AMFs and other anti-magicks: Why all the hats?

[CraftyCactus]

Please excuse me if this is an age-old discussion--it's a new idea to me, as I've personally stayed away from playing full casters my entire D&D career. So the question is this:

What's so terrible about moderate use of anti-magic effects, if everyone complains that magical characters often have the ability to break the game? I mean, instead of homebrewing an answer such as, "No, you may not play an incantrix/initiate of the sevenfold veil/what have you", could a DM reasonably answer cheese with... cheese? It's not like the intention is to screw over a particular player, or the party, even. The point would be to maximize players' freedom to optimize and attempt craziness to their hearts' content, while restraining them with the same rules. Examples of other things one might throw at extreme magic:

Spellthieves
Occult Slayers
NPCs loaded with mage slayer feats
Rangers, with Arcane casters as their favored enemy
Grapplers shielded with AMF contingencies
etc.

[animewatcha]

A properly prepared wizard 20 outdoes all that...even that.

[CraftyCactus]

Perhaps at 20, but what about the levels in between?

Even if it's a level 20 wizard in the party, what about a mirror match: wiz vs. wiz? The other party members will still be most useful, as the enemy wizard's bane could very well be underestimating the allies of the party wizard.

[eggynack]

A single well placed, and well metamagiced, orb of fire can get through all of those defenses like a knife through butter. Wizards are actually reasonably equipped to deal with stuff like that through spells with instantaneous duration of many kinds. Meanwhile, fighters get all of their stuff turned off in a field, and have to close with the enemy to do much of anything.

[animewatcha]

If I remember right ( not as good an optimizer as everyone else ), even levels of 1-20 if right spells are chosen, right feats, etc. It basically becomes an arms race between the DM and the player with the rest of the party being irrelevant. Not gonna end well.

[Mato]

Hate? Extraordinary Spell Aimed Anti-Magic Field is a must.

Eer to answer you're question it is binary. Just as a Rogue generally hates Undead, seeing them almost completely negates your Class's primary trick. No ands, ifs, or buts. Game over. A Wizard in an Anti-Magic field is a Commoner using a Masterwork Light Crossbow.

But yes, in the grand scheme of things. They fact you can wipe away Spellcasting is a huge balancing factor. But it's a **** move man, **** move.

[Urpriest]

Yeah basically, it's because every character relies on magic, whether via spells or via items. To deal with an enemy in an AMF you have to be inventive, versatile, and able to use the environment to your advantage...all things that casters can do and melee usually can't.

Most other anti-mage tactics are fine, if a bit silly when overused. The thing is, they're also not that effective, though. Relying on being within melee range of the mage tends to run into the fact that the mage is the last one to let themself get within melee range.

[eggynack]

Perhaps at 20, but what about the levels in between?

Even if it's a level 20 wizard in the party, what about a mirror match: wiz vs. wiz? The other party members will still be most useful, as the enemy wizard's bane could very well be underestimating the allies of the party wizard.
I don't think that a 20th level wizard's bane is ever underestimating the allies of the party wizard. Well, unless the wizard's allies have powers equivalent to that of the wizard, like if they're a cleric or druid or something. Just as the PC 20th level wizard can't really be threatened by much beyond a 20th level wizard, nor is the enemy 20th level wizard threatened by much beyond another 20th level wizard.

An additional problem with AMF's is that they're magic. It thus falls under the header of, "Only magic can defeat magic." We already knew that magic could defeat magic, so saying that AMF's shut down a wizard doesn't tell us much. AMF's don't really shut down a wizard that effectively, but that's a separate issue.

[CraftyCactus]

A single well placed, and well metamagiced, orb of fire can get through all of those defenses like a knife through butter. Wizards are actually reasonably equipped to deal with stuff like that through spells with instantaneous duration of many kinds. Meanwhile, fighters get all of their stuff turned off in a field, and have to close with the enemy to do much of anything.

Hm... what about this mental exercise:
Diviner NPC who teleports random anti-magical NPCs to assassinate the wizard. The wizard must conserve his spells with maximal efficiency; he can't afford to disintegrate every pesk that comes at him. Heck, send bards with glibness in disguise... who are your real teammates now? A wizard's power may be great, but may be restricted by things like morals.

Mechanically I may be playing this theoretical NPC wrong, but I hope my point gets across.

[CraftyCactus]

Yeah basically, it's because every character relies on magic, whether via spells or via items. To deal with an enemy in an AMF you have to be inventive, versatile, and able to use the environment to your advantage...all things that casters can do and melee usually can't.

Most other anti-mage tactics are fine, if a bit silly when overused. The thing is, they're also not that effective, though. Relying on being within melee range of the mage tends to run into the fact that the mage is the last one to let themself get within melee range.

Well, the idea isn't a 1v1, per se. Rather, NPCs in the world might be accustomed to the great potential and danger of magic, and thus, have adapted. Thus, an abundance of antimagical melee characters simply means that the wizard must take extra effort to deal with them. Heck, it's like every enemy has the potential of trying to kill you in a creatively new way.

[Flickerdart]

AMFs are rubbish at actually doing what they are supposed to do. Let's take a look:
Level 6 spell. Oh, that's not bad, too bad there's another spell at this level, called Contingency, that kind of gets in the way of jumping people.
Area: 10ft emanation centred on your d4 HD butt. You can't even catch up to any spellcasters to get them into range, because you can't use any movement magic. And since it's an emanation, a fence blocks it.
Effect: Block all spells! Oh, but not orbs, which are instantaneous conjurations and aren't magic after they are cast, or Invoke Magic, or Initiate of Mystra...

AMFs are great at screwing over the low-op casters that were not a problem to begin with, and terrible at doing anything the paranoid optimized casters that might be causing problems. All of your other ideas have the same problem - they suck so bad that they're only a threat against things that aren't an issue to start with.

[eggynack]

Well, there's a few different types of antimagic stuff. You have the magical antimagic, which can sometimes work, because magic may defeat magic, and then you have mundane antimagic, which doesn't really work, because in the end you're still trying to run up and stab a wizard. The problem is that although the things in the first column are the only effective methods of stopping a wizard, what ends up happening is that you have an encounter that's super difficult for a not-wizard to stop. If you just send infinite enemies at the wizard, all of whom are optimized to kill him, he's probably going to just hide in a rope trick or something, and take them out on an individual basis. Also, on disguised enemies, disguises make it difficult for the wizard to tell friend from foe. There are a ton of spells that can just figure it out automatically, but it's a cost. However, disguises like that make it impossible for the fighter to tell friend from foe. He just has no way to deal with it.

[CraftyCactus]

Hate? Extraordinary Spell Aimed Anti-Magic Field is a must.

Eer to answer you're question it is binary. Just as a Rogue generally hates Undead, seeing them almost completely negates your Class's primary trick. No ands, ifs, or buts. Game over. A Wizard in an Anti-Magic field is a Commoner using a Masterwork Light Crossbow.

But yes, in the grand scheme of things. They fact you can wipe away Spellcasting is a huge balancing factor. But it's a **** move man, **** move.

Touche. However, it's not an entirely new idea. Fundamentally, what if you view it like... chess? Tactics such as pins and skewers most definitely exist, and are commonly employed by both sides. Neither side likes being disabled, but that's the price of wielding such power. It's not like the wizard doesn't have a chance to have fun, either. Part of his or her fun is strategically outsmarting the enemy wizard, too. Perhaps certain items are necessary for the other wizard's destruction, perhaps having a simple conversation with those who share a common enemy might reveal personality flaws that can be exploited.


AMFs are rubbish at actually doing what they are supposed to do. Let's take a look:
Level 6 spell. Oh, that's not bad, too bad there's another spell at this level, called Contingency, that kind of gets in the way of jumping people.
Area: 10ft emanation centred on your d4 HD butt. You can't even catch up to any spellcasters to get them into range, because you can't use any movement magic. And since it's an emanation, a fence blocks it.
Effect: Block all spells! Oh, but not orbs, which are instantaneous conjurations and aren't magic after they are cast, or Invoke Magic, or Initiate of Mystra...

AMFs are great at screwing over the low-op casters that were not a problem to begin with, and terrible at doing anything the paranoid optimized casters that might be causing problems. All of your other ideas have the same problem - they suck so bad that they're only a threat against things that aren't an issue to start with.

Well, both sides may just as well have contingencies, right? Ultimately, the DM has infinite resources, while the player has limited resources. The DM's goal here would be to encourage out-of-the-box thinking, and clever resource management.

[eggynack]

AMFs are rubbish at actually doing what they are supposed to do. Let's take a look:
Level 6 spell. Oh, that's not bad, too bad there's another spell at this level, called Contingency, that kind of gets in the way of jumping people.
Area: 10ft emanation centred on your d4 HD butt. You can't even catch up to any spellcasters to get them into range, because you can't use any movement magic. And since it's an emanation, a fence blocks it.
Effect: Block all spells! Oh, but not orbs, which are instantaneous conjurations and aren't magic after they are cast, or Invoke Magic, or Initiate of Mystra...

AMFs are great at screwing over the low-op casters that were not a problem to begin with, and terrible at doing anything the paranoid optimized casters that might be causing problems. All of your other ideas have the same problem - they suck so bad that they're only a threat against things that aren't an issue to start with.
Ooh, don't forget the shrunken leaden hat of warding. That thing totally blocks AMF's, giving the wizard ample time to cast a spell to escape. That thing is sweet.

[animewatcha]

Hm... what about this mental exercise:
Diviner NPC who teleports random anti-magical NPCs to assassinate the wizard. The wizard must conserve his spells with maximal efficiency; he can't afford to disintegrate every pesk that comes at him. Heck, send bards with glibness in disguise... who are your real teammates now? A wizard's power may be great, but may be restricted by things like morals.

Mechanically I may be playing this theoretical NPC wrong, but I hope my point gets across.

Contingency.
Mind-blank.
Scry and die.
Summoned mobs.
Astral projection.
Wish.
Others can go on with the spell list.

There are magic items that so wizard doesn't use spell slots. If the 'antimagic folk' has nice things, the wizard has NICE THINGS.

[Flickerdart]

Well, both sides may just as well have contingencies, right?
Wrong, because one side thought it was a good idea to learn, prepare, and then cast AMF.

If you start getting into an arms race with the party wizard, you're no longer playing D&D, you're playing DM vs Wizard, a spectator sport for two players.

[CraftyCactus]

Just another idea to add to the storm: suppose the enemy wizard threatens to annihilate the whole batttlefield, friendly PC's and everything? To the DM, the NPCs are entirely expendable. The PC wizard should care about the party, and is fundamentally limited by that fact.

Heck, what if the enemy wizard dedicates all his efforts, spells, and resources towards the destruction of the party wizard's spellbook? In a mirror match, both are theoretically even. At the end of the day, though, the PC wizard is not as expendable.

[Flickerdart]

Just another idea to add to the storm: suppose the enemy wizard threatens to annihilate the whole batttlefield, friendly PC's and everything? To the DM, the NPCs are entirely expendable. The PC wizard should care about the party, and is fundamentally limited by that fact.
By the time you get to the kind of magics that can annihilate battlefields, bringing the party back to life isn't terribly difficult. And the mundanes still can't do a thing against that sort of power, so why are they even there to start with? When the presence of party members hinders the wizard from completing objectives, he's better off paying them their share of the loot to sit at home and whittle soap.


Heck, what if the enemy wizard dedicates all his efforts, spells, and resources towards the destruction of the party wizard's spellbook? In a mirror match, both are theoretically even. At the end of the day, though, the PC wizard is not as expendable.
It's way too easy to make a book untouchable. In a game where the DM targets spellbooks, it becomes a spellbook tax (that the wizard can refuse to pay with tattoos or Eidetic Spellcaster, or be a psion/cleric/artificer/etc).

[eggynack]

Well, both sides may just as well have contingencies, right? Ultimately, the DM has infinite resources, while the player has limited resources. The DM's goal here would be to encourage out-of-the-box thinking, and clever resource management.
Let me make this clear. If a DM wants to, he can challenge a wizard. It's not that hard, and doesn't require specific anti-magic tactics. Any given wizard of the same level as the PC and with the same optimization level has a solid 50% chance of beating the wizard. In a party with just wizards, everyone gets to have a fun time, and there are no balance problems.

However, in a party with both a wizard and a fighter, the story is rather different. All of these tactics you've come up with to destroy the wizard, do an even better job of destroying the fighter. If the DM brings his infinite resources to bear in an arms race with a wizard, the true casualty is the fighter who is just utterly pointless at solving these challenges. To put it simply: Wizards have a very high, but somewhat limited pile of resources. DM's have a theoretically infinite pile of resources. Fighters have almost no resources. While the DM and the wizard are having your crazy chess match to the death, the fighter is in the other room taking a nap.

[animewatcha]

Wizards aren't limited by alignment ( unlike cleric - deity or druid - extent ) and can give a rats rear about the party.

[CraftyCactus]

Let me make this clear. If a DM wants to, he can challenge a wizard. It's not that hard, and doesn't require specific anti-magic tactics. Any given wizard of the same level as the PC and with the same optimization level has a solid 50% chance of beating the wizard. In a party with just wizards, everyone gets to have a fun time, and there are no balance problems.

However, in a party with both a wizard and a fighter, the story is rather different. All of these tactics you've come up with to destroy the wizard, do an even better job of destroying the fighter. If the DM brings his infinite resources to bear in an arms race with a wizard, the true casualty is the fighter who is just utterly pointless at solving these challenges. To put it simply: Wizards have a very high, but somewhat limited pile of resources. DM's have a theoretically infinite pile of resources. Fighters have almost no resources. While the DM and the wizard are having your crazy chess match to the death, the fighter is in the other room taking a nap.

Okay, let's hang onto that thought. How does the fighter feel, in-game, when this happens? To be used as a rag doll, a mere pawn in the game? Won't that cause inter-party strife? Would this have potential to add another dimension to the game?

[Flickerdart]

Wizards aren't limited by alignment ( unlike cleric - deity or druid - extent ) and can give a rats rear about the party.
NE Druids and Clerics of evil deities have a bone to pick with you, and you don't want to know whose bone it is.

Okay, let's hang onto that thought. How does the fighter feel, in-game, when this happens? To be used as a rag doll, a mere pawn in the game? Won't that cause inter-party strife? Would this have potential to add another dimension to the game?
He's not a ragdoll or a pawn. He's a non-entity. He doesn't feel anything in-game because he's playing the Xbox in the other room, since he happened to pick a class that doesn't get to contribute because the DM has a vendetta against another party member with a higher optimization ceiling.

[eggynack]

Okay, let's hang onto that thought. How does the fighter feel, in-game, when this happens? To be used as a rag doll, a mere pawn in the game? Won't that cause inter-party strife? Would this have potential to add another dimension to the game?
No? Probably no. The fighter isn't a pawn in this crazy game of chess you've concocted. Pawns are useful. The fighter is just some guy that happens to be tagging along because that's what one of the players decided to make. What I'm really asking you to do, I guess, is construct a scenario that could kill a high level wizard. Now, figure out all of the things that the wizard could do to get out of that scenario, and add more factors to the battle to deal with that solution. Continue until the wizard is dead. In that final scenario, what is the fighter doing to effect the game at all? Personally, I don't consider player boredom to be a viable component to good roleplaying.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Ooh, don't forget the shrunken leaden hat of warding. That thing totally blocks AMF's, giving the wizard ample time to cast a spell to escape. That thing is sweet.

LEAD?! what kind of paranoid wizard uses a Lead hat? all you have to do is block line of effect. lead is heavy tinfoil is light. tinfoil is proper attire for a paranoid freak. you can touch your now unshrunk tinfoil hat and teleport away because you can still carry it. you then still have a hat.

Anti-magic fields really don't do what they are supposed to. the best use for them is for undead hunting, specifically vampires.

[CraftyCactus]

No? Probably no. The fighter isn't a pawn in this crazy game of chess you've concocted. Pawns are useful. The fighter is just some guy that happens to be tagging along because that's what one of the players decided to make. What I'm really asking you to do, I guess, is construct a scenario that could kill a high level wizard. Now, figure out all of the things that the wizard could do to get out of that scenario, and add more factors to the battle to deal with that solution. Continue until the wizard is dead. In that final scenario, what is the fighter doing to effect the game at all? Personally, I don't consider player boredom to be a viable component to good roleplaying.

This is one end of the spectrum: the PC wizard is finally outmatched, and dies. What about not going quite as far, and straining the party wizard just enough so he recognizes that he must inevitably use all the resources he has at his disposal--including his significantly less-powerful colleagues. What if the deities themselves decreed that fighter so and so had to slay so and so?

[animewatcha]

You are gonna have to tell me the bone on that one. Cause you say deities, I say pun-pun.

With eggynack's post, think that for every thing you try to add, there will be a spell to counter it in some one. DO NOT underestimate imagination/creativity of a player. DEFINITELY DO NOT underestimate imagination/creativity of captain paranoid wizard.

People on these boards ( and i think minmax, enworld, and brilliantgameologists ) have done things with Prestigidation that it wasn't supposed to do.

[Flickerdart]

LEAD?! what kind of paranoid wizard uses a Lead hat? all you have to do is block line of effect. lead is heavy tinfoil is light. tinfoil is proper attire for a paranoid freak. you can touch your now unshrunk tinfoil hat and teleport away because you can still carry it. you then still have a hat.

Anti-magic fields really don't do what they are supposed to. the best use for them is for undead hunting, specifically vampires.
Shrink Item can turn everything into cloth, so weight's not a huge problem.


This is one end of the spectrum: the PC wizard is finally outmatched, and dies. What about not going quite as far, and straining the party wizard just enough so he recognizes that he must inevitably use all the resources he has at his disposal--including his significantly less-powerful colleagues. What if the deities themselves decreed that fighter so and so had to slay so and so?
You're still thinking in terms of "how do I make the wizard's life hard" instead of "how do I make everyone else matter". The second question is the one you ought to be asking. Want to have players that don't care so much that their character isn't theoretically as strong as the nerd in a bathrobe? Engage them in the plot. Drop them cool items and set up situations where they can take the spotlight. Don't ignore them in favour of focusing all your efforts on one player, because even if the other players have characters who are just as capable, they're going to get pretty tired of that treatment very quickly.

[eggynack]

This is one end of the spectrum: the PC wizard is finally outmatched, and dies. What about not going quite as far, and straining the party wizard just enough so he recognizes that he must inevitably use all the resources he has at his disposal--including his significantly less-powerful colleagues. What if the deities themselves decreed that fighter so and so had to slay so and so?
Well, the situation I was coming up would reasonably end with the penultimate scenario to the wizard dying so that the campaign wouldn't end. Let's leave that aside for now though. In any situation which is capable of almost killing a high level wizard, fighters aren't going to even register as resources. If the enemy wizard has high enough defenses to not be killed by the party wizard, then he certainly has high enough defenses to not be killed by the party fighter. The deities decreeing that the fighter is the chosen one is DM fiat, and has no place in D&D optimization discussion for a number of reasons.

I mean, just consider a high level druid who can cast spells such that he's better at fighting than the fighter. Like, by a lot. Fighters just can't compete. The only real solution is to play games of either a higher power level or a lower power level. Wizards and fighters don't belong in the same party.

[eggynack]

Shrink Item can turn everything into cloth, so weight's not a huge problem.


Nah, he may have a point. You're trying to teleport away with the unshrunken lead cone, not the shrunken lead hat. It's a complication. Moreover, tinfoil is just more stylish for the paranoid wizard on the go. It's like a symbol for the wizard's overpreparedness. The only real question is if tinfoil even exists in D&D, but if anyone can do it, it's a wizard.

Edit: However, the lead cone is less fragile than the tinfoil one. A tinfoil cone has a good chance of just getting sliced into so many wayward pieces of foil. It's a real dilemma for our noble wizard.

[CraftyCactus]

You are gonna have to tell me the bone on that one. Cause you say deities, I say pun-pun.

With eggynack's post, think that for every thing you try to add, there will be a spell to counter it in some one. DO NOT underestimate imagination/creativity of a player. DEFINITELY DO NOT underestimate imagination/creativity of captain paranoid wizard.

People on these boards ( and i think minmax, enworld, and brilliantgameologists ) have done things with Prestigidation that it wasn't supposed to do.


Fair enough. Yet... I have never in my life played a level 20 wizard, and I learned more about how to think like one in the past hour by posing these questions. Obviously my goals as a DM would not be nearly as egocentric, but as you all have kindly showed, challenging the creativity and imagination of others has the potential to create great stuff.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Shrink Item can turn everything into cloth, so weight's not a huge problem.

it does make a difference. an antimagiced lead box is heavy, but an antimagiced tinfoil box is much less heavy so a wimpy wizard is much more likely to be able to carry it.

hat aside, if we are talking high level there is even a lv9 spell that lets you cast in an anti-magic field. there isn't really any good way to counter a wizard. wizard vs wizard is horrible. it comes down to either the one who strikes first or the one that is more tactically inclined. finally we have the tactically inclined wizard who has nerveskitter or something.

[CraftyCactus]

Well, the situation I was coming up would reasonably end with the penultimate scenario to the wizard dying so that the campaign wouldn't end. Let's leave that aside for now though. In any situation which is capable of almost killing a high level wizard, fighters aren't going to even register as resources. If the enemy wizard has high enough defenses to not be killed by the party wizard, then he certainly has high enough defenses to not be killed by the party fighter. The deities decreeing that the fighter is the chosen one is DM fiat, and has no place in D&D optimization discussion for a number of reasons.

I mean, just consider a high level druid who can cast spells such that he's better at fighting than the fighter. Like, by a lot. Fighters just can't compete. The only real solution is to play games of either a higher power level or a lower power level. Wizards and fighters don't belong in the same party.

Doesn't part of it depend on the reason that the fighter, druid, and wizard were put together in the first place? Pointing fingers at the players controlling the PCs doesn't help; that's OOC. What I'm attempting to support is the idea that perhaps, by tying everyone together by an in-game cause to cooperate, such issues might be addressed. Hm... maybe, look at Gandalf. He probably had the power to do a lot more than he actually did, knew a lot more about the ongoings of Middle Earth than most on his side, and yet, it wasn't a one-man show. Just a thought?

[Flickerdart]

Nah, he may have a point. You're trying to teleport away with the unshrunken lead cone, not the shrunken lead hat. It's a complication. Moreover, tinfoil is just more stylish for the paranoid wizard on the go. It's like a symbol for the wizard's overpreparedness. The only real question is if tinfoil even exists in D&D, but if anyone can do it, it's a wizard.

Edit: However, the lead cone is less fragile than the tinfoil one. A tinfoil cone has a good chance of just getting sliced into so many wayward pieces of foil. It's a real dilemma for our noble wizard.
Why are you teleporting away with the cone? It has much more value as an object of subterfuge (the enemy doesn't know you're not in there anymore, and will spend time and resources sundering it while you buff or summon allies a thousand feet in the air) than it does as a material possession.


Doesn't part of it depend on the reason that the fighter, druid, and wizard were put together in the first place? Pointing fingers at the players controlling the PCs doesn't help; that's OOC. What I'm attempting to support is the idea that perhaps, by tying everyone together by an in-game cause to cooperate, such issues might be addressed.
If this is what you're trying to do then, as I already mentioned, you're going about it backwards.



Hm... maybe, look at Gandalf. He probably had the power to do a lot more than he actually did, knew a lot more about the ongoings of Middle Earth than most on his side, and yet, it wasn't a one-man show. Just a thought?
And your suggestions so far would throw Balrog after Balrog at the party. Gandalf was a DMPC plot device, not a member of the party.

[eggynack]

Why are you teleporting away with the cone? It has much more value as an object of subterfuge (the enemy doesn't know you're not in there anymore, and will spend time and resources sundering it while you buff or summon allies a thousand feet in the air) than it does as a material possession.
Damn. It's like, I think I have this never ending debate solved one way, and then a brilliant argument throws me the other way. Just the idea of teleporting away while the enemy attacks a cone sounds beautiful. I think I'm back to the side of lead then, because that's super cool.

[Flickerdart]

If you have the scratch to spare, an adamantine cone with a lead sheet on the inside is probably going to delay the enemy a little further than just a cone of lead, and you can always fabricate it back together after you've mopped up.

[animewatcha]

If one of the player's wants to play a caster, beforehand go over with them about what they plan on doing, sources allowed ( especially since wizzies, clerics, and druids get spells in nearly every book ), etc. Take note of the wording of everything...

Like dungeoncrasher ( Dungeonscape fighter acf ). WOTC intended it to be I bullrush you into the wall for massive damage, right? Player's thought of idea of using the floor itself ( combination of feats, etc. ) as 'a wall' and next thing you know dungeoncrashes on EVERY ATTACK.

Heck, since the wording of the acf doesn't say the bull rush has to originate from a melee attack, hellooo ranged bull rushes. Splitting enchanted bow of auto-reset-spell-trapped-Arrowsplit for total of 4-10 arrows on every attack in a full attack that bull rush ( through be it feat, spell, and/or arrow type combination ) and the poor victim has to do bull rush checks for every one of them.

[eggynack]

Doesn't part of it depend on the reason that the fighter, druid, and wizard were put together in the first place? Pointing fingers at the players controlling the PCs doesn't help; that's OOC. What I'm attempting to support is the idea that perhaps, by tying everyone together by an in-game cause to cooperate, such issues might be addressed. Hm... maybe, look at Gandalf. He probably had the power to do a lot more than he actually did, knew a lot more about the ongoings of Middle Earth than most on his side, and yet, it wasn't a one-man show. Just a thought?
Well, obviously it's OOC. This is a problem that actually just needs to be solved out of character. There is no threat that you can send to kill a high level wizard that won't make a fighter pointless to the fight. That's just how it is. What you need to do is make these decisions before the game, not justify bad decisions during the game.

You can come up with roleplaying reasons all you want for the party to stick together. In fact, they're likely to stick together no matter how little the fighter is doing. I don't care at all about the theoretical boredom of a character in a game. The only thing I care about is the out of character boredom of the players playing that game. The fighter can be happy to sit under a tree while the wizard fights all he wants, but that doesn't make the game any more fun for the tragic figure that made the mistake of picking a fighter. It's both easier and more effective to solve this problem out of game, and I don't see why you insist on solving it within the game.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Fair enough. Yet... I have never in my life played a level 20 wizard, and I learned more about how to think like one in the past hour by posing these questions. Obviously my goals as a DM would not be nearly as egocentric, but as you all have kindly showed, challenging the creativity and imagination of others has the potential to create great stuff.

if you want to see creative check out one of our many wonderful prestidigitation threads such as this one.http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=278935


Why are you teleporting away with the cone? It has much more value as an object of subterfuge (the enemy doesn't know you're not in there anymore, and will spend time and resources sundering it while you buff or summon allies a thousand feet in the air) than it does as a material possession.

point, but you are then hatless in case of immediate emergency. i now suggest two hats. a tinfoil hat inside a lead hat.

[CraftyCactus]

If one of the player's wants to play a caster, beforehand go over with them about what they plan on doing, sources allowed ( especially since wizzies, clerics, and druids get spells in nearly every book ), etc. Take note of the wording of everything...

Like dungeoncrasher ( Dungeonscape fighter acf ). WOTC intended it to be I bullrush you into the wall for massive damage, right? Player's thought of idea of using the floor itself ( combination of feats, etc. ) as 'a wall' and next thing you know dungeoncrashes on EVERY ATTACK.

Heck, since the wording of the acf doesn't say the bull rush has to originate from a melee attack, hellooo ranged bull rushes. Splitting enchanted bow of auto-reset-spell-trapped-Arrowsplit for total of 4-10 arrows on every attack in a full attack that bull rush ( through be it feat, spell, and/or arrow type combination ) and the poor victim has to do bull rush checks for every one of them.

What if I'm simply tantalized by ideas players can conceive, that I want to allow them think of and exploit such things in a game? I mean, if they want to do something crazy, I want to see something crazy... can't I step everything up a notch?

[Flickerdart]

point, but you are then hatless in case of immediate emergency. i now suggest two hats. a tinfoil hat inside a lead hat.
http://tf2wiki.net/w/images/thumb/7/7a/ToweringSoldier.png/200px-ToweringSoldier.png


What if I'm simply tantalized by ideas players can conceive, that I want to allow them think of and exploit such things in a game? I mean, if they want to do something crazy, I want to see something crazy... can't I step everything up a notch?
Not every class and build has enough notches to step up. A cleric, druid, or wizard can kick his build up a notch every morning, a sorcerer every level, a psion every 10 minutes. A fighter will need weeks of retraining to swap his combat style for a more optimal one, and even then can only change his one single trick that won't always be relevant.

[eggynack]

point, but you are then hatless in case of immediate emergency. i now suggest two hats. a tinfoil hat inside a lead hat.
Why not a lead hat inside of a lead hat? If the inside hat is always inside the outside hat, then it will never be hit by the AMF. You can have an infinitely stacking series of hats. The adamantine hat also sounds pretty fancy, for the decoy tactic thing. Maybe an tinfoil hat, within a lead hat, within an adamantine hat. Best of all worlds.

[Sith_Happens]

point, but you are then hatless in case of immediate emergency. i now suggest two hats. a tinfoil hat inside a lead hat.


Why not a lead hat inside of a lead hat? If the inside hat is always inside the outside hat, then it will never be hit by the AMF. You can have an infinitely stacking series of hats. The adamantine hat also sounds pretty fancy, for the decoy tactic thing. Maybe an tinfoil hat, within a lead hat, within an adamantine hat. Best of all worlds.

It's hats all the way down!

[Flickerdart]

Play the Urban Druid variant from some Dragon mag to get a Small Animated Object as a companion. Dismiss it from service and give it to a wizard, who casts Awaken Construct and teaches it the tenets of his art.

You now have a wizard who IS a hat.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Why not a lead hat inside of a lead hat? If the inside hat is always inside the outside hat, then it will never be hit by the AMF. You can have an infinitely stacking series of hats. The adamantine hat also sounds pretty fancy, for the decoy tactic thing. Maybe an tinfoil hat, within a lead hat, within an adamantine hat. Best of all worlds.

o_0


What if I'm simply tantalized by ideas players can conceive, that I want to allow them think of and exploit such things in a game? I mean, if they want to do something crazy, I want to see something crazy... can't I step everything up a notch?

Crazy awesome is crazy awesome. that is why my group decided if it was legal and awesome you could get away with it once, more if it was just a clever way of using the thing the way it was intended.

[eggynack]

I believe that this thread would now be more appropriately named, "AMFs and other anti-magicks: Why all the hats?"

[animewatcha]

What if I'm simply tantalized by ideas players can conceive, that I want to allow them think of and exploit such things in a game? I mean, if they want to do something crazy, I want to see something crazy... can't I step everything up a notch?

Give them an objective. Tell them what is not allowed specifically spells, acfs, etc. The imagination/creativity will come from what insane things CAN they do with what they HAVE.

Like.. No walls around for bull-rushing?? Use the floor.

[CraftyCactus]

I believe that this thread would now be more appropriately named, "AMFs and other anti-magicks: Why all the hats?"

Done. Why everyone else chose to rename it, I don't understand.

[CraftyCactus]

Give them an objective. Tell them what is not allowed specifically spells, acfs, etc. The imagination/creativity will come from what insane things CAN they do with what they HAVE.

Like.. No walls around for bull-rushing?? Use the floor.

Interesting. What about... limited by spell-availability in the world? Not that the rules would be bent (they'd still get the usual spells from leveling-up), but that the supposedly-simple act of finding other spellbooks in the world was difficult in itself? Maybe such a simple problem might be solved by the wizard obtaining a spell, that the entire party would want to go on a quest so that the wizard could cast such a spell? And add in some external "timer", so research couldn't always be the answer.

[Flickerdart]

Interesting. What about... limited by spell-availability in the world? Not that the rules would be bent (they'd still get the usual spells from leveling-up), but that the supposedly-simple act of finding other spellbooks in the world was difficult in itself? Maybe such a simple problem might be solved by the wizard obtaining a spell, that the entire party would want to go on a quest so that the wizard could cast such a spell? And add in some external "timer", so research couldn't always be the answer.
Search around for the Easy-Bake Wizard, who gets almost more spells on level-up than there are good spells per level to take.

[eggynack]

Done. Why everyone else chose to rename it, I don't understand.
I don't know what you're talking about. My posts have always been "Why all the hats?" from the very beginning.

[Flickerdart]

I don't know what you're talking about. My posts have always been "Why all the hats?" from the very beginning.
My posts would also have been "why all the hats" but my hats are retroactively off to you, good sir.

[eggynack]

Interesting. What about... limited by spell-availability in the world? Not that the rules would be bent (they'd still get the usual spells from leveling-up), but that the supposedly-simple act of finding other spellbooks in the world was difficult in itself? Maybe such a simple problem might be solved by the wizard obtaining a spell, that the entire party would want to go on a quest so that the wizard could cast such a spell? And add in some external "timer", so research couldn't always be the answer.
In addition to the solution of making a wizard who gets tons of spells known naturally, there's always the solution of playing a druid. I tend towards druids with DM's I don't know the tendencies of for that reason. There's actually very little that a DM can do to effect the power level of a druid, short of DM fiat. They're good on any amount of books, and can immediately respond to an increase in books with an increase in power. The aren't very reliant on magic items, so a world with few magic items is fine for them. They just know all the spells on their list, so there's no digging through magic marts for acceptable spells. Clerics are also quite good at this, though clerics have more build optimization, and more reliance on magic items. Druids just kinda adapt to any campaign they're put in.

[animewatcha]

Interesting. What about... limited by spell-availability in the world? Not that the rules would be bent (they'd still get the usual spells from leveling-up), but that the supposedly-simple act of finding other spellbooks in the world was difficult in itself? Maybe such a simple problem might be solved by the wizard obtaining a spell, that the entire party would want to go on a quest so that the wizard could cast such a spell? And add in some external "timer", so research couldn't always be the answer.

There are magic items that act like a spellbook like Boccob's blessed book or the Lore gem. Also, there are feats/acfs for wizards to increase the number of spells they get each level. Heck, leadership feat or guild or organization and copy the spells they have ( abuse of cohort ). Afterall, there is bound to be 'more than one' wizard in that world.

There is also shenanigans on casting x spell as divine or arcane ( basically the other spell-type ).

[NeoPhoenix0]

so paranoid wizard + AMF = TF2?

the biggest problem with spellcasting is a lot of the strongest spells in the big three lists are in the player's handbook.

[CraftyCactus]

Well, obviously it's OOC. This is a problem that actually just needs to be solved out of character. There is no threat that you can send to kill a high level wizard that won't make a fighter pointless to the fight. That's just how it is. What you need to do is make these decisions before the game, not justify bad decisions during the game.

You can come up with roleplaying reasons all you want for the party to stick together. In fact, they're likely to stick together no matter how little the fighter is doing. I don't care at all about the theoretical boredom of a character in a game. The only thing I care about is the out of character boredom of the players playing that game. The fighter can be happy to sit under a tree while the wizard fights all he wants, but that doesn't make the game any more fun for the tragic figure that made the mistake of picking a fighter. It's both easier and more effective to solve this problem out of game, and I don't see why you insist on solving it within the game.

Maybe I've been looking in the wrong places, but I've seen so many games in which a dozen houserules have been invented--and many more OOC restrictions have been put into place--to attempt to foster this. After making that observation, I was really curious why such means were necessary. I mean, 3.5e with all the splatbooks gives everyone lots of legroom... so why not use what's already available? I've found out that it's harder than it sounds, but still... I personally enjoy games that give the players lots of flexibility without waving off all the mechanics as "roleplay", so I wanted to learn about the options on both ends.

[Flickerdart]

so paranoid wizard + AMF = TF2?

the biggest problem with spellcasting is a lot of the strongest spells in the big three lists are in the player's handbook.
The spy can turn invisible, kill with a single blow, transform into anybody, disable enemy "magic items", and even drop a clone to escape certain death. He's a pretty passable wizard.

[animewatcha]

Because RAW is 100% legal and 110% silly. By RAW, monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes ( and I am not talking about gauntlets ). This issue is for other threads in other areas of the internet boards. However, this is just one of the things that is 'house-ruled'.

[eggynack]

Maybe I've been looking in the wrong places, but I've seen so many games in which a dozen houserules have been invented--and many more OOC restrictions have been put into place--to attempt to foster this. After making that observation, I was really curious why such means were necessary. I mean, 3.5e with all the splatbooks gives everyone lots of legroom... so why not use what's already available? I've found out that it's harder than it sounds, but still... I personally enjoy games that give the players lots of flexibility without waving off all the mechanics as "roleplay", so I wanted to learn about the options on both ends.
The reason is that with or without splatbooks, there is no parity to be had between tier 2 characters and tier 5 characters. Admittedly, splatbooks do tend to close the gap a bit. It's just about impossible to go above tier one, and with splat books, fighters can go from tier 5 to tier 4. If you broaden your definition of "fighter" to include the warblade, then you can get up to tier 3. In my opinion, tier 3 is the lowest possible tier which can play with a tier 1 and still have fun, so that's about as close to parity as you can get.

The conclusion is ultimately that there's really no good ingame way to balance out a wizard and a fighter from the perspective of the DM. even if you tailor your tactics specifically for wizard stabbing, those tactics are either going to be ineffectual against the wizard, or too strong for the fighter. I really don't see a way around it. The options on both ends are to play classes that are closer together in power level while retaining the flavor of both characters. If the wizard instead plays a beguiler, and the fighter instead plays a warblade, then you gain pretty good balance between melee types and casting types. Thus, there are solutions to the imbalance, but none of them take place after the wizard and the fighter are both in the party. If there were just some single perfect solution that could stop wizards in their tracks with no recourse, while leaving the fighter free to stab bad guys in the face for his moment of glory, then the wizards wouldn't be wizards. Wizards are defined by their ability to have a solution to every problem.

[Flickerdart]

You can have a party with a wizard and a fighter that has both contributing equally - it's very easy to scale a wizard down if the wizard is willing to do it. You're just never going to be able to force him to, and trying to play the mage hunter card even once is going to be enough for him to start cranking up the paranoia to thermonuclear levels.

[CraftyCactus]

In addition to the solution of making a wizard who gets tons of spells known naturally, there's always the solution of playing a druid. I tend towards druids with DM's I don't know the tendencies of for that reason. There's actually very little that a DM can do to effect the power level of a druid, short of DM fiat. They're good on any amount of books, and can immediately respond to an increase in books with an increase in power. The aren't very reliant on magic items, so a world with few magic items is fine for them. They just know all the spells on their list, so there's no digging through magic marts for acceptable spells. Clerics are also quite good at this, though clerics have more build optimization, and more reliance on magic items. Druids just kinda adapt to any campaign they're put in.

What has stopped druids and clerics from breaking all games in the past? Deities, morals, and metagame influences, i.e. DM fiat?

[Flickerdart]

What has stopped druids and clerics from breaking all games in the past? Deities, morals, and metagame influences, i.e. DM fiat?
Nothing. Wizards are just the go-to T1 example because their spell list is the best.

[NeoPhoenix0]

What has stopped druids and clerics from breaking all games in the past? Deities, morals, and metagame influences, i.e. DM fiat?

it is commonly accepted that druids are the most powerful class without trying. you actually have to try to make a druid less powerful.
wizards can outdo them but they have to survive low levels and try a little.

[eggynack]

What has stopped druids and clerics from breaking all games in the past? Deities, morals, and metagame influences, i.e. DM fiat?
I don't really see how deities and morals would effect the druid much. They draw their power from nature, and it's pretty easy to stay within one step of neutral. When I say that druids can adapt to anything, I mean that they can adapt to any kind of campaign. They do well in games with lots of books and lots of items, and they do well in games with few books and few items, and they do well anywhere in between. They can even do well in games that go from having few books and few items, to having lots of books and lots of items. If you're stopping the druid by having the DM drop rocks on his head, then in my opinion the druid has already won. That's basically the DM handing in his card of surrender to the all consuming power that is a druid.

Druids just kinda adapt to things. You throw them into a situation where their animal companion is unhelpful, their spells are worthless, and their usual wildshape forms don't help (though I have no godly idea why those things would be true) and within a bit over a day they'll have a helpful animal companion, highly useful spells, and a perfectly suited wildshape form. They can prepare spells for unlikely situations, and turn those situational spells into bears if the situation doesn't call for the spells in question.

Edit: Another thing, druids do pretty well against anti-magic fields. Basically, the animal companion roughly keeps up with the melee classes throughout the game. An optimal animal companion at any given level is going to present about as much of a threat as a fighter. This tends to be true under normal circumstances. Under an AMF, suddenly all of the fighter's wealth by level is turned off. However, the druid's bear is still a bear. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html) They get an actually high powered melee guy for free, on top of whatever shenanigans they can pull off through an anti-magic field. Druids therefore operate in a manner similar to how you would expect a fighter to operate, except druids do it better, and they do it with disposable resources. Druids are also probably the best grappler in the game, but that's a different story.

[Gavinfoxx]

Easy Bake Wizard!

Here's the recipe for one of my favorite ways of playing D&D, an Easy Bake Wizard. Put the Sorcerer to shame (well, at anything except metamagic-heavy blasting...sorcerer has a ton of ACF's for that, which you don't get...)!

Easy Bake No "Worries" Wizard

Ingredients:
1 Gray Elf (SRD, MM1)
1 Wizard Class (PHB, SRD)
1 Elf Wizard Racial Substitution Level (Races of the Wild)
1 Eidetic Spellcaster Alternative Class Feature (Dragon Magazine #357 -- the core of the build!)
1 Spontaneous Divination Alternative Class Feature (Complete Champion, be sure to check out the errata online!)
1 Collegiate Wizard Feat (Complete Arcane)
1 Aerenal Arcanist feat (Player's Guide to Eberron, optional)
1 Eschew Materials feat (PHB, SRD)
1 Domain Wizard variant, Transmutation or Conjuration domain (SRD, Unearthed Arcana, optional)
Flaws, to taste (SRD, Unearthed Arcana, optional, but necessary if you want all those feats by level 3)
Extra bits, optional, see later instructions!

Mix in bowl, and be sure to top with any one of these feats:
Acidic Splatter, Winter's Blast, or Fiery Burst (all from Complete Mage)

Notes: if it doesn't turn out right when playing it in a zero wealth game, you picked bad spells. Be sure to look at the various wizard handbooks for how to pick solid, powerful, versatile spells. And it is very thematic that you can do stuff like leave a slot open to spend 15 minutes preparing the correct spell you need in it, or take Uncanny Forethought or Alacritous Cogitation, or Nexus Method, consider taking those later. And you automatically just 'get' spells like a sorcerer... no need for scrolls or anything. This Wizard idea relies on exactly zero found scrolls and zero need for items to scribe things into his spellbook, and with Eschew Materials and the right spells chosen, doesn't even need a Spell Component Pouch (just don't take any spells with focuses or components more than 5 gp)! Also, some people might think that this trading out the ability to specialize three times, but that isn't what is going on. Due to differing language between the various options, that isn't what's happening. Some of the stuff says that 'if you don't specialize, you can do this', some of the stuff says 'by removing the ability to specialize entirely, you gain this ability.' Order in which the abilities are taken matters.

Further, some more possible ingredients to take include:

-Alacritous Cogitation feat at level 6 (Complete Mage)
-Another Great option for race is a Lesser Fey'ri (Players Guide to Faerun and Races of Faerun) with LA Bought off (the LA buyoff option is in the SRD and Unearthed Arcana; choose the powers to get the minimum LA for that race). This lets you make use of that Alter Self at will; read the handbook on the uses of Alter Self, it's fantastic.
-Get the Nexus Method feat from Dragon Magazine #319! This lets you spontaneously cast the summon monster line, and apparently adds all the spells to your spellbook! If you do this, you probably want the Transmutation Domain rather than the Conjuration Domain, to maximize spells known.
-Another good feat is Greyhawk Method from Dragon Magazine #315. This is very similar to 'Collegiate Wizard', and is arguably a different writeup of this... and it might require GM interpretation if you are in a campaign other than Greyhawk. And it might require GM interpretation if you want to stack it with Collegiate Wizard. However, you should at least consider it.
-Another option is Lesser Celadrin. You combine the rules in Player's Guide to Faerun and the rules in Dragon Magazine #350 to get Lesser Celadrin.
-Also, Fire Elf (UA/SRD) works well too.

-If you ask for houserules, consider these two:
-Permission to house rule that you can take Uncanny Forethought (Exemplars of Evil) at level 9, with the Alacritous Cogitation (Complete Mage) and the Eidetic Spellacster ACF taking place of the Spell Mastery prerequisite, without access to the 'spell mastery' capability from that feat
-Hopefully permission to house rule for the character to count Autohypnosis (XPH, SRD) as a class skill, to describe the character's eidetic memory being useful for things other than spellcasting (assuming the GM uses Autohypnosis in his game! Or get it's abilities shunted into Concentration, or whatever)

Some numbers:

Basic Wizard: Start with 3+Int mod L1 spells, +2 each level as baseline
Elf Generalist Wizard: +1 wizard spell at start, +1 each level beyond baseline
Collegiate Wizard: Instead of 3+int and +2 each level, baseline is set at 6+int and +4 each level
Aerenal Arcanist: +1 each level beyond baseline, including L1 if you take it then
Domain Wizard (Transmutation or Conjuration): One specific extra spell of each spell levels; +9 spells over career (cantrip is already known)
Nexus Method: Apparently automatically gets you the entire Summon Monster line!

So at level one, with a 20 int (cause Grey Elf or whatever, or 21 if you start at middle aged...) you know:
13 level one spells, plus mage armor or expeditious retreat automatically
At level 2, you gain six new L1 spells
At level 3, you gain 6 spells of up to spell level 2, and levitate or web, depending...

Essentially, you end up with a more versatile Sorcerer, who has access to a TON of spells, and can always get the right spell for the job... even with no gear whatsoever. And no Vow of Poverty (ewww, exalted! And not able to gather even useful cheap equipment!) needed to be useful without wealth!

Finally, if you want to gain access to even MORE spells, the Mage of the Arcane Order prestige class can be useful. Or, if you have access to wealth by level, than Mercantile Background can get you cheaper scrolls to scribe to your brain.

[Gavinfoxx]

Also, here's a thread you might want to read:

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871214/Dispelling_38;_Counterspelling_Compilation

Also

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10104

[Blackhawk748]

heres my solution to any over optimized caster style person, while playing a rogue.

I was playing a sniper rogue and the psion was pissing me off, mainly by being an egotistical **** who thought he was god incarnate, well a crossbow bolt from 400 ft away WITH full sneak attack damage ended that thought process and any others he was gonna have.

[eggynack]

heres my solution to any over optimized caster style person, while playing a rogue.

I was playing a sniper rogue and the psion was pissing me off, mainly by being an egotistical **** who thought he was god incarnate, well a crossbow bolt from 400 ft away WITH full sneak attack damage ended that thought process and any others he was gonna have.
I might be missing something here, but is there some way to get sneak attack at over 30 ft away? Cause I'm pretty sure that you need to be within 30 feet to sneak attack someone.

[Blackhawk748]

sorry forgot to mention i was, im pretty sure a 5th or 6th lvl assassin and i had made a continuous item of The Snipers Shot lets you sneak attack within range of your weapon, and that was still my first, Sniper Crossbow with Far Shot

[eggynack]

Oh yeah, that one. I forgot sniper's shot for some reason. If you can get the drop on a wizardly type then you can sometimes kill him before his initiative. At high enough levels/optimization levels though, that strategy wouldn't be very effective. It could definitely work at low levels. If a barbarian can charge in on a wizard who hasn't prepared, he'll probably one shot him, although abrupt jaunt can stop lots of those types of attacks. Sneak attack from 400 feet would probably get past that though.

[CraftyCactus]

sorry forgot to mention i was, im pretty sure a 5th or 6th lvl assassin and i had made a continuous item of The Snipers Shot lets you sneak attack within range of your weapon, and that was still my first, Sniper Crossbow with Far Shot

After reading through the responses to this thread, I'm afraid that if a first-level monk could handle the crossbow bolt (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#deflectArrows), a fifth level wizard could easily deal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/majorImage.htm) with (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/gaseousForm.htm) it (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mirrorImage.htm), too (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/windWall.htm). I'm no hat expert yet, but I'm almost convinced that the wizard could pull off even more shenanigans with it on. :smallfrown:

Edit: I think I'll just sit down and cry in the corner with my Tier 3's.

[Kelb_Panthera]

heres my solution to any over optimized caster style person, while playing a rogue.

I was playing a sniper rogue and the psion was pissing me off, mainly by being an egotistical **** who thought he was god incarnate, well a crossbow bolt from 400 ft away WITH full sneak attack damage ended that thought process and any others he was gonna have.

psion=/=wizard and I'm betting your death attack had more to do with your success there than the SA damage.

[eggynack]

After reading through the responses to this thread, I'm afraid that if a first-level monk could handle the crossbow bolt (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#deflectArrows), a fifth level wizard could easily deal (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/majorImage.htm) with (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/gaseousForm.htm) it (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mirrorImage.htm), too (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/windWall.htm). I'm no hat expert yet, but I'm almost convinced that the wizard could pull off even more shenanigans with it on. :smallfrown:

Edit: I think I'll just sit down and cry in the corner with my Tier 3's.
Indeed. It always comes down to player skill and preparation. I don't know the specific ways that a psion deals with archery though. My favorite way to solve this problem is probably using the heart of X spells. You definitely have access to them by that level of assassin, and you can immunity to sneak attacks for hours/level. I've always loved those spells. I tend towards only heart of water and air though. Water, because it's the best one, and air because it's cheap access to light fortification. It's neat.

[Kornaki]

Edit: However, the lead cone is less fragile than the tinfoil one. A tinfoil cone has a good chance of just getting sliced into so many wayward pieces of foil. It's a real dilemma for our noble wizard.

Wear a lead hat. Over that, wear a tinfoil hat. As long as the tinfoil hat's integrity is preserved the lead hat never unshrinks - if the tinfoil gets destroyed, the lead backup is used (and at that point you don't care about keeping your hat, it's time to GTFO)

[eggynack]

Wear a lead hat. Over that, wear a tinfoil hat. As long as the tinfoil hat's integrity is preserved the lead hat never unshrinks - if the tinfoil gets destroyed, the lead backup is used (and at that point you don't care about keeping your hat, it's time to GTFO)
I think we've already reached and exceeded this goal. The current set up is an adamantine hat lined with lead, so that the enemy will try to break through the adamantine cone while you've moved to a tactically advantageous position. Then, the inner hat is foil because you want the inner hat to be easy to move around. Around all of that, there might be another third hat, because preparedness is important.

[Blackhawk748]

well he almost died from the damage (i rolled really well plus a crit so he had to save for massive damage) and he had to save for my death attack, so two save or dies

[Kazyan]

Adamantine hat with inner lead lining, around a cone that is a self-resetting magical trap of Major Creation that makes a hat when the outer one is removed. Never run out of hats. I mean, so long as we're being prepared and all.

[eggynack]

That's not even that impressive then. You got lucky on just about every account, after attacking him without any warning, and still didn't kill him directly through damage. It was also a psion rather than a wizard, so that's relevant. It just feels vaguely non-indicative of that plan's success rate.

[eggynack]

Adamantine hat with inner lead lining, around a cone that is a self-resetting magical trap of Major Creation that makes a hat when the outer one is removed. Never run out of hats. I mean, so long as we're being prepared and all.
That strategy is cool and all, but it doesn't really work. The key to the whole combo is shrink item, and major creation doesn't cast spells on the stuff it makes. What you need is a second self resetting trap of shrink item that triggers whenever the trap of major creation creates an adamantine cone with lead lining. That sounds pretty amazing.

[NeoPhoenix0]

what about a hat that makes shrunken hats above it so you always had 2 hats on your head?

edit: would probably be a minor artifact.

[Kazyan]

That strategy is cool and all, but it doesn't really work. The key to the whole combo is shrink item, and major creation doesn't cast spells on the stuff it makes. What you need is a second self resetting trap of shrink item that triggers whenever the trap of major creation creates an adamantine cone with lead lining. That sounds pretty amazing.

Yeah, I think we actually need two Major Creations and a Fabricate, too. It's an expensive contraption.

We aren't prepared enough yet, guys. :smalltongue:

[eggynack]

Yeah, I think we actually need two Major Creations and a Fabricate, too. It's an expensive contraption.

We aren't prepared enough yet, guys. :smalltongue:
Is that the list of spells you need to make a cone of adamantine lined with lead big enough to surround your whole body? Creating a source of infinite hats of AMF shielding is tricky. It's definitely doable, but it's tricky.

[NeoPhoenix0]

i've got it. kill the wizard by burying him alive in enough hats to crush him.

you know that's actually a good idea. give him a hat trapped with major creation. claim it creates a series of hats. you won't be lying. he puts on hat and is crushed by adamantine hats.

[Kazyan]

Wizards are now Tier 5 because you can kill them with hats.

[eggynack]

i've got it. kill the wizard by burying him alive in enough hats to crush him.

you know that's actually a good idea. give him a hat trapped with major creation. claim it creates a series of hats. you won't be lying. he puts on hat and is crushed by adamantine hats.
Either that, or you can take advantage of the nature of the hats. You give the wizard a hat, claiming that when it enters an antimagic field, it'll become a cone big enough to protect him. Little does he know that attached to the inside of the top of the hat is a tiny needle. Then you cast antimagic field, and the hat expands into its true form, a cone with a thin yet strong needle running all up the middle. The wizard is skewered alive by his own love of preparation.

[TuggyNE]

well he almost died from the damage (i rolled really well plus a crit so he had to save for massive damage) and he had to save for my death attack, so two save or dies

Unless sniper's shot changes this, Death Attack only works on melee attacks.

Congrats! You killed a psion with a rules misunderstanding! Do you want some cake?

[Kazyan]

(New reason I love the playground: we have threads like these.)

[NeoPhoenix0]

if anyone knows how to disguise magic item auras we can market the +5 wizard bane hat.

[eggynack]

Unless sniper's shot changes this, Death Attack only works on melee attacks.

Congrats! You killed a psion with a rules misunderstanding! Do you want some cake?
Huh. I forgot about that. This reminds of that thread where a guy was wondering if the alchemist in the party was overpowered because he took out a powerful monster really easily. It turned out that he got high rolls, was buffed, got a critical hit, had a rules misunderstanding, and only managed to kill the thing most of the way so the rest of the party could kill him. This is quite the let down.

[eggynack]

if anyone knows how to disguise magic item auras we can market the +5 wizard bane hat.
Can't we just use the spell magic aura (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicAura.htm) to disguise the item's magic aura? it seems like the right tool for the job.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Can't we just use the spell magic aura (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicAura.htm) to disguise the item's magic aura? it seems like the right tool for the job.

and the sorcerers inherited the earth.

[eggynack]

The true irony here is that the only class that's going to be reliably capable of making the +5 hat of wizard's bane is a wizard. Well, an artificer could probably do it, but that barely counts.

[Jack_Simth]

Yeah, I think we actually need two Major Creations and a Fabricate, too. It's an expensive contraption.

We aren't prepared enough yet, guys. :smalltongue:

Has to be True Creation, Wish, or a combination of Wall of Stone/Iron & Fabricate (all with Shrink Item as well, of course), actually - items created via Major Creation go away in an AMF, thus having no effect.

[Kelb_Panthera]

well he almost died from the damage (i rolled really well plus a crit so he had to save for massive damage) and he had to save for my death attack, so two save or dies

I'll be nice and assume you also had the spell that makes death attack viable at range up too (even though you didn't.)

That still makes this much more a case of luck than skill. Let's calculate.

You rolled a 19 or 20 and a confirmation. Let's be generous and call that about 7.5%. Then he failed a dc 15 fort save against massive damage or the dc 15-17ish save against your death attack. Again being generous by assuming he somehow had +0 base fort save (I rather doubt that) it's a 30% chance for the massive damage and a 20% chance for the death attack. Combining the two saves we determine that his chance of making both is .3 X .2 = .06; 6%. Combining the odds of his failed save with the odds that you'd crit .94 X .075 gives us a total of .0705; approximately a 7% chance that your attack would be successful if we're being quite generous.

Compared to a 93% chance that he'd survive and then be aware that you're become a foe, denying you both sneak attack and the possibility of death attack while he still had all his combat options open to him.

Just how screwed would you have been if that shot missed?

[eggynack]

Also, he didn't kill the psion anyway. Everyone knows that all psions are secretly astrally projected wizards disguised as psions, who use magic and metamagic in equal measures to pretend that they're using powers rather than spells. It's practically common knowledge by this point.

[Blackhawk748]

i would've been fine as i was in a church tower and coulda just shot him again next round, remember 400 feet away thats a -40 spot check, i only could get a decent view because my scope was a spyglass, and yes i did get lucky, but the second attack would have ended him anyway even if i hadnt crit'd on the first

[eggynack]

i would've been fine as i was in a church tower and coulda just shot him again next round, remember 400 feet away thats a -40 spot check, i only could get a decent view because my scope was a spyglass, and yes i did get lucky, but the second attack would have ended him anyway even if i hadnt crit'd on the first
But he could have done stuff. He could have made a barrier, or flown out of range, or teleported, or gained back some life, or whatever it is psions do in that situation. I'm not super familiar with the entire scope of psionic abilities, and I"m definitely not familiar with his psionic abilities. The only reason your plan could potentially work at all is that the opponent never had time to react. You just took a shot and he was dead. Magic lets you solve problems, and those problems include distant archers. Heck, if he were a wizard, a single casting of wind wall would have broken your entire plan in half. He doesn't have to kill you immediately after you fail to kill him. He just has to get somewhere you can't kill him, and kill you later when it's on his terms rather than yours. Casters have ways of making sure that there's no second shot.

[Flickerdart]

i would've been fine as i was in a church tower and coulda just shot him again next round, remember 400 feet away thats a -40 spot check
Hiding and attacking is a) a -20 penalty and b) restricts you to a single attack per round (as, in fact, does a surprise round). Single arrow shots aren't going to do much impact on anybody.

[tyckspoon]

Single arrow shots aren't going to do much impact on anybody.

If your plan/prep is 'lob an arrow and hope I get lucky with my damage roll', no. It's just going to alert your target that there's an enemy. But if your 'one shot' is a Sniper's Shot, Hunter's Mercy-buffed Sneak Attack with a Collision (+ other crit-friendly effects if you can afford/find some more) arrow fired from a high-strength composite bow.. well, 3 hits worth of arrow damage + Sneak Attack + 3x your level (you do have the Craven feat, right? You're a Sneak Attacker trying to assassinate somebody from far enough away they can't even spot you. Why don't you have Craven?) That'll seriously inconvenience somebody, especially when you do it as a first strike and they haven't had time to activate any non-permanent/long duration counters. And also they're Flat-footed so they can't use any Immediate responses either.

'course, there's at least a large handful of ways to defend against this, but it is a valid threat that requires having the defense in place *before* the attack, as the attack method is designed to prevent you from getting a chance to use a more reactive response.

[unseenmage]

Y'know, it occurs to me that the big bad antimagic field is only that big and bad if it is constantly in effect.

Perhaps if antimagic fields required the constant influx of a resource to power them?

I mean they're basically denying the world of D&D it's primary defining characteristic. It's against the very forces that bind that world together and power it's cosmology.

I mean a living spell of antimagic would be a horror beyond horror to those creatures who are MADE of magic. (okay maybe not that bad, but really imagine being an intelligent magic item and KNOWING that these things exist!)

Anyway, my idea is to make all anitimagic fields strobe, on for one or two turns then off for one or two turns. All the fields.

And if you want a constant stream of "antimagic" you have to fuel it with a resource as valuable to you as magic is to the D&D reality.

I'm seriously considering making antimagic either an "antimatter" like phenomenon that reacts violently with magic effects OR creating a dead-but-waking god of annihilation who starts making the antimagic effects of the world ravenous and aggressive. This could be fun.

Probably definitely using the Antimagic creature at the bottom of this page for it too!

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ls/20061026a

[Gavinfoxx]

Well, then no one would cast antimagic field. Simple.

ANTIMAGIC FIELD =! NULL MAGIC ZONE

[Flickerdart]

I mean a living spell of antimagic would be a horror beyond horror to those creatures who are MADE of magic. (okay maybe not that bad, but really imagine being an intelligent magic item and KNOWING that these things exist!)
Magical creatures are not affected by antimagic fields, and intelligent items are constructs.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Magical creatures are not affected by antimagic fields, and intelligent items are constructs.

constructs are still affected by antimagic fields. SR only comes into play when you are seeing if a creature is unsummoned. it would be effectively a mundane intelligent item. (not sure if it could still talk or not if it was capable of that outside the field.)

[Gavinfoxx]

Constructs themselves function just fine in antimagic fields and null magic zones. They just can't use their su and sp abilities, just like anyone else. They're still mobile and such, though.

[Blackhawk748]

I was at work today discussing this problem with another guy who plays dnd, and we realized that an Assassin of equal level to the wizard being targeted plus Black Lotus Extract (poison that does 3d6 con primary and secondary DC 20 fort save) and a Splitting crossbow, with all the appropriate buffs running means that that wizard is probably dead, considering average con damage would be about 10

[Gavinfoxx]

That's assuming that a single crossbow bolt could hit the Wizard, though...

[Blackhawk748]

well if im an assassin going after a mage, im gonna have a wand on True Strike so theres no way im gonna miss, and goggles of True Seeing, so screw you Displacement, and probably a bevy of other assorted items i cant think of right now

[eggynack]

well if im an assassin going after a mage, im gonna have a wand on True Strike so theres no way im gonna miss, and goggles of True Seeing, so screw you Displacement, and probably a bevy of other assorted items i cant think of right now
Oh no. Wizards don't have anything they can do to stop a crossbow bolt with truestrike. Spells like wind wall, or really any wall ever, don't exist at all. Wizards are doomed against this level of uncompromising power.

[Tar Palantir]

No counter to Friendly Fire, though, and that's one of the best buffs to persist via Incantatrix or other shenanigans (or heck, even just reducing the cost by 1 and casting out of a 9th level slot would be worth it). Auto-deflects all ranged attacks, mundane or magical, and lets you redirect them to a nearby target to boot.

[Gavinfoxx]

Yea, you are assuming "Ranged Crossbow bolt with +infinity to hit targeting ac" will actually hit the Wizard.

That's not necessarily true!

[Larkas]

well if im an assassin going after a mage, im gonna have a wand on True Strike so theres no way im gonna miss, and goggles of True Seeing, so screw you Displacement, and probably a bevy of other assorted items i cant think of right now

I just wanted to point this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/windWall.htm) out, as numerous others have already.

[Blackhawk748]

heres the thing, the wizard needs to know the attack is coming if the assassin is any good the wizard won't know its coming, so Wind Wall won't matter because that happens after the shot and the Wizard has a bolt in him. Im using True Strike to avoid any miss chances he throws at me, and im gonna be honest i don't know many wizards that take Persistent Spell, Clerics? yes. Wizards? not as much.

[eggynack]

Contingency (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/contingency.htm)? You already have access to evocation if you have windwall, so you have access to contingency.

[Blackhawk748]

ok so have several Assassin's gank the mage, the point is, is that this is all theoretical, im pretty sure there are more common threats a wizard will use Contingency on, and i have never seen a Wizard actually in game be this paranoid or this over prepared, because honestly it just takes to much work for most people, and makes the rest of the party get bored when the wizard yells "AHA I HAVE PREPARED FOR THAT EVENTUALLY TOO!!" for the 20th time that day

[Gavinfoxx]

heres the thing, the wizard needs to know the attack is coming

Oh so many ways.

Contingency & Craft Contingent Spell
Contact Other Plane to learn if someone is going to attack him in the next week or so
Foresight, to know if he is going to be in danger

The fact that he is always buffed with some useful spells... that he is surrounded by planar bound entities and undead...

The fact that he always sleeps in a Rope Trick, and comes out of it buffed!

And just because the Wizards played by your friends or DMs aren't played to a high level of confidence and optimization doesn't mean that no one does it!

[eggynack]

ok so have several Assassin's gank the mage, the point is, is that this is all theoretical, im pretty sure there are more common threats a wizard will use Contingency on, and i have never seen a Wizard actually in game be this paranoid or this over prepared, because honestly it just takes to much work for most people, and makes the rest of the party get bored when the wizard yells "AHA I HAVE PREPARED FOR THAT EVENTUALLY TOO!!" for the 20th time that day
If these assassins are still standing at a distance and using poison tipped crossbow bolts, then wind wall stops them all equally. Also, you're using the example of several level appropriate assassins who somehow managed to surprise and surround the wizard. First of all, how do fighters fare against that? Second of all, how did all of these assassins do that? The wizard is pretty hard to surround and surprise.

[Eldariel]

AMFs are a fine tool...for Casters to combat other Casters while becoming untouchable for non-Casters (it's one in the bag of many). They're also a nice trick in Runescarred Berserker's bag of tricks among other things. They're a good part of the game but they in no way stop casters or anything.

If anything, like Dispelling, they enhance casters since casters are the ones with the easiest means of deploying those abilities and thus they can attack their opponents' magical abilities or magic items. A warrior without magic items or spells is basically never a threat, so anti-magic is a very good way of negating non-casters.

Casters generally have an easier time avoiding them or contributing regardless. Of course, locking a caster down in an AMF is a time-honored means of actually killing casters pre-Astral Projection; if you have the action advantage you probably have a very real chance of pulling it off, especially if your Familiar has the AMF centered on it or such.

[Blackhawk748]

its very simple, have them ambush him on a road and they dont all have to be level appropriate, and the fighter would actually do ok as his high fort save will counteract most of the Assassin's tricks and his high AC makes him hard to hit, and have you guys not seen ninja assassins jump out of the ground to stab people?

[Gavinfoxx]

You know what would be better than a bunch of assassins, in assassinating a Wizard?

Another Wizard. Or a Sorcerer.... ;)

Especially as you have the 'we crazy outnumber him and are all high level and better equipped!' thing going on... Wizards would be BETTER at that...

Basically... your tactics aren't all that good vs. a smart wizard...

And of COURSE the rest of the party is bored when the Wizard has prepared for all eventualities. That's because they aren't playing to the level of the Wizard. If they ARE (say, the Sorcerer, the Druid, the Cleric, etc. are the rest of the party...), then they will be actively contributing in planning the contingencies and plans, and in proactively taking down enemies before they strike...

[CraftyCactus]

I find it hilarious that a bard could easily survive this theoretical situation. With... y'know, a mundane skill. Disguise. Heck, he could even put on some spells to boost his check.

Corollary: if the bard can do it, the wizard can do it at least 10x better. Maybe even by hiring the bard (or multiple ones) to do it for him, if that's what it takes.

[NeoPhoenix0]

AMFs are a fine tool...for Casters to combat other Casters while becoming untouchable for non-Casters (it's one in the bag of many). They're also a nice trick in Runescarred Berserker's bag of tricks among other things. They're a good part of the game but they in no way stop casters or anything.

If anything, like Dispelling, they enhance casters since casters are the ones with the easiest means of deploying those abilities and thus they can attack their opponents' magical abilities or magic items. A warrior without magic items or spells is basically never a threat, so anti-magic is a very good way of negating non-casters.

Casters generally have an easier time avoiding them or contributing regardless. Of course, locking a caster down in an AMF is a time-honored means of actually killing casters pre-Astral Projection; if you have the action advantage you probably have a very real chance of pulling it off, especially if your Familiar has the AMF centered on it or such.

I find i hilarious that you both actually brought up what this thread was originally about (wizards hating AMFs) and that you brought up AMFs after we explained to death that a paranoid wizard isn't afraid of AMFs because "tinfoil" hats are an iron clad defense against it.

basically if two good assassins wouldn't kill the wizard an AMF wouldn't.