilith has time to prepare. So yes, a party that isn't readied the way a caster is will be in danger. And even with a caster, it's difficult, since the marilith is stocking 30 SR.


You can track to the image (if that's even hidden) and then track from that to the Marilith.Assuming a) You have the caster for it, b) You spend the time to do it, and c) You haven't been hit by flying rocks / party members.


One at a time. Not a very effective strategy against a 17th level party.Unless your party members can stand after being hit by 375 pounds of flying , you can take out 2/4 at a time, and even more if they're close.


Except that those sorts of spells aren't really examples of how crazy casters can get.It takes a caster to lock the marilith down. That means the marilith is crazy like a caster. You appear to be drawing disconnects that don't exist.


Maybe I just didn't make it clear what I'm arguing. I'm not claiming that high-level monsters can be reasonably beaten without caster help; that's absurd. What I'm saying is that even if casters were nerfed down to tier 3, that would not make high-level monsters unreasonably difficult.All right, so we've officially beaten it into the ground that you NEED a caster for this stuff. I'll take you up on that "nerf" business. What are some good nerfs for casters that can actually handle what I've presented? The Dread Necromancer, Beguiler, Warmage, and Healer will all be struggling. Even the sorcerer will have trouble waltzing into a room with a marilith and some sort of hiding spot.


Did you not notice that I only argued on the "walking" part? Yes, it's a tank; it's meant to be a boss. But it's immobile, and that gives a clever party a lot of interesting options that make the encounter much easier.It's not meant to be a boss--it's meant to be CR 17. That should be handle-able by a level 17 party at the level of balance you want, and I'm showing how formian queens are actually in crazytown.


Why not? A bit of blasting should easily clear out everything except the queen and maybe the mymarchs, and those aren't too plentiful and are quite weak compared to your level 17 party.OK, so at least you're one character down against the formian queen, getting tackled by the swarms of creeps, and the queen can pick you for her temporal stasis spell, or maybe she'll counterspell you with dispel magic so her creeps don't die, and then watch you fall down under a pile of formian workers, casting spells with a Concentration check of 20 + any damage you take + the spell level. Have a blast. That is, if they don't bind you.


If you don't like that, you can simply use the same hit-and-run tactics you'd be using against the queen anyway; if the formians follow then you can engage them without the queen interfering (an easy win for you), and if they don't then it'll work against them just like it does against the queen. Cool, the queen uses invisibility, and then hiveminds to tell her creeps to guard herself, and THEN calls in the rest of the colony from the outside to kill you. She is now untargettable (without an attack, and that's a 50% miss chance and also means she and her creeps can see you.)


Or the encounters weaker. Since the encounters are also stronger than the fighter, the barbarian, the non-CoDzilla divine caster, and the rogue, I'd say that's the better way to go, particularly since the encounters and the non-blaster wizards will be fixed by the same fixes (since it's the same factors contributing to both of them.)Ah, all right. I can see that argument too. But the point that I'm correcting you for is that are too strong, so the tier 3 balance doesn't match up.


Yes, if [I]everything (including noncasters) was balanced up. That's what's known as a balanced tier 2+ game; it's a lot more work than a balanced tier 3 game, and it is quite vulnerable to the rocket tag effect. (There are ways to get around that vulnerability, but the result looks more like Exalted than D&D.)Um... OK. Thank you for the tangent? My point is that you can't say "all characters being Tier 3 means the encounters will be OK!" because that's wrong.

And again, in a delightful parody of Kenneth's post, I'll repost my proposed fix (www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=162377). It's the seventh post in the thread, and brings evocation up to par with stuff like transmutation. Personally, I think that caster spell access should be decreased instead of spells being worsened, because it's less work and leaves possible places for epic advancement that's actually decent.

[Yitzi]

Uh.. where are you getting that i say you need to decrease HP? actually all that I said was 1) that blast spells above 3rd levle need to have their damage capabilities increase substntially and the highest level ones (8th and 9th) need to have secodnary effects

Ah, I misunderstood you. Ok, then your solution will work for the blaster/other caster dynamic, but won't fix the noncaster/other caster dynamic, and will in fact make the blaster/noncaster dynamic worse.



But then you are essentially screwing over psionics as we know it. The only thing psionics has going for it is the ability to make lower level powers viable at higher game. If caps are removed from magic, that will make spells strictly superior to psionics in every way, not just in most ways.


There are ways to fix that. For instance, remove psionics/magic transparency and remove Dispel Psionics, and psionics becomes a far harder to counter system than magic (of course, that probably makes it powerful enough that some depowerings are needed as well.)


The whole reason Evasion is a problem is that the way save bonuses scale vs save DCs is broken.

Yes, it's broken in favor of the save DCs, unless you use multiclassing tricks (and those are easily fixed; have those initial +2's not stack). The reason, of course, is that save DCs are based on the caster's primary ability, while save bonuses usually aren't based on the target's primary ability.


The whole thing stems from the fact that as you progress in 3.5e, it turns more and more into Rocket Tag.

True; this is in essence what's causing to the blasters' problems as well, since blasters have a very hard time boosting their damage to rocket tag levels. I, at least, also find Rocket Tag to be not very fun.

The solution, therefore, is to make the game less rocket-tag-y.


The problem isn't really one with blasting as much as 3.5e as a whole, which is a ridiculously offense-biased system at high levels.

Exactly. Hence my suggestion that rather than boosting blasting, the worst offenders of the ridiculously offense-biased system be curtailed.


and little dodgy numerous mooks you need to multitarget are the most likely sorts of things to have evasion.

Little dodgy numerous mooks shouldn't be a problem even with evasion, as most of them will fail their saves anyway. If you really need, you can use stuff like Horrid Wilting or Circle of Death to deal with the issue.


and DCs that actually scale with 1/2 HD like saves are supposed to

They do. If you add 2 levels, the DC of your top-level spells goes up by 1, the DC of your second-level spells goes up by 1, the DC of your third-level spells goes up by 1, and so on.


My bad, I meant to ask if it were OK for a caster to NOT play support. Because you said that if they don't, then they don't deserve to be a caster.

It is ok for a caster to not primarily play support. It is ok for a caster to absolutely refuse to use one of the major categories of caster role only in the sense that it's ok for any player to play a vastly mechanically inferior character when he doesn't have to (i.e. only if the other party members don't mind, and don't complain when it's vastly mechanically inferior).


Um... I was just addressing your refute that 50% spell failure from standard SR wasn't bad for the game. So beguilers are in this equation.

Ah, ok. That's why beguilers have illusion spells (which tend to be SR: No) and bonuses that help against SR. (To tell the truth, Mind Blank is more of a problem for beguilers than SR.) They're also primarily a noncombat class, so that makes the issue less of an issue.


Your quote was "not such a pain". I point you to the place where people play most--levels 1 through 6.

At levels 1 through 6, SR is rare enough that it's not such an issue.


This is a per-day resource that determines whether or not you are useful in combat.

Yes; everyone has stuff of that sort (even if it's only HP.)


When you are fighting something with equal SR, your spells fail to go off 50% of the time.

Yes, what's wrong with a 50% failure rate (assuming no rocket tag)?


In addition, monsters tend to stack large numbers for their saves on top of THAT.

You'll be hard pressed to find a monster with a weak save substantially better than his CR; between key ability score increases (via items, levels, and eventually tomes) and using higher-level spells, a caster can keep up pretty decently.


So basically what you're doing is wasting your actions AND your per-day resources when your spell doesn't go off.

And when it does go off, it can usually do quite a bit better than the noncasters (especially when using single-target spells, which usually have no save when they're blasting and therefore can be heavily boosted with metamagic. Multitarget spells are of course useful even when they only hit half the targets). Overall, it should even out pretty well. And if the noncasters are a bit better, the blasters make up for it against low-SR or no-SR enemies and in versatility.


So yes, SR to auto-cancel spells is a bad idea.

You imply that if it's not auto-cancel it's ok.
So tell me, what is the difference between a 50% auto-cancel rate, and a 100% rate to make it 50% effective?


The enchanter has SoDs. The necromancer has SoDs. Evocations are not SoDs.

So the problem then is either that non-SoDs are too weak, or SoDs are too strong.

The best way to determine which it is is probably to see which is more common among all the classes.


Ummm.... motionmatrix said "And at higher levels, the fact is that creatures get just as crazy as the casters do.", and you asked for examples. I am showing you creatures that are crazy examples whose only real remedies are solutions by casters, are you're "refuting" me by listing off all of these spells. So I'm not sure whether you've flip-flopped sides or changed your opinion, or aren't considering the point I made.

Neither. I'm arguing that "casters need casters to counter them" does not imply "casters are crazy", and similarly "monsters need casters to counter them" does not imply "monsters are as crazy as casters are". (Obviously, casting monsters are as crazy as casters are, but not independently crazy.)


You said "nothing a blaster level party can't handle". So the blaster a) needs to learn dispel magic

Or have the party cleric know dispel magic despite not being optimized beyond blaster level, or in larger parties have another caster who's as weak as a blaster without actually being a blaster.

But yeah, some party access to Dispel is pretty much mandatory at higher levels. Fortunately, it's on almost every class list.


b) needs have it prepared

Or have a scroll.


c) needs to spend time casting it

Yes, and the dragon needs to spend time casting the spells it removed. Since it's removing a large number of spells, and is only 1/4 the party spending a round as opposed to the entire enemy, I'd say that the party comes out ahead there.


Right, your blaster-level party has that AND dispel magic?

Why not? They're both widely available low-level spells. And a dragon isn't something you face without preparation, so the divine caster (who doesn't have to worry about spells known) can prepare them both for the day.


We're stretching boundaries here. Also, if the party is level 5, is your caster thinking "damn, I need some dispel magic instead of SoDs" when he gets up in the morning, or when he learns his spells as a sorcerer? Also, which does he cast first?

If the party is level 5, it's not facing heavy spellcasters.


Now you're just being silly. Remove fear is competing with glitterdust and grease and lahm's finger darts and even stuff like true strike.

It's more likely to be cast by a cleric actually. And the cleric can prepare it when he knows he's fighting a dragon today.


and that will take time to get out and use (time for the dragon to beat you).

Actually, drawing a wand is a move action, so...


Oooh, another spell for your "blaster-level party" to have known and prepared ahead of time!

Blaster-level power does not mean that it doesn't know that it's facing a dragon and having the cleric prepare accordingly.


All right, so the party walks into a place and see a marilith. Somebody gets hit with a blade barrier or a flying rock or perhaps tripped

Of which the only one that's even significant to a 17th level party is the blade barrier, and that's not such a big deal if they haven't skimped on saves (note that when casting blade barrier directly on an enemy, it's reflex negates).


and they try to hit the marilith and realize its an illusion. They then try to find the marilith. Depending on how large the area is, they may spend 2-4 turns on this.

Not really. You know it has line-of-effect to the image, and know that it has cover or concealment from you. Most of the time, that's pretty limiting.


and perhaps finding more hidden shadow mariliths (pretending to be concentrating on telekinesis) and trying to hurt those

And each one you find reduces the number of places the real one can be. If there are a lot out in the open, then it's time for someone to use True Seeing (one of those spells useful enough that it's pretty much guaranteed that by level 17 a party member will have a scroll or two) to tell which is the real one.


So yes, a party that isn't readied the way a caster is will be in danger.

Why can't they be readied the way a caster is? Being properly prepared doesn't mean they're more powerful than a blaster; it's only stuff like save-or-die spells that make a blaster (or noncaster) look underpowered.


And even with a caster, it's difficult, since the marilith is stocking 30 SR.

So a 35% chance to hit. As you said, difficult, but manageable.


Assuming a) You have the caster for it

Who needs a caster? Look around the room, see where X might be hiding and still have line of effect to Y.


b) You spend the time to do it

Not all that much time most of the time.


and c) You haven't been hit by flying rocks / party members.

And if you have? That's not so much damage to a level 17 party.


Unless your party members can stand after being hit by 375 pounds of flying

Assuming 1d3 damage per 25 pounds (they're not pillows, but they're not rocks either), that's an average of 30 damage. Not all that scary.


It takes a caster to lock the marilith down. That means the marilith is crazy like a caster.

Not at all true.

Just because someone can only be countered by a caster doesn't mean they're tier 2 ("crazy like a caster").


All right, so we've officially beaten it into the ground that you NEED a caster for this stuff. I'll take you up on that "nerf" business. What are some good nerfs for casters that can actually handle what I've presented? The Dread Necromancer, Beguiler, Warmage, and Healer will all be struggling. Even the sorcerer will have trouble waltzing into a room with a marilith and some sort of hiding spot.

I think the one linked in my sig should work pretty well; wizards and sorcerers are seriously nerfed when it comes to save-or-die, save-or-lose, and save-or-suck spells, but blasters and defensive spells are unaffected. Clerics lose some versatility, but all the spells I mentioned are at worst increased by one level if the cleric lacks the relevant domains.


It's not meant to be a boss--it's meant to be CR 17. That should be handle-able by a level 17 party at the level of balance you want

Yes; it's handle-able by a level 17 party, as a boss. (It's a boss because it gets minions but doesn't come with any similar-CR allies, and is meant to be the enemy in the final encounter of the adventure.)


and I'm showing how formian queens are actually in crazytown.

Not really; you showed how they make for tough and level-appropriate enemies.


OK, so at least you're one character down against the formian queen

Why? It doesn't seem to have any abilities that can take out a party member before they can retreat if seriously damaged.


getting tackled by the swarms of creeps

Who only hit on a natural 20, and don't do much damage when they do. Unless you have no way to deal with large groups of enemies, shouldn't be an issue.


and the queen can pick you for her temporal stasis spell

Not without a melee touch attack.


or maybe she'll counterspell you with dispel magic so her creeps don't die

That has a 50% chance of working, and ties her up too (making it 3 characters against a horde of low-level mooks.)


Cool, the queen uses invisibility, and then hiveminds to tell her creeps to guard herself, and THEN calls in the rest of the colony from the outside to kill you.

All quite low-level compared to your party.
And meanwhile, you're not doing nothing; you're going in, throwing out a few attacks, and retreating to heal and remove status effects before repeating the process.


She is now untargettable (without an attack, and that's a 50% miss chance and also means she and her creeps can see you.)

Or you can use a scroll of See Invisibility. (The only problem is the noncasters, since SI doesn't come in potion form; that is a problem I agree exists.)


Ah, all right. I can see that argument too. But the point that I'm correcting you for is that [i]are too strong, so the tier 3 balance doesn't match up.

And my point (which I admittedly may not have expressed so well) is that all the things that make encounters too strong are the same things that make tier 2's too strong, so fixing the latter will fix the former as well.


Um... OK. Thank you for the tangent? My point is that you can't say "all characters being Tier 3 means the encounters will be OK!" because that's wrong.

Depends why all characters are Tier 3. If all characters are tier 3 because the broken parts of casters (and casting monsters) were depowered, rather than because they're all playing tier 3 classes (which lack the powerful, and necessary at higher levels, protections of tier 1 classes), then there should be no problem.

[ILM]

So wait, are we fixing Blasting, or Evocation? :smallconfused: Because those are two similar, but still distinctly different things, and I really can't tell based upon the first post.
My thoughts exactly. It's not about Evocation or Conjuration or even Necromancy; it's about making mages that want to deal direct elemental (or not) damage viable, regardless of schools.

The issue is that many monsters are resistant or immune to it, and that it's hard to land a spell in the first place due to saving throws, Evasion/ Mettle, and sometimes attack rolls.

It can still be pimped to stupid levels, as illustrated by mailman builds. How do they do it?
- they pick the very best blasty spells
- they metamagic them to the sky
- they arcane fusion the hell out of that for kicks.

Issues:
- some blasty spells are better than others, on an equal level basis
- due to reducers, it is now possible to metamagic stuff to ungodly levels
- ... I got nothing on Arcane Fusion, I think it's a pretty cool spell.


Some spells deal d6/CL, some d8/CL, some d20/CL, with caps that go from 10 dice to no cap at all. Some allow SR, some don't. Some require attack rolls, some don't. Some allow saves - usually those without attack rolls - some don't. Some are melee, some are ranged. Lots of options there. If I were to seriously try to fix blasting, I'd start with standardizing spells across levels. I'm just going to throw some assorted ideas here:
- a spell that requires an attack roll doesn't offer a saving throw, and vice-versa; that's pretty much already the case. No spell requires neither.
- Damage dice according to the rarity of resistances and immunities: cold, fire, electricity damage use your standard d6. Acid and force use d4 (maybe drop a dice or two from the cap for Force spells). Slashing/ bludgeoning/ piercing damage use d8 (maybe just d6 though).
- a melee spell is one level lower than its ranged equivalent, all other characteristics being the same.
- not sure how to deal with SR. I'd be tempted with saying all blasting spells require SR.
- riding effects (such as from Orb spells) all require saves and bump a spell up a level.
- a single-target spell is a level lower than the AoE version.
- honestly, I don't think ranges warrant a level adjustment. Perhaps remove a few dice to the long-range spells.
- then you just have the number of base damage dice scale with level. Perhaps something like 1 dice + half your casting stat bonus per level (with number of dice capped at 2x(spell level+1))? Or 1 dice + 1/4 your character level rounded down/up?
All the rest is really just fluff.

Next up is dealing with metamagic, otherwise a level 5 admixtured spell will always be better than the level 9 counterpart. In my campaign I've disallowed any two reducers to stack with the exception of Arcane Thesis. YMMV.

This may bring blasting back up to competitive levels. Adjust the spell's base damage per level as you like. If you want blasting to shine alongside Save-or-Dies, maybe you chould just remove all attack rolls and saves. A basic level 9 ranged AoE spell at CL 20 with the rules above would deal 20d6+100 elemental damage, no save - average 170, modified by resistances or immunities; seems about right? Of course, that does nothing to fix the end-game rocket tag, but then again you'd have to rebuild the system from the ground up...

[Yitzi]

Of course, that does nothing to fix the end-game rocket tag, but then again you'd have to rebuild the system from the ground up...

Not really; there are only a few features (save-or-dies, things like Shock Trooper that let you boost your offense extremely high at the expense of defense) that turn it into rocket tag. Nerf or remove those, and it should be workable.

[NeoSeraphi]

Not really; there are only a few features (save-or-dies, things like Shock Trooper that let you boost your offense extremely high at the expense of defense) that turn it into rocket tag. Nerf or remove those, and it should be workable.

You can't "nerf" a save-or-die. It's save, or die. Very simple. SR and a saving throw are all that stands between you and -10 hit points. Pathfinder tried to "nerf" save-or-dies and turned them into more blasting, which completely destroyed their point.

[YouLostMe]

It is ok for a caster to not primarily play support. It is ok for a caster to absolutely refuse to use one of the major categories of caster role only in the sense that it's ok for any player to play a vastly mechanically inferior character when he doesn't have to (i.e. only if the other party members don't mind, and don't complain when it's vastly mechanically inferior).So then you're retracting your statement, and you now saying that it's OK for a caster to play support.

Check. Problem solved.


Ah, ok. That's why beguilers have illusion spells (which tend to be SR: No) and bonuses that help against SR. (To tell the truth, Mind Blank is more of a problem for beguilers than SR.) They're also primarily a noncombat class, so that makes the issue less of an issue.Look at the beguiler spell list. Look at all those offensive spells with no SR. And gape again. The beguiler gets a useful no-SR spell about once or twice every spell level. Not class level, but spell level. That's not a decrease in tactics, but a total lockdown on usefulness.


At levels 1 through 6, SR is rare enough that it's not such an issue.No strawmen. The point is that SR is broken. I'm showing you that SR breaks this system, and we could even go into the levels 7-14 and I could show you all over again (though I'd like to not to waste MORE space. Please look at it on your time).


Yes; everyone has stuff of that sort (even if it's only HP.)Wait, you can use wands to replenish healing? BEEP, error. Try again.


Yes, what's wrong with a 50% failure rate (assuming no rocket tag)?Not in rocket tag. Even if a caster is balanced to Tier 3 or 4 or whatever you want to play, SR will ALWAYS have a 50% failure rate. That's bad.


You'll be hard pressed to find a monster with a weak save substantially better than his CR; between key ability score increases (via items, levels, and eventually tomes) and using higher-level spells, a caster can keep up pretty decently.
Right, his Tier 3 caster that is specializing in how many saves? Oh, one. Maybe.


And when it does go off, it can usually do quite a bit better than the noncasters (especially when using single-target spells, which usually have no save when they're blasting and therefore can be heavily boosted with metamagic. Multitarget spells are of course useful even when they only hit half the targets). Overall, it should even out pretty well. And if the noncasters are a bit better, the blasters make up for it against low-SR or no-SR enemies and in versatility.That does not compensate for the fact that you get WORSE every time you mess up when SR comes into play. Characters DECREASE in power over time. And especially when an action comes down to "Roll SR, see if it's negated, and force a Fort save", players want to go off and play smash bros. because their spells are only hitting once per combat.


You imply that if it's not auto-cancel it's ok.
So tell me, what is the difference between a 50% auto-cancel rate, and a 100% rate to make it 50% effective?100% rate? Where in the world did you get that I wanted that? I'm only here to tell you that SR is broken as-is, and needs to be fixed, not that my proposed solution is a "100% rate" (whatever that even means).


So the problem then is either that non-SoDs are too weak, or SoDs are too strong.

The best way to determine which it is is probably to see which is more common among all the classes.What? No. We were talking about how evokers need a boost because they only target reflex, and you said "Necromancers target fort!" but I countered with "Necromancers target only fort because they have SoDs. They pressure one save with dangerous stuff. Evokers only target one save, but they ALSO don't do anything dangerous with it". And then you had this random tangent. Please, when you divide the conversation, keep it on the same tangent.


Neither. I'm arguing that "casters need casters to counter them" does not imply "casters are crazy", and similarly "monsters need casters to counter them" does not imply "monsters are as crazy as casters are". (Obviously, casting monsters are as crazy as casters are, but not independently crazy.)OK, so if monsters are not as crazy as casters are, then the only feasible way to prove that is to show how monsters can be beaten without casters. You're still failing to do that.


Or have the party cleric know dispel magic despite not being optimized beyond blaster level, or in larger parties have another caster who's as weak as a blaster without actually being a blaster.

But yeah, some party access to Dispel is pretty much mandatory at higher levels. Fortunately, it's on almost every class list.Cleric a) is Tier 1. So you're wrong, and b) has to wake up in the morning thinking about that spell, c) needs to prioritize that spell over any other level 3 spell. At level 5, you're going to pick something you think will be better.

So maybe in 1% of all scenarios, this will happen and be OK.


Or have a scroll.Who knows how to use that? Oh, the caster. And guess what, you can't move either, because you spent your entire turn pulling out the scroll and using it. Enjoy that.

Have I mentioned the low chance of dispel magic's success?


Yes, and the dragon needs to spend time casting the spells it removed. Since it's removing a large number of spells, and is only 1/4 the party spending a round as opposed to the entire enemy, I'd say that the party comes out ahead there.The dragon has its buffs up. The party attempts to dispel the, perhaps not even successfully. The dragon then lands on the party, gets up, breathes fire on them, and then maybe picks someone up and carries them away to drop them 100 feet in the air. Refreshing buffs is unecessary when the party can be screwed by a dragon in one turn.


Why not? They're both widely available low-level spells. And a dragon isn't something you face without preparation, so the divine caster (who doesn't have to worry about spells known) can prepare them both for the day.All right, so again, you have a caster, and again they are preparing ahead of time, and again your caster is some sort of Druid or Cleric who isn't actually Tier 1 because you don't want it to be for this conversation.


If the party is level 5, it's not facing heavy spellcasters.No, but it's facing a dragon. Have I mentioned the breath weapon? Or the flight?


It's more likely to be cast by a cleric actually. And the cleric can prepare it when he knows he's fighting a dragon today.That Tier 1 cleric in your blaster-level party, ah-huh. I'm seeing a pattern here. Your party is just perfectly full of people who don't belong there.


Actually, drawing a wand is a move action, so...And using is a standard action, so... Your whole turn has been used, just like I said.


Blaster-level power does not mean that it doesn't know that it's facing a dragon and having the cleric prepare accordingly.Blaster= Tier 4. Cleric = Tier 1. For the exact reasons that you are detailing. Do you know the Tier rankings?


Of which the only one that's even significant to a 17th level party is the blade barrier, and that's not such a big deal if they haven't skimped on saves (note that when casting blade barrier directly on an enemy, it's reflex negates).Flying rocks for 20d6 damage are actually meaningful, contrary to popular belief. And so are flying party members. Yes, a 17th level party WILL have trouble.


Not really. You know it has line-of-effect to the image, and know that it has cover or concealment from you. Most of the time, that's pretty limiting.So if you were in a cave of 160' radius, it could literally be ANYWHERE IN THE CAVE with 9/10ths cover and a 20 on hide. And you all ready wasted your first turn on a fake.


And each one you find reduces the number of places the real one can be. If there are a lot out in the open, then it's time for someone to use True Seeing (one of those spells useful enough that it's pretty much guaranteed that by level 17 a party member will have a scroll or two) to tell which is the real one.So that level 17 party member is pulling open the scroll during turn 2 after possibly being hit by the flying party member, and then will get knocked down again on the next turn. Your true seeing kicks in at round 3, and probably everyone in the party has all ready taken damage.


Why can't they be readied the way a caster is? Being properly prepared doesn't mean they're more powerful than a blaster; it's only stuff like save-or-die spells that make a blaster (or noncaster) look underpowered.Because they don't have spells to counter the monster? That's the whole point of this--you NEED spells.


Who needs a caster? Look around the room, see where X might be hiding and still have line of effect to Y.OK, so let's assume we're not playing Legend of Zelda, and there are actually SEVERAL places the marilith could be hiding. And there's a clone at each one, all pretending to concentrate on telekinesis. And all have 9/10ths cover, and are making hide checks based on the marilith's hide check. Without true seeing (CASTER CASTER CASTER ALERT), you can't get that.


And if you have? That's not so much damage to a level 17 party.

Assuming 1d3 damage per 25 pounds (they're not pillows, but they're not rocks either), that's an average of 30 damage. Not all that scary.Um, yeah, not 1d3. That's a punch. These people flying are covered in "violent thrust", and are covered in armor, with weapons, possibly with spiked armor. It's 1d4 for your halfling, 1d6 for your armored dwarf. And have I mentioned that both characters take that damage and go prone?


Not at all true.

Just because someone can only be countered by a caster doesn't mean they're tier 2 ("crazy like a caster") You cannot claim something without proving it. Now prove to me that non-caster party can take this marilith down.


I think the one linked in my sig should work pretty well; wizards and sorcerers are seriously nerfed when it comes to save-or-die, save-or-lose, and save-or-suck spells, but blasters and defensive spells are unaffected. Clerics lose some versatility, but all the spells I mentioned are at worst increased by one level if the cleric lacks the relevant domains.You nerfed all the casters. So basically the marilith is just dangerous, and the people who have a chance are weaker? Nothing more to say here.


Yes; it's handle-able by a level 17 party, as a boss. (It's a boss because it gets minions but doesn't come with any similar-CR allies, and is meant to be the enemy in the final encounter of the adventure.)Um, it's meant to be 1 of 4 equivalent encounters in the day. Boss encounters are at least 1-2 CR higher. It's a boss for level 15 characters.


Not really; you showed how they make for tough and level-appropriate enemies.Not to your blaster party. They've got no advantages.


Why? It doesn't seem to have any abilities that can take out a party member before they can retreat if seriously damaged.Do you know how spellcasting works? There's this spell called temporal stasis. And this one called Evard's Black Tentacles.


Who only hit on a natural 20, and don't do much damage when they do. Unless you have no way to deal with large groups of enemies, shouldn't be an issue.Holy crap, what's your blaster's touch AC? Don't even kid yourself on this one.


Not without a melee touch attack. 20 mooks is low. maybe 2 touch attacks will succeed. Grappled.


That has a 50% chance of working, and ties her up too (making it 3 characters against a horde of low-level mooks.)She spent one action, and you are down 25% of your characters. Now on to the fighter.


All quite low-level compared to your party.
And meanwhile, you're not doing nothing; you're going in, throwing out a few attacks, and retreating to heal and remove status effects before repeating the process. How are you healing? You were rushing her for a turn, and now you're running back? That is three turns MINIMUM, at which point you are one character down because they're grappled, AND your other party members are taking hits AND she's fired off an SoD.


Or you can use a scroll of See Invisibility. (The only problem is the noncasters, since SI doesn't come in potion form; that is a problem I agree exists.)So you need to have a scroll of See Invisibility (lol) and the caster to cast it (lol) and you then need to get in sight after 2 rounds to maybe hurt her, at which time she can also see you.


And my point (which I admittedly may not have expressed so well) is that all the things that make encounters too strong are the same things that make tier 2's too strong, so fixing the latter will fix the former as well.

[quote]Depends why all characters are Tier 3. If all characters are tier 3 because the broken parts of casters (and casting monsters) were depowered, rather than because they're all playing tier 3 classes (which lack the powerful, and necessary at higher levels, protections of tier 1 classes), then there should be no problem.Giving wizards weaker class features or less spell access will not fix the marilith. Try again.

[Yitzi]

You can't "nerf" a save-or-die. It's save, or die. Very simple.

Yes you can: Increase the DC, with lesser effects (e.g. negative levels) for if you make the usual DC but not the higher one. (That's the approach I took in my fix.)


So then you're retracting your statement, and you now saying that it's OK for a caster to play support.

It is ok for a caster to play support. It is ok for a caster to play primarily not support. It is even ok, if the party's ok with it, for a caster to never play support. But if he takes that last option, he's playing either an extremely unoptimized character or a brokenly optimized one; in the former case, he should not complain when he's not all that effective.


Look at the beguiler spell list. Look at all those offensive spells with no SR. And gape again. The beguiler gets a useful no-SR spell about once or twice every spell level.

Let's see...discounting noncombat spells (which already is downgrading the beguiler a lot, as he's primarily a noncombat class) and spells that aren't in the SRD and so I don't have, but counting spells that allow spell resistance but are cast on allies, we have:
-Expeditious Retreat. Pretty useful, if not offensively so.
-Obscuring Mist. Effectively a combat control spell, albeit a weak one.
-(on to level 2) Blur. A nice defensive spell. Also grants immunity to sneak attacks, which can be useful at times.
-Detect Thoughts. Takes a bit of time, but knowing what that creature's planning to do next can be incredibly useful.
-Fog cloud. Like Obscuring Mist, but better.
-Glitterdust. Counters concealment of all sorts, and is a save-or-suck on top of that. Extremely worthwhile.
-Invisibility. Whether enabling a sneak attack or protecting a summoner or healer, quite useful.
-Mirror image. One of the best defensive low-level spells in the game.
-See invisibility. Also can be useful.
-Silence. If you can corner a spellcaster, this can put him out of commission.
(on to level 3): Arcane Sight: So that you know how the enemy's buffed.
-Dispel magic. And then remove those buffs.
-Displacement. Like Blur, but better.
-Haste. Boost your whole party.
(level 4): Freedom of movement. One of the most important spells at higher levels.
-Greater invisibility. The party rogue will love you.
-Solid fog. Very strong combat control.
(level 6):-Greater Dispel Magic. Like Dispel.
-Mislead. A nice defensive spell.
-True Seeing. Because you're not the only one who can use illusions.
(level 7): Greater Arcane Sight. For when you want a better idea of what you're facing.
-Project image. Didn't you point out how good that can be?
-Spell turning. Another useful defensive spell.
(level 8): Mind Blank. Very nice.
-Screen. The uses of this are limited only by your imagination.
(level 9): Foresight and Time Stop. Both nifty.

So it's usually 2 or 3 per spell level rather than 1 or 2, but those include some of the best SR: No spells (and often, some of the best spells period.)


No strawmen. The point is that SR is broken. I'm showing you that SR breaks this system, and we could even go into the levels 7-14 and I could show you all over again (though I'd like to not to waste MORE space. Please look at it on your time).

You say you're showing it, but all I see are unsupported and badly-supported claims.


Wait, you can use wands to replenish healing? BEEP, error. Try again.

Ok, point; HP is more of a per-battle resource than a per-day resource if you're using wands of CLW (or worse, lesser vigor). Of course, that can cut into your profit margin a bit.


Not in rocket tag. Even if a caster is balanced to Tier 3 or 4 or whatever you want to play, SR will ALWAYS have a 50% failure rate. That's bad.

Why is that bad? (Assuming no rocket tag, which is the outcome of balancing casters to tier 3 and banning a select few feats.)


Right, his Tier 3 caster that is specializing in how many saves? Oh, one. Maybe.

Why is the caster specializing so extremely in only one save? That's not tier 3, that's tier 5. (Obviously, a specialist wizard will primarily use the save most common in his school, if there is one, but he's still got 5 other schools to dabble in.)


Characters DECREASE in power over time.

Why?


And especially when an action comes down to "Roll SR, see if it's negated, and force a Fort save", players want to go off and play smash bros. because their spells are only hitting once per combat.

Which spells are we talking about? At the levels where SR is common, Fort save spells will, as things stand, usually hit only once per combat anyway because once they hit you've won the combat. A tier 3 fix would of course reduce that, but they'd still amount to the equivalent of at least a roughly 1/3 power decrease to the target, making the fight much easier.


100% rate? Where in the world did you get that I wanted that? I'm only here to tell you that SR is broken as-is, and needs to be fixed, not that my proposed solution is a "100% rate" (whatever that even means).

My point is that your "total negation"/"partial negation" distinction is irrelevant, as what matters is the average power reduction.


What? No. We were talking about how evokers need a boost because they only target reflex, and you said "Necromancers target fort!" but I countered with "Necromancers target only fort because they have SoDs. They pressure one save with dangerous stuff. Evokers only target one save, but they ALSO don't do anything dangerous with it". And then you had this random tangent.

Not a random tangent. Having established that the difference between evokers and necromancers is not in targeting one save but in how powerful their attacks are, and knowing that the only thing that matters is relevant power level, I pointed out that balance can be achieved either by depowering necromancers (and enchanters) or by powering up evokers, and explained why I think the former is a better idea in the general game setting.


OK, so if monsters are not as crazy as casters are, then the only feasible way to prove that is to show how monsters can be beaten without casters.

Did you even understand what I said? It is entirely possible to have monsters that cannot be beaten without casters, but still are not as crazy as casters are, because they can be beaten with low-powered caster support in a way that many casters can't.


Cleric a) is Tier 1.

But if it were nerfed (or non-optimized) to not be tier 1, it would still have Dispel Magic. Ergo, a lower-tier party could still beat the monster.


and b) has to wake up in the morning thinking about that spell

Of course he is. He knows they're planning to kill a dragon today, and knows that dragons can self-buff but have low CL. (Also, he probably prepares it every day, as it's just that useful.)


needs to prioritize that spell over any other level 3 spell. At level 5, you're going to pick something you think will be better.

You mentioned spellcasting dragons. That means we're not dealing with a level 5 party here.


Who knows how to use that? Oh, the caster.

So? I never said you don't need casters, just that you can make do with tier 3 versions of the casters.


And guess what, you can't move either, because you spent your entire turn pulling out the scroll and using it. Enjoy that.

Why is that a problem?


Have I mentioned the low chance of dispel magic's success?

A level 18 cleric casts Dispel on an old green dragon (CL 9) with 6 buffs up (he's not wasting a dispel on just one buff, after all), he's got a slightly better than even chance of popping each one, so he's just undone 3 of the dragon's spells (probably an even level distribution) with one of his own.

If he's really worried about failure, he can spend a level 6 slot to cast Greater Dispel, and have a 95% chance of success.


The dragon has its buffs up. The party attempts to dispel the, perhaps not even successfully.

It's not all-or-nothing. He checks each one individually, and because the dragon has such low caster level, he'll pop most of them unless he's doing something like using Dispel Magic (rather than Greater Dispel) against an epic-CR dragon.


All right, so again, you have a caster, and again they are preparing ahead of time, and again your caster is some sort of Druid or Cleric who isn't actually Tier 1 because you don't want it to be for this conversation.

More like because they can't use Divine Metamagic and are weaker in melee than a barbarian of the same level.


No, but it's facing a dragon. Have I mentioned the breath weapon? Or the flight?

Yes, but the focus here was on Dispel. The Protection from Energy will still be needed, as will archery capability.


That Tier 1 cleric in your blaster-level party, ah-huh. I'm seeing a pattern here. Your party is just perfectly full of people who don't belong there.

Which part of "cleric depowered to blaster level" do you not understand?


And using is a standard action, so... Your whole turn has been used, just like I said.

Yes, spellcasting tends to use the most important part of your turn; using the move action as well isn't such a big deal.


Blaster= Tier 4.

I'd call it tier 3, since he doesn't have to be 100% a blaster. (Now, a blaster class would be a strong tier 4 in the technical definition of such, but the difference between tier 3 and a strong tier 4 isn't one of usefulness or power, but rather of how that usefulness is distributed among encounter types.)


Cleric = Tier 1. For the exact reasons that you are detailing.

Which reasons would that be?


Do you know the Tier rankings?

Yes. Tier 4 means he's either not great at anything or useless at most things; as I said, the difference between strong tier 4 and tier 3 is more academic than practical. Tier 1 means he not only breaks the game, but has a choice of how to break the game; none of the cleric spells I mentioned do anything remotely like that. (They prevent others from breaking the game, but that's not the same thing.)


Flying rocks for 20d6 damage are actually meaningful, contrary to popular belief.

Too bad that TK can't do more than 15d6 worth of damage with flying rocks, and that's assuming that there are 375 pound rocks (exactly 375 pounds, no more, no less) just lying around.


And so are flying party members.

Not all that much. It's 15 dice of damage, and because party members are relatively squishy they won't be big dice. It's not nothing, but not deadly.


Yes, a 17th level party WILL have trouble.

Of course they'll have trouble; it's supposed to be a challenge. But it'll be trouble they can handle.


So if you were in a cave of 160' radius, it could literally be ANYWHERE IN THE CAVE with 9/10ths cover and a 20 on hide.

What's this cave look like, that every point in the cave has such heavy cover?


So that level 17 party member is pulling open the scroll during turn 2 after possibly being hit by the flying party member

Why not draw and cast in one turn?


and probably everyone in the party has all ready taken damage.

What did you expect to happen in a challenging encounter?


Because they don't have spells to counter the monster? That's the whole point of this--you NEED spells.

Of course you do. But the spells you need would be perfectly in place on a tier 3 or even 4 caster; the tier 1 spells (save-or-die, the most powerful combat control, etc.) aren't needed to beat these monsters.


OK, so let's assume we're not playing Legend of Zelda, and there are actually SEVERAL places the marilith could be hiding.


And there's a clone at each one, all pretending to concentrate on telekinesis.

So each of those places has LoE to not only the central one, but also to each other? That's one contrived cave.


Um, yeah, not 1d3. That's a punch.

Yeah, I'd say throwing a 25-pound object of the same consistency of a human being should be about the same damage as a punch. Maybe it'd be 1d4 per 25 pounds, but certainly not 1d6; that's for stuff like rocks.


These people flying are covered in "violent thrust", and are covered in armor, with weapons, possibly with spiked armor.

Ah, good point, the armor would likely affect things somewhat. It's still not as bad as a rock, but definitely 1d4 for an armored character.


1d6 for your armored dwarf.

Wait, if an armored dwarf (hard on the outside, squishy on the inside) does 1d6 per 25 pounds, how much does a rock (hard on the outside and inside) do?


And have I mentioned that both characters take that damage and go prone?

Source for prone?


You cannot claim something without proving it. Now prove to me that non-caster party can take this marilith down.

I never claimed that.


You nerfed all the casters.

Admittedly, I do have major boosts for the noncasters that are still not done, but yes, I nerfed the casters. Notice that none of the discussion we've been having used any of the features that have been seriously nerfed.


So basically the marilith is just dangerous, and the people who have a chance are weaker?

Weaker than the tier 1 wizard who, as soon as he finds the marilith, can kill it with one spell with high probability? Yes.


Um, it's meant to be 1 of 4 equivalent encounters in the day. Boss encounters are at least 1-2 CR higher. It's a boss for level 15 characters.

Ok, not a boss of that sort. But still something that's going to be the most important encounter of the day, even if it's not any harder than the others.


Not to your blaster party.

So you keep claiming, and never supporting (except by attacking a strawman of noncasting parties.)


Do you know how spellcasting works? There's this spell called temporal stasis.

Which requires a melee touch attack.


And this one called Evard's Black Tentacles.

What about it? Anyone who's not a poor grappler and poor at escape artist can get out of the grapple, and they only attack someone who enters the area.


Holy crap, what's your blaster's touch AC? Don't even kid yourself on this one.

20 mooks is low. maybe 2 touch attacks will succeed. Grappled.

Oh, I didn't realize you meant grapple. Ah yes, then a few will make their attack rolls, and (except for the myrmarchs) probably fail the grapple rolls against anyone but the wizard (who should be staying well back).


She spent one action, and you are down 25% of your characters.

No, she spent one action, and you are down 25% of your characters for one round. Counterspell only disables a caster as long as you keep counterspelling.


How are you healing? You were rushing her for a turn, and now you're running back? That is three turns MINIMUM, at which point you are one character down because they're grappled

Grappling a character half a dozen levels higher than you isn't so easy.


AND she's fired off an SoD.

No decent SoDs on the typical list.


So you need to have a scroll of See Invisibility (lol)

Quite reasonable at that level. It's only 150 gp, and quite useful.


and the caster to cast it (lol)

That's why I agreed that some boost to See Invisibility is needed.


and you then need to get in sight after 2 rounds to maybe hurt her, at which time she can also see you.

Oh, you think it should be possible to fight level-appropriate enemies without getting hurt yourself?


Giving wizards weaker class features or less spell access will not fix the marilith.

True, but nerfing the spells themselves will. (Well, would if they had any spells worth nerfing. As it is, its spells are pretty much evoker-level, plus Project Image.)

Oh, I thought of another way to figure out where the Marilith is hiding: Use some means to break Line of Effect around the image in one direction at the time; the direction that makes the image wink out is the direction in which the Marilith is hiding.

[Shadowbranch1]

Since we are talking about changing the rules anyways, why not just alter the damage dice type and raise the caps a bit. For example:

1st level spells do d4 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 6 damage dice.

2nd level spells do d4 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 9 damage dice.

3rd level spells do d6 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 12 damage dice.

4th level spells do d6 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 15 damage dice.

5th level spells do d8 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 18 damage dice.

6th level spells do d8 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 21 damage dice.

7th level spells do d10 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 24 damage dice.

8th level spells do d10 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 27 damage dice.

9th level spells do d12 damage (regardless of energy type) and cap out at 30 damage dice.

This does NOTHING for the SR issue (which I personally dont see as an issue since there are spells and other resources that can address this). However it does give the blaster a little more bang for his buck.

(and you get to use D12 dice for something other than Barbarian hit points and uncommon weapons)

[YouLostMe]

All right, you've argued against my point by supporting it for the Beguiler, you've circled your argument for SR, you're insisting that Tier 1 casters with Tier 1 versatility aren't Tier 1 because in your mind you can nerf something without decreasing its versatility, you believe that blasters are Tier 3 despite being outlined and enforced as Tier 4 and despite them only having 1 tactic, you think that apparently 15d6 to two party members every round isn't actually dangerous, that party members can prepare for combat but not monsters (who will be in their own lairs), that distractions like illusory clones don't actually affect party tactics, that temporal stasis and tentacles aren't actually SoDs, and above it all you also think that people can burst out of grapple when their party is engaged in a monster fight just because they want to. I hope the high-level games you play are super balanced with all the unprepared mariliths and dragons and queen formians that you fight with your incredibly powerful party that is Tier 3 and not optimized despite having a buttload of scrolls and a Cleric. Really, have fun. You've won this argument beyond a shadow of a doubt.

MOVING ON:

If people here are interested in re-writing the system from the ground up, I think evocation spells are the greatest thing for a possible spell point construction system. Make it classic for them to deal common energy damage, and then stronger spells will deal more damage (scaling from 1d6/level to 1d8/level to 1d10/level, and 2d6/level, which is probably where we should stop). Then scaling riders (shakened upwards towards knocked prone and then perhaps even stun), shaping (ray, cone/line/blast, "shape your own" stuff like the Fire Salamander Maneuver or whatever it's called). In addition, it would be cool to see Evocation orb spells as swift action for really minor damage.

EDIT: Also, damage caps are a bad idea. Other abilities like glitterdust are always potent, but scale by save. So should evocations, which means that to stay potent, the damage cap on dice is given the middle finger. We really don't need it.

[Yitzi]

{{scrubbed}}

[Kenneth]

check out my thread on evocation (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=223006)

and tell me what you think..

it follows what you lost me and Shadowbranch1 laid out in progressive damage dice to an extent.