Overrated spells?

[Jon_Dahl]

Have you ever noticed that some spells are (outrageously) overrated by players/DMs?

Here's one: Poison (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/poison.htm)

I'm the DM in our group and when a druid PC first used this spell, my initial reaction was "Oh no! 1d10 Con damage? That's excessive, to say the least!". However, the spell has mostly been just plain awful.

The last fight in which that spell was used was against a 4th-level fighter NPC. The 7th-level druid PC hit him with Poison and he lost 5 Con points. Does that sound a lot? Well, he had Con 17, which dropped to 12. Overall he lost 8 HP. Just to add insult to injury, the fighter struck the the druid with a maximum critical hit for 25 HP. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at that moment. The druid died too, so I guess I will not be able to field test Poison anymore.

[Lightlawbliss]

Fireball. So many new players think fireball is as good as it gets... They will learn sooner or latter what wizard means.

[Crake]

Have you ever noticed that some spells are (outrageously) overrated by players/DMs?

Here's one: Poison (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/poison.htm)

I'm the DM in our group and when a druid PC first used this spell, my initial reaction was "Oh no! 1d10 Con damage? That's excessive, to say the least!". However, the spell has mostly been just plain awful.

The last fight in which that spell was used was against a 4th-level fighter NPC. The 7th-level druid PC hit him with Poison and he lost 5 Con points. Does that sound a lot? Well, he had Con 17, which dropped to 12. Overall he lost 8 HP. Just to add insult to injury, the fighter struck the the druid with a maximum critical hit for 25 HP. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at that moment. The druid died too, so I guess I will not be able to field test Poison anymore.

To be fair, it's actually 2d10 if the target fails the second fort save, meaning there was actually a possibility that it would kill the fighter outright with the con damage. Note that the second fort save needs to be made regardless of whether the first one is successful or not, unlike regular poisons. Then also theres the fact that the DC scales with caster level rather than spell level, so the DC is always nice. Also consider that con damage scales much better against creatures with higher HD than the party. While NPCs will typically have a reasonable HD count, magical beasts or giant vermin will typically have lots of HD compared to their CR, so suddenly a 5 con loss is dealing something like 30 damage against a 15 HD creature.

As for overrated spells? I'd have to say fireball is definitely up there, but Polymorph is, in my opinion, quite an overrated spell, simply because I cant think of a DM who would just let you open a monster manual to a random page and just allow to turn into whatever you want.

[eggynack]

As for overrated spells? I'd have to say fireball is definitely up there, but Polymorph is, in my opinion, quite an overrated spell, simply because I cant think of a DM who would just let you open a monster manual to a random page and just allow to turn into whatever you want.
I don't think that's a fair criticism of polymorph. In discussion, we need to assume that the game is being played by the rules, and per the rules, that's a thing you can do with polymorph. Basically, you're not saying that polymorph is worse than people say it is. You're saying that polymorph is fantastic to the point where DM's should nerf it. That's fair, but it doesn't make the spell overrated. Anyways, for my own contribution, I generally dislike short duration melee type buffs. For example, I'm not a fan of the bull's strength line of spells, which causes problems on a core druid at level three, because those spells make up a huge portion of that list. The list also includes spells like shellelagh, because fighting with a quarterstaff is the last thing I want to do on a druid, and the bite of the were X line, if I'm casting it on myself rather than my animal companion. I do like animal growth though, because that one just closes out combats on its own.

[tyckspoon]

I'm actually pretty fond of Poison myself, because it has several mechanical oddities that are interesting, but it does take some finessing to put it to best use. I wouldn't use it as a straight combat spell unless you can Maximize it; otherwise the 1d10 is way too much variance to risk your action for a round on. And throwing it at a lower-level humanoid class-leveled foe is a pretty terrible application, as you really want something with more HD for the Con-damage effects to work on.

On the other hand.. on the Druid list, it's only level 3 (so you can Max it with the relatively inexpensive Minor metamagic rod.) That's also low enough to stick into a Spell-Storing weapon, and it's a pretty decent bonus effect on a hit. It scales by caster level rather than spell level, which means its Save DC is always relevantly high without having to use Heighten and it can potentially have a DC much, much higher than anything else you could cast. And it hits twice like most poisons, albeit at a delay, so if you can convince your party to do a hit-and-run fight you can tag something with it, withdraw, and come back later to find your victim dead of 20 Con damage (or severely weakened and ready to be taken out by any number of Fort-based Save-or-lose/Die/straight up HP damage.)

[CRtwenty]

I'll second Fireball. Even the designers of the game considered it OP for some reason, even though it's vastly overshadowed by other core spells of the same level.

[Spuddles]

I've seen people treat Phantasmal Killer as a great spell, but it's kinda bad. Mechanically, it's not optimal, and save-or-dies can be kind of underwhelming and/or lame if you're really into things hitting things for HP damage.

I find most of the ClericZilla stuff pretty overrated. The actual good stuff there is DMM, not divine power or righteous might. Those spells are badass, for sure, but spending an action and a 4th level spell slot to become as proficient at combat as an NPC warrior? You really can't get more overrated than that.

[Vaern]

Have you ever noticed that some spells are (outrageously) overrated by players/DMs?

Here's one: Poison (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/poison.htm)

I'm the DM in our group and when a druid PC first used this spell, my initial reaction was "Oh no! 1d10 Con damage? That's excessive, to say the least!". However, the spell has mostly been just plain awful.

The last fight in which that spell was used was against a 4th-level fighter NPC. The 7th-level druid PC hit him with Poison and he lost 5 Con points. Does that sound a lot? Well, he had Con 17, which dropped to 12. Overall he lost 8 HP. Just to add insult to injury, the fighter struck the the druid with a maximum critical hit for 25 HP. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at that moment. The druid died too, so I guess I will not be able to field test Poison anymore.
I've never seen anyone cast Poison. It looks a lot to me like a 3rd level spell that puts the caster in melee combat, requires an attack roll, allows two saving throws, has an wide and unreliable damage range, and whose average damage can barely kill a level 1 commoner who fails both saves.
Sure, it lowers the target's max HP and fortitude saves, but you're going to get yourself killed casting it. However, since druids do learn it as a 3rd level spell, it would be fun to brew it into a potion and trick someone into drinking it.

[eggynack]

I've seen people treat Phantasmal Killer as a great spell, but it's kinda bad. Mechanically, it's not optimal, and save-or-dies can be kind of underwhelming and/or lame if you're really into things hitting things for HP damage.
Yeah, I'll second that. Save or dies are just way overrated in general. A well built wizard shouldn't leave his fate up to a coin flip.

[Jon_Dahl]

To be fair, it's actually 2d10 if the target fails the second fort save, meaning there was actually a possibility that it would kill the fighter outright with the con damage. Note that the second fort save needs to be made regardless of whether the first one is successful or not, unlike regular poisons...

I know, but most of our fights simply don't last for 10+ rounds. Long fights at mid-level are very unusual, at least for us. Used as some sort of hit&run spell Poison is definitely solid, but that wasn't the case here. Good point anyway!

I understand that Poison can be used to its full potency, but I've seen it been used in our games for about half a dozen times and it has only been useful once.

[eggynack]

I've never seen anyone cast Poison. It looks a lot to me like a 3rd level spell that puts the caster in melee combat, requires an attack roll, allows two saving throws, and whose average damage can barely kill a level 1 commoner who fails both saves.
Sure, it lowers the target's max HP and fortitude saves, but you're going to get yourself killed casting it. However, since druids do learn it as a 3rd level spell, it would be fun to brew it into a potion and trick someone into drinking it.
I don't really know why you're bringing first level commoners into this. The real power of poison is that it scales. A first level commoner takes like three damage on each poison hit, but that's a seriously misleading figure. Against an enemy with twenty HD, it's dealing about sixty damage on each save, and that's quite a bit better. It's not the best spell, but acting like first level commoners are a representative example is just unfair to the spell.

[nyjastul69]

I think Prestiditation is overrated. It's very good, but it's not a mini-wish.

[Spuddles]

Poison can be good if you share it with your animal companion, though I think I'd rather have greater magic fang, spike growth, protection from energy, or sleet storm in that slot. And if it doesn't look like those are going to work, just summon a dire wolf.

[SowZ]

I think Prestiditation is overrated. It's very good, but it's not a mini-wish.

It depends on if you allow any of the supplements and web enhancements that expand the powers of prestidigitation.

[NeoPhoenix0]

I'll throw another vote in for fireball.


I think Prestiditation is overrated. It's very good, but it's not a mini-wish.

Surely you jest. I have found a use for prestidigitation every session that was longer than a single fight. Never underestimate the ability to dry yourself off, or clean/soil a surface.

Edit: Also desert survival. You can fill canteens by dampening a cloth and ringing it out.

[Spuddles]

It depends on if you allow any of the supplements and web enhancements that expand the powers of prestidigitation.


Surely you jest. I have found a use for prestidigitation every session that was longer than a single fight. Never underestimate the ability to dry yourself off, or clean/soil a surface.

Edit: Also desert survival. You can fill canteens by dampening a cloth and ringing it out.

Presitidigitation cannot duplicate the effects of another spell. Splats tend to shrink the usefulness of prestidigitation, as more spells = fewer uses.


Dampening a cloth makes it damp, there isn't enough there to drink. It's not Create Water. Furthermore, it has a duration. So after an hour is up, you're thirsty again.

Seriously, it's not a mini wish, it's more of an acid test for how much your DM will let you get away with.

[eggynack]

Seriously, it's not a mini wish, it's more of an acid test for how much your DM will let you get away with.
Heh, that might actually be more useful, when you get right down to it. There's no better way to figure out what kindsa stuff someone limits than by having him set those limits on one of your zeroth level spells. It's a lot better to have the DM say that you can't use your mini-wish to satiate your thirst than it is to have him turn one of your actual wishes against you when you act outside the guidelines.

[Vaern]

I don't really know why you're bringing first level commoners into this. The real power of poison is that it scales. A first level commoner takes like three damage on each poison hit, but that's a seriously misleading figure. Against an enemy with twenty HD, it's dealing about sixty damage on each save, and that's quite a bit better. It's not the best spell, but acting like first level commoners are a representative example is just unfair to the spell.
I was merely making an observation that it can't be used reliably to outright kill something with a single cast. If your hypothetical 20 HD enemy isn't dead after taking 11 points of con damage, then I rest my case.

[Devronq]

Just out of curiosity of everyone saying fireball is overrated as far as just hp damage goes is there a better damaging 3rd level spell? I mean there other 3rd level spells that deal 10d6 like lightning bolt but is there better? Because if there isnt, that isnt just evocation spells over rated and not fireball specifically?

[nyjastul69]

I'll throw another vote in for fireball.



Surely you jest. I have found a use for prestidigitation every session that was longer than a single fight. Never underestimate the ability to dry yourself off, or clean/soil a surface.

Edit: Also desert survival. You can fill canteens by dampening a cloth and ringing it out.

I'm not jesting. It's an opinion I have that you do not share.

[Mithril Leaf]

As much as people like it (or hate it) for being one of the big dozen game breaker spells, I find gate vastly overrated. You summon something big and scary, yeah. But with shapechange you can be something big and scary for a lot longer and a lot cheaper. And as for the whole getting service from outsiders, planar binding has had your back for a hefty portion of the game with all of no cost.

[eggynack]

I was merely making an observation that it can't be used reliably to outright kill something with a single cast. If your hypothetical 20 HD enemy isn't dead after taking 11 points of con damage, then I rest my case.
I don't think there's really a case to rest. I mean, let's compare this to another third level spell that's overrated, like fireball. You're doing like 35 fire damage to your 20 HD opponent on average, while this majig is doing significantly more than that on a single shot. It also has a saving throw that scales well, and each successful poisoning makes each subsequent one more likely to succeed. I'm not saying that poison is the best third level spell, or even a particularly great third level spell. I am saying that talking about one HD enemies is misleading, because weak enemies are the enemies that poison is weakest against. It's not a great spell, but it's also not a bad spell. It's a spell that ranges from alright to pretty good, depending on the circumstances. I'm not going to throw a frigging parade in the spell's honor, but maybe there'll be a little drum roll.

[eggynack]

Just out of curiosity of everyone saying fireball is overrated as far as just hp damage goes is there a better damaging 3rd level spell? I mean there other 3rd level spells that deal 10d6 like lightning bolt but is there better? Because if there isnt, that isnt just evocation spells over rated and not fireball specifically?
It doesn't look like people are saying that there are more damaging spells of that level at all. If you want to do damage, fireball is a good option for its level, though the orb of x line surpasses it by fourth. As you say, it's blasting spells that are overrated in general, but fireball is overrated in the specific. Lightning bolt may be worse than fireball, but people don't call lightning bolt the iconic wizard spell, or hold it up as a paragon of power. Being overrated is more than a measure of how good or bad something is. It's a measure of how good something is in comparison to the general perception of that thing. Fireball might be better than lightning bolt, so if they were viewed the same way, lightning bolt would be more overrated. However, because fireball gets piles of love and respect, it is far more overrated than lightning bolt. Such is the nature of this thread.

[Vaern]

I don't think there's really a case to rest. I mean, let's compare this to another third level spell that's overrated, like fireball. You're doing like 35 fire damage to your 20 HD opponent on average, while this majig is doing significantly more than that on a single shot. It also has a saving throw that scales well, and each successful poisoning makes each subsequent one more likely to succeed. I'm not saying that poison is the best third level spell, or even a particularly great third level spell. I am saying that talking about one HD enemies is misleading, because weak enemies are the enemies that poison is weakest against. It's not a great spell, but it's also not a bad spell. It's a spell that ranges from alright to pretty good, depending on the circumstances. I'm not going to throw a frigging parade in the spell's honor, but maybe there'll be a little drum roll.
At what point did I say that its effect was unimpressive compared to other spells? I was merely making an observation that it can't be used reliably to outright kill something with a single cast. At no point in your argument did you even attempt to disprove the point that I'm proposing :smallconfused:

[eggynack]

At what point did I say that its effect was unimpressive compared to other spells? I was merely making an observation that it can't be used reliably to outright kill something with a single cast. At no point in your argument did you even attempt to disprove the point that I'm proposing :smallconfused:
But... who was saying that it can outright kill enemies with a single cast? I certainly wasn't, so it seems that you've constructed a strawman of some kind.

[Vaern]

But... who was saying that it can outright kill enemies with a single cast? I certainly wasn't, so it seems that you've constructed a strawman of some kind.


To be fair, it's actually 2d10 if the target fails the second fort save, meaning there was actually a possibility that it would kill the fighter outright with the con damage.

:smallcool:

[eggynack]

:smallcool:
Yeah, but he wasn't saying that poison usually kills enemies. He was just saying that it could. Do you want me to prove that it can? That seems kinda trivial, honestly. I mean, it'd just be a list of every enemy with under twenty constitution, so it's not an argument that I'd enjoy thoroughly constructing, but you can use your Google powers to construct the argument yourself, if you like. There might not be many of 20 HD, but he wasn't arguing for the 20 HD thing, so that doesn't matter. I'll start us off with the legendary eagle, just to get things rolling.

Edit: Also, the legendary ape, if the ability to be hit from the ground is important to you.

[Zergrusheddie]

I think Poison isn't bad. A failed save will eat 2 or 3 HP per hit dice, which ain't bad. The scaling on level also means that it gets better with you. The big seller is that is can used by a Druid. Hold the Charge and go grapple a dude. Add a little extra nastiness to your bear hug.

Honestly, I think True Strike is given a little too much credit. Sure you can Quicken it so you don't miss with a Ranged Touch Attack (which are pretty easy to hit anyway) but is that decent because of True Strike or because of Quicken?

[Vaern]

Yeah, but he wasn't saying that poison usually kills enemies. He was just saying that it could. Do you want me to prove that it can? That seems kinda trivial, honestly. I mean, it'd just be a list of every enemy with under twenty constitution, so it's not an argument that I'd enjoy thoroughly constructing, but you can use your Google powers to construct the argument yourself, if you like. There might not be many of 20 HD, but he wasn't arguing for the 20 HD thing, so that doesn't matter. I'll start us off with the legendary eagle, just to get things rolling.

Edit: Also, the legendary ape, if the ability to be hit from the ground is important to you.
The problem is that on 2d10, there's only a 1% chance of actually rolling max damage. Sure, it's definitely capable of killing some pretty scary stuff, but it can't do it reliably (unless you're a high enough level to maximize it, like someone suggested earlier, but you should have better spells to use by then).
But let's face it, the rest of your party is going to finish the fight before the poison has a chance to deal its secondary damage anyway :smallamused:

[Feytalist]

He did mention a lesser metamagic rod of maximise, which is perfectly affordable and can be used with poison. Still requires two saves, but 20 Con damage is pretty impressive in any case, no matter how you come by it.

[eggynack]

The problem is that on 2d10, there's only a 1% chance of actually rolling max damage. Sure, it's definitely capable of killing some pretty scary stuff, but it can't do it reliably (unless you're a high enough level to maximize it, like someone suggested earlier, but you should have better spells to use by then).
But let's face it, the rest of your party is going to finish the fight before the poison has a chance to deal its secondary damage anyway :smallamused:
Well, yeah. However, the idea that it's going to consistently finish off opponents in a single shot is, once again, a strawman. The closest you've come to presenting someone saying what you're arguing against is someone claiming the theoretical possibility of enemy murder. A consistently murderful spell isn't something that anyone even came close to claiming, so you're kinda arguing against nothing right now. It's a pretty good spell. No more, no less. If the idea that it's overrated is reliant on everyone thinking that it's some kind of save or die, I'd have to say that it's not overrated, because I don't think people think that.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Poison is a single target, melee touch, fort save or take some damage. That is not my idea of a worthwhile third level spell, unless you have time to pre-buff and hold the charge (but then you could've cast SNA III or Call Lightning). That said, the OP has seen Poison used more in one campaign than I've seen it in all my years of D&D. I guess my groups either went for direct damage or knew to stay away, so in my groups it was rated properly.

Anyway, I think the most overrated spells aren't the terrible ones, but the okay ones that get too much love:


"Defenestrating Sphere (Comp. Arcane): BEST. SPELL. EVER!!!"It pushes people around and does damage, like a good evocation should. That doesn't live up to the "best spell ever" hype, though, unless your campaign is set in a world of towers that have tall glass windows on every floor.

Similarly,
Howling Chain (SC): (Triple Threat: Blast + BC + Debuff :evillaugh - TREANTMONK'S FAVORITE EVOCATION SPELL ) 15’ reach chain that will last through the battle – tripping opponents on every round (+15 on the opposed Str check!) then hitting them and leaving them shaken – plus it can make attacks of opportunity. Cast it 15’ in front of you for a defensive/offensive chain of awesome. Pay the 500 gp for the Arcane Focus and put this in your spellbook right now. Seriously - this is my favorite evocation spell - period.By the time you're casting a 6th level spell to stop people from getting to you, it better give you something more than a trip attempt at +15. A CR 11 Cloud Giant is a coin flip away from ripping you a new one. Again, it can be quite good (especially with certain combos), but it's no contingency.

[eggynack]

Poison is a single target, melee touch, fort save or take some damage. That is not my idea of a worthwhile third level spell, unless you have time to pre-buff and hold the charge (but then you could've cast SNA III or Call Lightning). That said, the OP has seen Poison used more in one campaign than I've seen it in all my years of D&D. I guess my groups either went for direct damage or knew to stay away, so in my groups it was rated properly.
Sure, that seems like a mostly fair assessment. I think that poison is a little better than you're making it out to be for few reasons. The biggest is that it scales. As your enemies increase in size, so too does the scale of poison's damage, so you're usually dealing the same amount of damage to a commoner and a legendary bear, proportional to that enemy's HP. Unlike most direct damage spells, it does more than HP damage. It also hits the enemy's fort save, which makes them more susceptible to spells, including future iterations of poison. They're not factors that make poison great, but they're factors that make poison somewhat worth casting. I tend to prefer SNA III and call lightning as well, but poison has its place.



It pushes people around and does damage, like a good evocation should. That doesn't live up to the "best spell ever" hype, though, unless your campaign is set in a world of towers that have tall glass windows on every floor.
Defenestrating sphere could never get too much love. It's not that the spell is the best in the game, because it isn't, but it's called defenestrating sphere, and the name is accurate. How could you not love that? It's a sentimental thing, ya know?


Similarly, By the time you're casting a 6th level spell to stop people from getting to you, it better give you something more than a trip attempt at +15. A CR 11 Cloud Giant is a coin flip away from ripping you a new one. Again, it can be quite good (especially with certain combos), but it's no contingency.
Yeah, it's probably a bit less than it's made out to be, but really cool evocation spells are rare, and that's a really cool evocation spell. A man can't survive on contingency alone, and Treantmonk has a general preference for battlefield control. I have a similar preference, so I get the love here.

[Jerthanis]

I find Solid Fog to be an exceptionally situational spell, as it does almost as much to protect your targets as it does to hinder them.

I'd actually say at this point that Fireball is (in online discussions) at this point one of the most underrated spells around. It's a stable platform upon which to deliver damage to groups of people and swarms. It's low level enough to metamagic up cheaply and its damage scales with the number of targets, which if you're fighting 7+ monsters, they're probably each CR-2 or CR-3, so the damage will be significant, even if it doesn't one shot anyone, the next attack is more likely to kill them in one hit.

Sure, it drops off in effectiveness after about level 12, when monster hit points begin to balloon to the point where 30-60 damage isn't even a dent even to the CR-3s, but I find the fact that there's really no damage spell equal to Fireball to replace it in that level range is actually a supreme pain in the butt.

[Alabenson]

Yeah, I'll second that. Save or dies are just way overrated in general. A well built wizard shouldn't leave his fate up to a coin flip.

While I have nothing against Save or Dies per se, Phantasmal Killer also has the issues that 1) the target has to fail two saves before it works, and 2) it has both the 'Fear' and 'Mind-affecting' tags, which means there are a huge number of opponents that either gain substantial bonuses to their save against it or are outright immune to it.

[Toy Killer]

I personally find SMI-IX demeaning to a party, and I'm currently in process of homebrewing a fix of sorts.

I mean, Joe spent half an hour making his character and selecting his feats and making a Melee beast of doom. Jake summons a badger that is Objectively better then he is in combat for his level.

Something about that ain't right, punishes any kind of role playing choices and cranks away at the arm's war between players and DMs. Sure, it's not the sole perpetrator, but it seems to bring it up to the forefront more often then other spells.

A rogue may not invest skill points into open locks because the wizard has 'Knock" but what is the barbarian, fighter, melee combatant going to do in lieu of Melee combat?

Yes, it's effective; Yes, it's legal; Yes, it's not your fault the game was designed to do this; Yes, their are faults to Summon Monster. But I believe the reliance on it is the worse thing a player can do. At least BFC helps the other party members for the most part.

[peacenlove]

This powerful spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/forcecage.htm)
Note: you get it at 13th level minimum
1)Evocation [Force]
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
You banned this school.
Also battlefield control at charge range always healthy for you,

2)

Area: Barred cage (20-ft. cube) or windowless cell (10-ft. cube)
Creatures within the area are caught and contained unless they are too big to fit inside, in which case the spell automatically fails.
(Hint: enlarge (person), most creatures at this CR)

3)

Teleportation and other forms of astral travel provide a means of escape, but the force walls or bars extend into the Ethereal Plane, blocking ethereal travel.
Like a wall of force spell, a forcecage resists dispel magic, but it is vulnerable to a disintegrate spell,
Can be bypassed or destroyed by spells or effects of lower level (vastly lower in some games)

3.5)

Material Component
Ruby dust worth 1,500 gp, which is tossed into the air and disappears when you cast the spell.

Or I can save money and use Greater Planar Binding?
Or polymorph any object?

3.P)

Saving Throw Reflex negates;
The walls of a forcecage can be damaged by weapons and supernatural abilities, but they have a Hardness of 30 and a number of hit points equal to 20 per caster level.

Now this spell isn't worth the ink you spent to write it into your spell book ...

[LordBlades]

I personally find SMI-IX demeaning to a party, and I'm currently in process of homebrewing a fix of sorts.

I mean, Joe spent half an hour making his character and selecting his feats and making a Melee beast of doom. Jake summons a badger that is Objectively better then he is in combat for his level.

Something about that ain't right, punishes any kind of role playing choices and cranks away at the arm's war between players and DMs. Sure, it's not the sole perpetrator, but it seems to bring it up to the forefront more often then other spells.

A rogue may not invest skill points into open locks because the wizard has 'Knock" but what is the barbarian, fighter, melee combatant going to do in lieu of Melee combat?

Yes, it's effective; Yes, it's legal; Yes, it's not your fault the game was designed to do this; Yes, their are faults to Summon Monster. But I believe the reliance on it is the worse thing a player can do. At least BFC helps the other party members for the most part.
Sm isn't that bad once you start optimizing a bit. Mainly because 99% of the monsters are unoptimized as hell. It also draws monsters from the same book the DM usually uses. If you can keep up with summons, then you probably can't keep up with opponents either.

As for BFC helping other chars....you usually don't want to be near the overlapping solid fog, black tentacles and cloudkill any more than the enemy does. A good deal of BFC and AOE spells in general aren't ally friendly.

[Alabenson]

Personally, despite having many fans in these forums, I've always found that the various fog spells like stinking cloud and solid fog are fairly underwhelming in actual play. Yes, they can effectively neutralize groups of enemies, but they also make it nearly impossible for your own party members to engage said neutralized enemies.

[JaronK]

Poison, I think, is for use with Spell Storing weapons. That's what makes it actually good... at higher levels it's one of the best attack spells to use in such a thing, especially if you slap a Lesser Rod of Maximize on it.

As for spells better than Fireball, I'd go with Glitterdust (nuetralizes enemies), Manyjaws (way more damage and from a better damage type, though it takes three rounds to do it), and Wings of Flurry (one level higher but WAY more damage and dazes targets, plus it doesn't hit friendlies).

JaronK

[Dusk Eclipse]

This powerful spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/forcecage.htm)
Note: you get it at 13th level minimum
1)Evocation [Force]
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
You banned this school.
Also battlefield control at charge range always healthy for you,

2)

(Hint: enlarge (person), most creatures at this CR)

3)

Can be bypassed or destroyed by spells or effects of lower level (vastly lower in some games)

3.5)


Or I can save money and use Greater Planar Binding?
Or polymorph any object?

3.P)


Now this spell isn't worth the ink you spent to write it into your spell book ...

While those are pretty good arguments I haven't seen it suggested in general spell suggestion threads, normally I only see it on 1 vs. 1 duel threads where it is pretty effective.

[Karoht]

Overrated?
Many of the single target save or dies bore me to tears.
Summon Monster is both over and under rated. It is under rated for it's number of uses, it is over rated for the impact of those uses. Just my opinion on that.

I have a friend who absolutely loves Scorching Ray to death. Short range, scales oddly, has to bipass spell resistance, fire resistance hamstrings it quite quickly (as little as 10 can cause it to deal no damage, 20 usually shuts it down pretty consistantly), has to make multiple ranged touch attacks. So many chances to fail, and he literally does in fact metamagic it up to 9th level and pew pew things. And he is often butthurt when it fails. Extremely butthurt. Like, "how dare you Mr DM for throwing fire resistant/immune enemies at me? That's unfair!"
So yeah. That spell. Overrated IMO.

[erikun]

Sleep.

I am honestly surprised at the claims made about this spell around here. A lot of comments about it make it out to be the ultimate party-killer, capable of slaying anything within its HD range and utterly dominating any fight it is cast in.

And yet, I've found that you're generally lucky to hit three opponents within its range. Several types of enemies are outright immune to it, and most things at first level have a good chance of making the save. And even if they fail, at best you've consumed two rounds of the opponent's time - one from the sleeping target, and one from the ally waking them up.

Of course, that's a pretty good exchange. Putting two opponents to sleep means at least four rounds lost on the opponent's side. However, that's nowhere close to the "Cast Sleep, coup de grace with scythe, win" method that a lot of posters claim it to be.

And let's not forget either that most people recommend banning Enchantment for more spell slots. :smallamused:


This powerful spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/forcecage.htm)
Note: you get it at 13th level minimum
1)Evocation [Force]
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
You banned this school.
Also battlefield control at charge range always healthy for you,

2)

(Hint: enlarge (person), most creatures at this CR)

3)

Can be bypassed or destroyed by spells or effects of lower level (vastly lower in some games)

3.5)


Or I can save money and use Greater Planar Binding?
Or polymorph any object?

3.P)


Now this spell isn't worth the ink you spent to write it into your spell book ...
20x20 will hold a lot of dangerous things, casting Enlarge won't do anything after the spell has been cast, and we're talking 1500gp to automatically eliminate one target for 26 hours, minimum. The D&D3e version of the spell allows no save and the cage itself is indestructable.

The Pathfinder version of the spell is weaker, but the Pathfinder version of the spell generally isn't considered worthwile anymore (from what I've heard).


I have a friend who absolutely loves Scorching Ray to death. Short range, scales oddly, has to bipass spell resistance, fire resistance hamstrings it quite quickly (as little as 10 can cause it to deal no damage, 20 usually shuts it down pretty consistantly), has to make multiple ranged touch attacks. So many chances to fail, and he literally does in fact metamagic it up to 9th level and pew pew things. And he is often butthurt when it fails. Extremely butthurt. Like, "how dare you Mr DM for throwing fire resistant/immune enemies at me? That's unfair!"
So yeah. That spell. Overrated IMO.
Scorching Ray is actually pretty good with core-only. It's one of the only no-save, no-SR low level spells in the book. It does more damage than Acid Arrow, and you can split it up against multiple targets if fighting weak opponents.

The various Orb spells work better, but that assumes you are including Complete Arcane (which your friend may not be familiar with).

[Karoht]

Scorching Ray is actually pretty good with core-only. It's one of the only no-save, no-SR low level spells in the book. It does more damage than Acid Arrow, and you can split it up against multiple targets if fighting weak opponents.We're going off the pathfinder version, which does have SR.
http://www.pathfindersrd.com/magic/all-spells/s/scorching-ray
Even if it didn't, the number of times where it is actually effective and actually deals the max damage he claims he can do with it is minimal. Given all the metamagic he burns on it for extra numbers, it really doesn't compair with the spell slots he's wasting. IE-7th and up.


The various Orb spells work better, but that assumes you are including Complete Arcane (which your friend may not be familiar with).We one day allowed him access to the Orb line of spells from 3.5 in our Pathfinder campaign. He eventually went back to Scorching Ray claiming "I have a higher theoretical max damage with it."

Sorry, I know there are better spells out there, I know that at low level it isn't a terrible spell, but I just tired of this spell rather a lot.

[kabreras]

Have you ever noticed that some spells are (outrageously) overrated by players/DMs?

Here's one: Poison (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/poison.htm)

I'm the DM in our group and when a druid PC first used this spell, my initial reaction was "Oh no! 1d10 Con damage? That's excessive, to say the least!". However, the spell has mostly been just plain awful.

The last fight in which that spell was used was against a 4th-level fighter NPC. The 7th-level druid PC hit him with Poison and he lost 5 Con points. Does that sound a lot? Well, he had Con 17, which dropped to 12. Overall he lost 8 HP. Just to add insult to injury, the fighter struck the the druid with a maximum critical hit for 25 HP. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at that moment. The druid died too, so I guess I will not be able to field test Poison anymore.

Considering that con dmg also lower your fort save, and that the DC is based on the caster level i wouldnt call it overrated but underused

[Grod_The_Giant]

This powerful spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/forcecage.htm)Now this spell isn't worth the ink you spent to write it into your spell book ...
Erm... Forcecage is saving throw: none. 1500 gold is a pretty good price for completely incapacitating any melee opponent who's smaller than gargantuan for a day or more.

[Karoht]

Erm... Forcecage is saving throw: none. 1500 gold is a pretty good price for completely incapacitating any melee opponent who's smaller than gargantuan for a day or more.
Sadly, in Pathfinder it is Reflex negates. But only 500gp
http://www.pathfindersrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/forcecage

Still, useful. Just not as OMGAWESOME! as before.

[eggynack]

Sadly, in Pathfinder it is Reflex negates. But only 500gp
http://www.pathfindersrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/forcecage

Still, useful. Just not as OMGAWESOME! as before.
True enough, but that doesn't seem to be what he was referring to, which makes this an odd criticism. Is the pathfinder forcecage even rated highly? I think the 3.5 one is, but then we run into the old conundrum. I don't much like to pay for each spell use, and that might make forcecage a bit on the overrated side, but it's a spell worth casting if you need it.

[Karnith]

Scorching Ray is actually pretty good with core-only. It's one of the only no-save, no-SR low level spells in the book.

We're going off the pathfinder version, which does have SR.
The 3.5 version (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/scorchingRay.htm) is SR: Yes, too, actually.

[LordBlades]

Erm... Forcecage is saving throw: none. 1500 gold is a pretty good price for completely incapacitating any melee opponent who's smaller than gargantuan for a day or more.

On the other hand, at the level you cam cast Forcecage, why is a melee opponent that can't bypass it still a threat?

[Segev]

Sorry for the tangent, but... PF Forcecage. What happens if I make the reflex save? Reflex saves don't let you move from the square(s) you occupy. If I'm in a square contained within the Forcecage and I make my Reflex save, can I walk in and out of it at will?

Somebody didn't think things through very well with their PF update.

[Invader]

I'll second prestidigitation for the simple fact that most of the things it accomplishes are usually handwaved in game.

I'm surprised no one has brought up the cure line of spells yet with the disdain you usually see for them here in the forum.

[erikun]

Sorry for the tangent, but... PF Forcecage. What happens if I make the reflex save? Reflex saves don't let you move from the square(s) you occupy. If I'm in a square contained within the Forcecage and I make my Reflex save, can I walk in and out of it at will?
If you make your reflex save, then that means you positioned part of your body in the way of the cage and so disrupted the spell. The spell does not form at all (but is still cast) and you remain in the same square.

[EDIT]

I'm surprised no one has brought up the cure line of spells yet with the disdain you usually see for them here in the forum.
Part of the reason for that, at least for me, is because I'm frequently the one running the Cleric of the party, and because I generally buy a wand of CLW by 3rd level or so. Most people aren't going to complain too much when I'm placing Bull Strength on them and hitting stuff with Spiritual Hammer, along with healing everyone.

[Segev]

...so...it's a spell that, if ANYBODY possibly subject to it makes their save, EVERYBODY possibly subject is safe? Can somebody not within its area make a reflex save to negate it? How close to the exterior need they be to do so? Is there any point within it that a sufficiently small creature cannot reach the walls to disrupt them?

[eggynack]

Sorry for the tangent, but... PF Forcecage. What happens if I make the reflex save? Reflex saves don't let you move from the square(s) you occupy. If I'm in a square contained within the Forcecage and I make my Reflex save, can I walk in and out of it at will?

Somebody didn't think things through very well with their PF update.
I'm pretty sure that you do shift squares on this basis. This certainly isn't an issue unique to force cage. Wall of stone is a good example of this kinda thing, though it doesn't really say what happens either.


I'm surprised no one has brought up the cure line of spells yet with the disdain you usually see for them here in the forum.
It's kinda a weird meta thing, which is why I expected fireball not to come up as much as it has. If it's overrated in other places, it probably isn't hereabouts. Fireball might attract more attention because it sometimes appears in the context of having maximum spell power. I don't think cure spells have that, though they do have a whole apparent archetype based on them. I have a particular fondness for cure minor wounds as well. That spell is neat.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I'm surprised no one has brought up the cure line of spells yet with the disdain you usually see for them here in the forum.

I think it's because people either know to get wands or in low-op parties it's "the spell the cleric has to waste his slots on, so i'm playing another class".

[erikun]

...so...it's a spell that, if ANYBODY possibly subject to it makes their save, EVERYBODY possibly subject is safe? Can somebody not within its area make a reflex save to negate it? How close to the exterior need they be to do so? Is there any point within it that a sufficiently small creature cannot reach the walls to disrupt them?
Most spells similar to Forcecage, including Wall of Force (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfForce.htm), can be disrupted and fail to form if there are creature(s) inside the wall itself. In fact, I seem to recall being able to roll Reflex if you were standing next to it to see if you could intentionally interrupt it - although I don't recall if that was a 3.0 rule or just a houserule based on how the spell worked.

Not sure what's going on with a 2 foot tall creature disrupting a 20x20 cage by standing in the middle of it, though.

[Kazyan]

Most save-or-X. Sounds fun, but in practice, you look like a fool when the other guy makes their save (you know, that thing that happens sometimes?) and then your party members continue to get mauled while you're sitting in the back wasting actions. Improbable? Sure, but how many combats are you going to see? A lot, right? Don't throw a save-or-X when a blasting spell can take out the rest of the enemy's HP, then. It's just sensible.

[eggynack]

Most spells similar to Forcecage, including Wall of Force (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfForce.htm), can be disrupted and fail to form if there are creature(s) inside the wall itself. In fact, I seem to recall being able to roll Reflex if you were standing next to it to see if you could intentionally interrupt it - although I don't recall if that was a 3.0 rule or just a houserule based on how the spell worked.

Not sure what's going on with a 2 foot tall creature disrupting a 20x20 cage by standing in the middle of it, though.
The force spells make some sense with this, because they're magicish, but wall of stone is a bit more problematic. That one's just a regular and unmagical stone wall, so it probably still exists, even if the other guy dodges it. There's really nothing there to interrupt.

[Spuddles]

The force spells make some sense with this, because they're magicish, but wall of stone is a bit more problematic. That one's just a regular and unmagical stone wall, so it probably still exists, even if the other guy dodges it. There's really nothing there to interrupt.

Wall spells fail to form if something interrupts their contiguousness

[eggynack]

Wall spells fail to form if something interrupts their contiguousness
That does make sense. Where'sat rule hang out, anyways? Also, this does very little to stop the issue where you can make a wall of stone whose edges aren't adjacent to the enemy's square. It's an odd thing. The spell talks about "mobile opponents", but that means very little in a game where enemies are largely static on your turn.

[nyjastul69]

Wall spells fail to form if something interrupts their contiguousness

This is not true for wall of fire. Most of the wall spells are a little different in regards to what happens if a creature or object is in the area of the wall. Check each spell for the specifics.

[eggynack]

This is not true for wall of fire. Most of the wall spells are a little different in regards to what happens if a creature or object is in the area of the wall. Check each spell for the specifics.
Ah, I see. It's a wall of stone specific rule, or a rule specific to wall of stone and other spells. However, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that a successful reflex save to avoid a surrounding wall spell kills the wall, or that there isn't some kinda movement incorporated in evading a wall that surrounds you at a distance. What a save means is really unclear a lot of the time.

[nyjastul69]

Ah, I see. It's a wall of stone specific rule, or a rule specific to wall of stone and other spells. However, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that a successful reflex save to avoid a surrounding wall spell kills the wall, or that there isn't some kinda movement incorporated in evading a wall that surrounds you at a distance. What a save means is really unclear a lot of the time.

Wall of Ice seems to be the only one that can be disrupted by a save made by an adjacent creature.

[eggynack]

Wall of Ice seems to be the only one that can be disrupted by a save made by an adjacent creature.
Nice find. That seems to imply that a reflex save can not disrupt a wall of stone, so that probably isn't the mechanism at work. On a more thread related note, I don't think AMF has been mentioned, and I think it deserves to be. People think that it makes wizards useless, and it does not do so by any stretch of the imagination. It's a pretty good spell, and I'm very happy that it's on the runescarred berserker list because that's super cool, but it's treated as some sort of panacea to the ills brought forth by wizards, and it's not even that good against them.

[CockroachTeaParty]

I'll second Gate being an overrated spell.

By the time Gate comes online, you can use it to conjure scary things like Solars and Balors! Oh no! Surely, the world will quake at their power!

Except that... by the time you're level 17, solars are kind of a joke. A whole party of 17+ characters will be able to accomplish a hell of a lot more than a solar can. Sure, you can add some additional firepower to the team in the form of a high HD outsider or two, but in my experience (actual in-game experience, mind you!) with high level play, allies brought in via Gate add negligible impact to a fight.

I ran a group through the Savage Tide campaign, and by the time they were gating in solars and titans, the party's sword sage was killing demon lords in one round. Most high CR outsiders have some decent defenses, but many of them are lacking on offense.

That said, Planar Ally and Planar Binding can be quite potent when they first become available, but those spells certainly have an expiration date.


I also consider Time Stop to be a bit overrated. Sure, you can use it to erect a slew of buffs, but if you're doing your job properly you already have those spells in place. Useful in a duel, perhaps, but metamagic and foresight (not the spell) had you covered five levels ago.

[Ernir]

Speaking from the perspective of how spells are talked about 'round these parts:

I think Disjunction is feared more than it should be. OK, it is stupidly powerful when it comes to wiping out buff stacks, but people keep talking about it as if it were some kind of ancient forbidden technique whose use can't never ever ever be justified.

Shadow Conjuration/Evocation and its greater cousin. Unless you're Shadowcrafting, you're not replacing entire spell schools with this crap. Hello, slot inefficiency, additional saves and SR (and yes, I know it doesn't always apply).

Forcecage, as peacenlove explained adequately.

Disintegrate as a SoD. It's a great can opener, though.

Contact Other Plane. Yes, I know the binary logic and statistical analysis tricks. We're still dealing with a spell that has harsh built-in failure modes, and is a minefield of explicit DM invitations to screw the caster over.

Wind Wall. Of all the ways to screw over Archers... this one? Just Stinking Cloud them.

[ryu]

There are only like two or three good spells in evocation anyway, and none of them care about being shadow powered. Contingency, wind wall, and perhaps wall of force are the only interesting ones. As arrows can't have will saves at least as far as I know, and contingency is interacting entirely and only with its caster, the only spell that can be effected by will saves is the wall of force. If I'm using wall of force as my only defense to hold back a melee opponent I need to start rethinking my life.

[Vedhin]

Speaking from the perspective of how spells are talked about 'round these parts:

I think Disjunction is feared more than it should be. OK, it is stupidly powerful when it comes to wiping out buff stacks, but people keep talking about it as if it were some kind of ancient forbidden technique whose use can't never ever ever be justified.

Did you notice that it can wipe your entire WBL? People don't want it because it's EVIL!

[underlaud]

I think Prestiditation is overrated. It's very good, but it's not a mini-wish.

Never underestimate turning everything Purple...

[Lord Vukodlak]

Sure, it lowers the target's max HP and fortitude saves, but you're going to get yourself killed casting it. However, since druids do learn it as a 3rd level spell, it would be fun to brew it into a potion and trick someone into drinking it.

Well actually because you brewed the poison spell into a potion, he'd be fine but you might be in trouble after he touches you...

[Telok]

I think that Fireball is both under- and overrated.

New players think that Fireball is about the best third level spell there is because boom!. Veteran players are dismissive of it because it's 35 fire damage with an Evasion save, spell resistance, and a very common immunity. I feel that, like most other spells in D&D, it is simply situational. When used on drow rogues using potions of Resist Energy[Fire] a Fireball is nearly useless. However when faced with a pack of twenty Ghasts (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ghoul.htm#ghast) two Fireballs is a nice, low risk and low resource, I-win button.

Of course Protection from Evil 10' Radius and a bunch of arrows might be even better, but nobody ever prepares a spell that completely hedges out and protects against summoned and evil monsters for an hour or more.

[The honest illusionist]

As much as people like it (or hate it) for being one of the big dozen game breaker spells, I find gate vastly overrated. You summon something big and scary, yeah. But with shapechange you can be something big and scary for a lot longer and a lot cheaper. And as for the whole getting service from outsiders, planar binding has had your back for a hefty portion of the game with all of no cost.
Can you be something big and scary, attack, and cast spells at the same time? Even with metamagic and cheesy spells, you can only make so many actions in a round. Why not have a big scary angel do some extra actions for you (and take hits that you'd rather not take)?

[Urpriest]

I think that Fireball is both under- and overrated.

New players think that Fireball is about the best third level spell there is because boom!. Veteran players are dismissive of it because it's 35 fire damage with an Evasion save, spell resistance, and a very common immunity. I feel that, like most other spells in D&D, it is simply situational. When used on drow rogues using potions of Resist Energy[Fire] a Fireball is nearly useless. However when faced with a pack of twenty Ghasts (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ghoul.htm#ghast) two Fireballs is a nice, low risk and low resource, I-win button.

Of course Protection from Evil 10' Radius and a bunch of arrows might be even better, but nobody ever prepares a spell that completely hedges out and protects against summoned and evil monsters for an hour or more.

You won't face 20 Ghasts, though. 12 Ghasts are an EL 10 encounter. 20 Ghasts would be for a higher level party than that...which means each Ghast gives no XP, because level 10 is the highest you can get XP from a CR 3 critter. So there isn't a point where you would be fighting 20 Ghasts.

[Spuddles]

I don't think there's really a case to rest. I mean, let's compare this to another third level spell that's overrated, like fireball. You're doing like 35 fire damage to your 20 HD opponent on average, while this majig is doing significantly more than that on a single shot. It also has a saving throw that scales well, and each successful poisoning makes each subsequent one more likely to succeed. I'm not saying that poison is the best third level spell, or even a particularly great third level spell. I am saying that talking about one HD enemies is misleading, because weak enemies are the enemies that poison is weakest against. It's not a great spell, but it's also not a bad spell. It's a spell that ranges from alright to pretty good, depending on the circumstances. I'm not going to throw a frigging parade in the spell's honor, but maybe there'll be a little drum roll.

At high levels, you're looking at monsters with astronomical fort saves, spell resistance, and blanket immunities.

Poison is just a bad spell.


It doesn't look like people are saying that there are more damaging spells of that level at all. If you want to do damage, fireball is a good option for its level, though the orb of x line surpasses it by fourth. As you say, it's blasting spells that are overrated in general, but fireball is overrated in the specific. Lightning bolt may be worse than fireball, but people don't call lightning bolt the iconic wizard spell, or hold it up as a paragon of power. Being overrated is more than a measure of how good or bad something is. It's a measure of how good something is in comparison to the general perception of that thing. Fireball might be better than lightning bolt, so if they were viewed the same way, lightning bolt would be more overrated. However, because fireball gets piles of love and respect, it is far more overrated than lightning bolt. Such is the nature of this thread.

Fireball is actually really solid against masses of humanoids of like CR-2, or even of equal CR, from levels 5 to 10, as long as 1) they aren't fire resistant and b) no evasion/spell resistant.

This is especially true if you can boost the damage on fireball. A couple caster level bumps and a lesser rod of empower, and you can clear out a dozen monsters a turn.

Of course, this is predicated on having a rather specific kind of combat, against a narrow range of enemies. It's better on a sorcerer, really, as a sorcerer can drop two fireballs if that would be best in the situation, but also has haste and fly available.



I find Solid Fog to be an exceptionally situational spell, as it does almost as much to protect your targets as it does to hinder them.

I'd actually say at this point that Fireball is (in online discussions) at this point one of the most underrated spells around. It's a stable platform upon which to deliver damage to groups of people and swarms. It's low level enough to metamagic up cheaply and its damage scales with the number of targets, which if you're fighting 7+ monsters, they're probably each CR-2 or CR-3, so the damage will be significant, even if it doesn't one shot anyone, the next attack is more likely to kill them in one hit.

Sure, it drops off in effectiveness after about level 12, when monster hit points begin to balloon to the point where 30-60 damage isn't even a dent even to the CR-3s, but I find the fact that there's really no damage spell equal to Fireball to replace it in that level range is actually a supreme pain in the butt.

It also has the advantage of speeding up combat IRL, as your turn goes faster. Boom, damage, move on.

Solid Fog slows combat down to a crawl.


I personally find SMI-IX demeaning to a party, and I'm currently in process of homebrewing a fix of sorts.

I mean, Joe spent half an hour making his character and selecting his feats and making a Melee beast of doom. Jake summons a badger that is Objectively better then he is in combat for his level.

Something about that ain't right, punishes any kind of role playing choices and cranks away at the arm's war between players and DMs. Sure, it's not the sole perpetrator, but it seems to bring it up to the forefront more often then other spells.

A rogue may not invest skill points into open locks because the wizard has 'Knock" but what is the barbarian, fighter, melee combatant going to do in lieu of Melee combat?

Yes, it's effective; Yes, it's legal; Yes, it's not your fault the game was designed to do this; Yes, their are faults to Summon Monster. But I believe the reliance on it is the worse thing a player can do. At least BFC helps the other party members for the most part.

In combat, Summon Monster can't do much other than outgrapple a fighter, and that's it. They usually summon something from like 4 or 5 CR under what your level is, which can be up to like 10 CR under your opponents. At higher levels, Ice Devils have Wall of Ice, but as far as straight up sluggers go, SM sucks a bag of *****.

You should actually look at summon monster before claiming that summoned badgers are actually objectively better than a fighter.


Anyway, I'd like to say that Summon Monster is overrated, for basically all the reasons you think it's good.


Personally, despite having many fans in these forums, I've always found that the various fog spells like stinking cloud and solid fog are fairly underwhelming in actual play. Yes, they can effectively neutralize groups of enemies, but they also make it nearly impossible for your own party members to engage said neutralized enemies.

In my experience, cloud spells are amazing. But my experience involves four or five PCs battling 20+ monsters, including 5 brutes at our ECL and a dozen or so archers, and a couple casters. They're incredible force multipliers because the caster can divide and conquer the battlefield while melee doesn't have to bother with more than a couple opponents at a time.

But in narrow hallways against a couple CR+2 foes that use magic or have ways to take actions to buff? They're underwhelming


Did you notice that it can wipe your entire WBL? People don't want it because it's EVIL!

If you fail every single save for your items, yes.

MJD is most threatening to characters abusing persistent spells. No save, just lose buffs. CoDzilla isn't that great without spells.


So there isn't a point where you would be fighting 20 Ghasts.

DM: "Down the hall, you see shadowy figures. From previous encounters, you recognize them as ghasts. A total of 20 fill the room."

Rogue: "We'll have to find another way...."

Sorcerer: "Nah, it's cool, they're tightly packed. A couple fireballs should take care of them."

Rules lawyer: "OMG, you took fireball as a spell known? What did I tell you! It's overrated! Whatever. I'll handle this. DM, we're a level 6 party. At most, the encounter should only have three ghasts. I demand that you remove 17 because we should all follow the rules."

DM: "You're absolutely correct, rules lawyer. You all see 17 ghasts disappear in a puff of rules lawyering."

[Firebug]

I second Disintegrate. Sure sounds like a load of damage (2d6 per caster level, 40d6 cap), but I have NEVER had anyone fail their fort save. So it was always just 5d6 damage. Effectively worse then shocking grasp 6 spell levels earlier. At least shocking grasp gave a bonus vs targets wearing metal armor.

[Vedhin]

If you fail every single save for your items, yes.

MJD is most threatening to characters abusing persistent spells. No save, just lose buffs. CoDzilla isn't that great without spells.


Disjunction doesn't remove the targets ability to cast so CoDzilla still has high-level spells after Disjunction, and they can function even without buffs. And they should still have most of their items, because they are Wisdom based classes with good Will save progression.

On the other hand, the Big Stupid Fighter who is almost completely dependant on gear by this point will fail a large portion of those Will saves for his items.

[Urpriest]

If you fail every single save for your items, yes.


You don't get a chance to. You spend an hour looking up the saves for all your items, and the game ends early with everyone pissed off at you. Or you're super-organized like Tippy and it doesn't really matter because you've got better things to do with your time.




DM: "Down the hall, you see shadowy figures. From previous encounters, you recognize them as ghasts. A total of 20 fill the room."

Rogue: "We'll have to find another way...."

Sorcerer: "Nah, it's cool, they're tightly packed. A couple fireballs should take care of them."

Rules lawyer: "OMG, you took fireball as a spell known? What did I tell you! It's overrated! Whatever. I'll handle this. DM, we're a level 6 party. At most, the encounter should only have three ghasts. I demand that you remove 17 because we should all follow the rules."

DM: "You're absolutely correct, rules lawyer. You all see 17 ghasts disappear in a puff of rules lawyering."

A new DM wouldn't have the confidence to go beyond the EL tables, while an experienced DM is used to how the game scales and knows how to make encounters within the EL tables compelling. The only DMs who have 20+ creatures in an encounter are those who are trying to play a different game, and those DMs are dying out because, guess what, there are lots of different games available that actually do things like that!

[Spuddles]

I second Disintegrate. Sure sounds like a load of damage (2d6 per caster level, 40d6 cap), but I have NEVER had anyone fail their fort save. So it was always just 5d6 damage. Effectively worse then shocking grasp 6 spell levels earlier. At least shocking grasp gave a bonus vs targets wearing metal armor.

Yeah, ranged touch attack, SR: yes, and fort: partial make it particularly mediocre for combat use.


Disjunction doesn't remove the targets ability to cast so CoDzilla still has high-level spells after Disjunction, and they can function even without buffs. And they should still have most of their items, because they are Wisdom based classes with good Will save progression.

On the other hand, the Big Stupid Fighter who is almost completely dependant on gear by this point will fail a large portion of those Will saves for his items.

At least half of CoDzilla's spells are spent on buffs. A single spell has totally undone their build, and they're out of turn attempts to put buffs back up. They also don't have the actions to get back to hitting things. If their remaining spell load out is "spells that aren't buffs", then they would have better off with a full spell load out of "spells that aren't buffs."

MJD basically wipes out half of CoDzilla's resources.

The fighter, though, has purposefully pimped his will save, so fails far fewer saves than you think, and isn't completely dependent on gear, because dragonborn, half-minotaur, and necropolitan takes care of the majority of problems fighters have at high levels.


You don't get a chance to. You spend an hour looking up the saves for all your items, and the game ends early with everyone pissed off at you. Or you're super-organized like Tippy and it doesn't really matter because you've got better things to do with your time.

I suspect that, but the time MDJ is in play, that your save are superior to that of your items. Furthermore, how is this any different that a wizard using a targeted dispel and forcing a hundred rolls vs. CL?

That's such a non argument. Virtually every aspect of GOD wizards are based around making the game play as slow as molasses. What's the particular issue with MDJ?


A new DM wouldn't have the confidence to go beyond the EL tables, while an experienced DM is used to how the game scales and knows how to make encounters within the EL tables compelling. The only DMs who have 20+ creatures in an encounter are those who are trying to play a different game, and those DMs are dying out because, guess what, there are lots of different games available that actually do things like that!

I don't know what, exactly, you're getting at here.

[eggynack]

At high levels, you're looking at monsters with astronomical fort saves, spell resistance, and blanket immunities.

Poison is just a bad spell.
Eh, I wouldn't call it bad. There's probably a decent range of levels at which the damage is good and the fort saves are doable. I'd have to do some real numerical consideration to know for sure though, so I may be mistaken.




Fireball is actually really solid against masses of humanoids of like CR-2, or even of equal CR, from levels 5 to 10, as long as 1) they aren't fire resistant and b) no evasion/spell resistant.

This is especially true if you can boost the damage on fireball. A couple caster level bumps and a lesser rod of empower, and you can clear out a dozen monsters a turn.

Of course, this is predicated on having a rather specific kind of combat, against a narrow range of enemies. It's better on a sorcerer, really, as a sorcerer can drop two fireballs if that would be best in the situation, but also has haste and fly available.
I don't know if it's true of everyone, but I tend to put a high premium on reliable effectiveness on my spells, at least if I'm not a druid. Also, I don't see how being good in a specific situation, and not good in most other situations, makes a good sorcerer spell. You're not losing spell slots, but you're losing spells known, and that's probably more important. Fireball might be good on a sorcerer due to its spammability, but I wouldn't call relative versatility if my spells don't match the situation a benefit of the sorcerer, simply because wizards can prepare a variety of spells. I'd generally prefer orb of fire in either case, simply because the number of situations in which it's applicable exceeds that of some other spells.

[Vedhin]

At least half of CoDzilla's spells are spent on buffs. A single spell has totally undone their build, and they're out of turn attempts to put buffs back up. They also don't have the actions to get back to hitting things. If their remaining spell load out is "spells that aren't buffs", then they would have better off with a full spell load out of "spells that aren't buffs."

MJD basically wipes out half of CoDzilla's resources.

The fighter, though, has purposefully pimped his will save, so fails far fewer saves than you think, and isn't completely dependent on gear, because dragonborn, half-minotaur, and necropolitan takes care of the majority of problems fighters have at high levels.

Well, Word of Recall is standard issue for Clerics anyway, or at least should be. And the Druid can still sic the Animal Companion on them, Wildshape into something nasty, or spontaneously Summon Nature's Ally.
And a CR appropriate encounter is supposed to consume a quarter of your resources, so that line of arguing proves that Disjunction is never CR appropriate.

Tell me, how common are these Half-Minotaur Dragonborn Necropolitan fighter-types classes? I don't think "chosen of a Lawful Good deity" plays well with "volutarily became an undead" in most cases. And Half-Minotaur is it's own problem entirely. And eve if they purposely boost their save they still have a bad base Will save and Wisdom as a tertiary stat or so.
Besides, the question in this case isn't "can a BSF avoid Disjunction as well as a CoDzilla?", but "can most BSFs avoid Disjunction as well as a CoDzilla?".

[Spuddles]

Eh, I wouldn't call it bad. There's probably a decent range of levels at which the damage is good and the fort saves are doable. I'd have to do some real numerical consideration to know for sure though, so I may be mistaken.

Just in Core, plant growth, spike stones, and protection from energy are all better spells, imo. Prot from energy is good at all levels, really.


I don't know if it's true of everyone, but I tend to put a high premium on reliable effectiveness on my spells, at least if I'm not a druid. Also, I don't see how being good in a specific situation, and not good in most other situations, makes a good sorcerer spell. You're not losing spell slots, but you're losing spells known, and that's probably more important. Fireball might be good on a sorcerer due to its spammability, but I wouldn't call relative versatility if my spells don't match the situation a benefit of the sorcerer, simply because wizards can prepare a variety of spells. I'd generally prefer orb of fire in either case, simply because the number of situations in which it's applicable exceeds that of some other spells.

Orb of Fire is nice, but you get it 8th level as a sorc, and it's not AoE damage. Plus there are other 4ths I'd rather have- blank tentacles, wings of flurry, assay spell resistance, polymorph, or solid fog.

Spell spamming is part of what makes sorcerers good. It's not that you have the perfect spell for the situation, and god help you if you face that same situation twice, but that for any given situation, you have 1.5 spells that will take care of it.

At 9th level, fireball, haste, and dispel magic is a pretty good suite of 3rd level spells. You're using alter self (or polymorph) to gain flight. Fireball takes care of situations with multiple, grouped targets at long range (like archer formations). Haste is good in any situation, so long as you have allies that make full attacks. It's particularly amazing vs. single target pile ups. Dispel magic helps vs. magic.

Though to be honest, I far prefer Shrink Item abuse.


Well, Word of Recall is standard issue for Clerics anyway, or at least should be. And the Druid can still sic the Animal Companion on them, Wildshape into something nasty, or spontaneously Summon Nature's Ally.

Run away, turn into an animal (which Druidzilla already is), or summon an animal. None of those are particularly threatening to most things that use Disjunction.


And a CR appropriate encounter is supposed to consume a quarter of your resources, so that line of arguing proves that Disjunction is never CR appropriate.

Eh, the CR system broke at level 2.


Tell me, how common are these Half-Minotaur Dragonborn Necropolitan fighter-types classes? I don't think "chosen of a Lawful Good deity" plays well with "volutarily became an undead" in most cases. And Half-Minotaur is it's own problem entirely. And eve if they purposely boost their save they still have a bad base Will save and Wisdom as a tertiary stat or so.
Besides, the question in this case isn't "can a BSF avoid Disjunction as well as a CoDzilla?", but "can most BSFs avoid Disjunction as well as a CoDzilla?".

CoDzilla is a very particular brand of mediocre divine caster build. I see no problem with comparing it to say, Eldariel's barbarian build. If every druid has natural spell and every cleric divine metamagic: persisted divine power, then what's the problem with melee picking up the half minotaur template?

[Urpriest]

I don't know what, exactly, you're getting at here.

I'm saying that your experience is completely anomalous. Encounters with 20+ combatants don't happen except with a small subset of DMs.

[Spuddles]

I'm saying that your experience is completely anomalous. Encounters with 20+ combatants don't happen except with a small subset of DMs.

On what are you basing this?

Genuinely curious.

[georgie_leech]

On what are you basing this?

Genuinely curious.

Inexperienced DM's are likely to stick to the Encounter guides that suggest that there are no levels where 20 extremely under-CR'ed opponents are an acceptable encounter, while Experienced DM's are likely to know there are better systems if you're trying to model mass combat.

[Urpriest]

Inexperienced DM's are likely to stick to the Encounter guides that suggest that there are no levels where 20 extremely under-CR'ed opponents are an acceptable encounter, while Experienced DM's are likely to know there are better systems if you're trying to model mass combat.

Yes, as I said earlier. Plus, who has the minis for that sort of fight?

[Alabenson]

In my experience, cloud spells are amazing. But my experience involves four or five PCs battling 20+ monsters, including 5 brutes at our ECL and a dozen or so archers, and a couple casters. They're incredible force multipliers because the caster can divide and conquer the battlefield while melee doesn't have to bother with more than a couple opponents at a time.

But in narrow hallways against a couple CR+2 foes that use magic or have ways to take actions to buff? They're underwhelming

I will admit that in mass combat situations, such as what you seem to indicate are commonplace in your games, the various cloud spells do tend to be extremely effective. Most of the games I've played in, however, have been closer to the other scenario you mentioned, with the party facing 3-5 opponents, and most of their damage being supplied by the melee.


I second Disintegrate. Sure sounds like a load of damage (2d6 per caster level, 40d6 cap), but I have NEVER had anyone fail their fort save. So it was always just 5d6 damage. Effectively worse then shocking grasp 6 spell levels earlier. At least shocking grasp gave a bonus vs targets wearing metal armor.

I can't say I agree with you on Disintegrate. While I'll admit it isn't the most omgwtfbbq powerful spell, it definitely has its uses. Not only is it extremely useful whenever you need to punch through a wall or other nonliving object, but it has the distinction of being one of the few spells that can target an Undead's Fort save.

[Manly Man]

Plus, who has the minis for that sort of fight?

I used to. The amount of pewter in my trunk was staggering.

[eggynack]

Just in Core, plant growth, spike stones, and protection from energy are all better spells, imo. Prot from energy is good at all levels, really.

I tend to like stone shape as well. Wind wall is nice on a druid, because druids do well with situational spells, and I think sleet storm has been mentioned. I don't know if poison is often the best option, but it might be a decent option sometimes. The other big druid blasting option at that level is call lightning, which seems to apply in very different circumstances.

[Spuddles]

Inexperienced DM's are likely to stick to the Encounter guides that suggest that there are no levels where 20 extremely under-CR'ed opponents are an acceptable encounter, while Experienced DM's are likely to know there are better systems if you're trying to model mass combat.


Yes, as I said earlier. Plus, who has the minis for that sort of fight?

So there's not any data for that? Just my experience vs. yours? I feel like I've played some modules with hordes of goblins in them, but those could have just been updated 1e or 2e adventure paths.

As for minis, I think a bunch of ours come from Warhammer or that Warhammer knock off. We're playing with stuff that's almost 30 years old, though.

Or my other DMs used whiteboard or grid paper.


I tend to like stone shape as well. Wind wall is nice on a druid, because druids do well with situational spells, and I think sleet storm has been mentioned. I don't know if poison is often the best option, but it might be a decent option sometimes. The other big druid blasting option at that level is call lightning, which seems to apply in very different circumstances.

I've never seen Poison used because it's such an overwhelmingly bad spell, I guess. It makes sense in a spell storing weapon, where there's little cost to putting it there. Especially if you were able to stick it in with a lesser rod of maximize.

Call Lighting is one of those spells that's bad on its own, but with a ring of mystic lighting, a rod of maximize, sculpt spell metamagic, and cloudburst spell, becomes really amazing.

[Rubik]

Polymorph is seriously overrated. People seem to think that you can turn into any creature of the types allowed in the spell of the caster's HD or lower, but that's not at all true.

Note that a Medium target can never turn into a hydra, since size-boosting effects don't stack.

No, not even then.

Not that it's not a great spell, but it's seriously limited.

Metamorphosis on the other hand...

[Spuddles]

Polymorph is seriously overrated. People seem to think that you can turn into any creature of the types allowed in the spell of the caster's HD or lower, but that's not at all true.

Note that a Medium target can never turn into a hydra, since size-boosting effects don't stack.

No, not even then.

Not that it's not a great spell, but it's seriously limited.

Metamorphosis on the other hand...

Ehhh, the hydra thing doesn't work, but War Troll & Firbolg are still available. The hydra thing with getting multiple attacks as a standard action doesn't work via polymorph, anyway, because it's not a special attack. It's probably a special quality, which polymorph explicitly does not grant.

If anything, hydra morph is grossly overrated.

[Ernir]

You don't get a chance to. You spend an hour looking up the saves for all your items, and the game ends early with everyone pissed off at you. Or you're super-organized like Tippy and it doesn't really matter because you've got better things to do with your time.
It takes 30 seconds to find the rule that "a magic item’s saving throw bonus equals 2 + one-half its caster level (round down)". If your character's Will save isn't higher than that at the levels you're encountering Disjunction, uhhh, yeaaaahh. This shouldn't take long to figure out.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Polymorph is seriously overrated. People seem to think that you can turn into any creature of the types allowed in the spell of the caster's HD or lower, but that's not at all true.

Note that a Medium target can never turn into a hydra, since size-boosting effects don't stack.

No, not even then.

Not that it's not a great spell, but it's seriously limited.

Metamorphosis on the other hand...All I'm seeing is "multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack." Polymorph is a single magical effect. If you polymorph yourself into a huge whatever, it's one magical effect that changes your size, so there's no stacking to consider.

And even if there's text I'm missing, I agree with Spuddles - it's really really good just with large forms. Also, if you have a weird type like outsider or aberration it gets even better.

[Urpriest]

It takes 30 seconds to find the rule that "a magic item’s saving throw bonus equals 2 + one-half its caster level (round down)". If your character's Will save isn't higher than that at the levels you're encountering Disjunction, uhhh, yeaaaahh. This shouldn't take long to figure out.

Eh, depends on level of optimization. There are lots of items that are CL 20 for essentially no good reason. It's still weak for a character who's actually thinking about buffing their Will save, but there should be a decent number of mid-range cases.

[Spuddles]

All I'm seeing is "multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack." Polymorph is a single magical effect. If you polymorph yourself into a huge whatever, it's one magical effect that changes your size, so there's no stacking to consider.

And even if there's text I'm missing, I agree with Spuddles - it's really really good just with large forms. Also, if you have a weird type like outsider or aberration it gets even better.

All hydras are Huge, and polymorph has size limitations inherited from alter self text.

[Rubik]

Ehhh, the hydra thing doesn't work, but War Troll & Firbolg are still available. The hydra thing with getting multiple attacks as a standard action doesn't work via polymorph, anyway, because it's not a special attack. It's probably a special quality, which polymorph explicitly does not grant.

If anything, hydra morph is grossly overrated.The ability to attack using multiple heads as a standard action is a natural ability (as it's not tagged in any way, and it's a function of its body shape, so it auto-defaults to natural) which you do get. Or you would, assuming you start out as Large, Huge, or Gargantuan.


All I'm seeing is "multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack." Polymorph is a single magical effect. If you polymorph yourself into a huge whatever, it's one magical effect that changes your size, so there's no stacking to consider.

And even if there's text I'm missing, I agree with Spuddles - it's really really good just with large forms. Also, if you have a weird type like outsider or aberration it gets even better.Check the text for Alter Self. Polymorph inherents everything from A.S. that it doesn't explicitly override, so...

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Ah, right, the whole "stacking" thing threw me off.

[Segev]

Even without the "no stacking" rule, the limit in Alter Self is based on your normal size.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

That is to say, the discussion of stacking was a red herring, and I forgot about the actual reason hydras don't work.

But Polymorph doesn't need huge creatures to rock about as hard as people say it does.

[Spuddles]

The ability to attack using multiple heads as a standard action is a natural ability (as it's not tagged in any way, and it's a function of its body shape, so it auto-defaults to natural) which you do get. Or you would, assuming you start out as Large, Huge, or Gargantuan.

Is that a Rules Compendium ruling, or what? Because the spell text has nothing on "natural abilities".

[Rubik]

That is to say, the discussion of stacking was a red herring, and I forgot about the actual reason hydras don't work.That does prevent you from utilizing Enlarge Person stacking or whatever. So, yeah.


But Polymorph doesn't need huge creatures to rock about as hard as people say it does.It's still a good reason why Polymorph is overrated, though.

Metamorphosis, however, is every bit as awesome as people think it is and more. If anything, it's probably underrated a bit. It's just that awesome.

[nyjastul69]

Never underestimate turning everything Purple...

Well, not everything. Only items in a 1ft cube per round. It'd be much more fun if it could color creatures. I'd choose blue personally. ;-)

[Manly Man]

Well, not everything. Only items in a 1ft cube per round. It'd be much more fun if it could color creatures. I'd choose blue personally. ;-)

Dammit, you've got that song stuck in my head. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68ugkg9RePc)

[LordBlades]

Polymorph is seriously overrated. People seem to think that you can turn into any creature of the types allowed in the spell of the caster's HD or lower, but that's not at all true.

Note that a Medium target can never turn into a hydra, since size-boosting effects don't stack.

No, not even then.

Not that it's not a great spell, but it's seriously limited.

Metamorphosis on the other hand...

It's debatable whether Polymorph can be considered a size altering effect or not, since it doesn't change your size based on your current size (like every other single size altering effect stated as such) but rather sets a new size regardless of the previous one. Seen arguments both ways and rules aren't 100% clear. Regardless, as it's been said, Polymorph is good enough with large creatures.

[Spuddles]

It's debatable whether Polymorph can be considered a size altering effect or not, since it doesn't change your size based on your current size (like every other single size altering effect stated as such) but rather sets a new size regardless of the previous one. Seen arguments both ways and rules aren't 100% clear. Regardless, as it's been said, Polymorph is good enough with large creatures.

Is polymorph magical?

Does it affect your size?

Seems pretty straight forward to me....

[Rubik]

It's debatable whether Polymorph can be considered a size altering effect or not, since it doesn't change your size based on your current size (like every other single size altering effect stated as such) but rather sets a new size regardless of the previous one. Seen arguments both ways and rules aren't 100% clear. Regardless, as it's been said, Polymorph is good enough with large creatures.Except that according to Alter Self, it does depend on your size. Otherwise it wouldn't inherit that clause that states that you can change your size by one in either direction.

That sounds like it's based on your size to me.

[Petrocorus]

Fireball is an iconic spell for wizard mostly due to fluff, not to actual power. And because it was more used and relatively more powerful in previous editions, when there were less spells and some of them had drawbacks (like haste).
I don't think it's a weak spell, but a very situational spell, very good for dealing with a lot of mooks.



Well, Word of Recall is standard issue for Clerics anyway, or at least should be.

I was just thinking about this spell and the fact that Malack seemed to forget about it.

[Sith_Happens]

I was just thinking about this spell and the fact that Malack seemed to forget about it.

That's been discussed to death over in the comic subforum. Even if he had Word of Recall prepared, he couldn't have casted it:


Exposing any vampire to direct sunlight disorients it: It can take only a single move action or attack action and is destroyed utterly in the next round if it cannot escape.

Slay Living is close enough to an attack to get rules-lawyered in so we could see that Nale was oddly well-prepared for this, while Word of Recall most definitely isn't.

[Incanur]

Except that... by the time you're level 17, solars are kind of a joke.

If they just make attack roles or cast weak spells, sure. But at a minimum you're getting access to a wish and miracle for 1k XP. That's a good deal.

And solars are only the beginning. Outside of core you can potentially call ridiculous epic monsters and/or extraplanar great wryms.

[LordBlades]

Is polymorph magical?

Does it affect your size?

Seems pretty straight forward to me....

On the other hand, every single spell, power or ability that I can remember that explicitly alters your size (Enlarge Person, Reduce Person, Expnasion, Righteous Might, Animal Growth etc.) contains the phrase 'Multiple magical effects that increase(reduce) size do not stack'. Polymorph/Alter Self lack it. Which might or might not indicate designer intent that the rule doesn't apply to these spells. Also, spell descriptions are the only place where that rule explicitly appears to my knowledge. Having to (know that you should) reference another completely unrelated spell to apply a rule to Polymorph is a bit over the top (and an unique case in D&D rules). For me, it's one of the things that falls firmly in the 'ask your DM' territory.



That's been discussed to death over in the comic subforum. Even if he had Word of Recall prepared, he couldn't have casted it:



Slay Living is close enough to an attack to get rules-lawyered in so we could see that Nale was oddly well-prepared for this, while Word of Recall most definitely isn't.

The phrasing in the SRD (taken straight from the MM) is a bit weird, since 'attack action' isn't specifically defined anywhere in the rules (or if it is I couldn't find it). Which raises a ton of questions:

Can you make an attack in an attack action?
Can you make an attack that takes more than a standard action, like a Monk's Decisive Strike or a Fighter's Overwhelming Attack?
Can you use a spell/power/ability that requires an attack roll, like Scorching Ray or Slay Living?
Can you use a targeted spell or ability that requires no attack roll, like Finger of Death?

[RustyArmor]

Would have to throw my vote for just about any evocation spell. Not saying they are all terrible but save the damage for the fighter types that can do it at will.

[Incanur]

Not being able to do the hydra trick some folks talk about hardly makes polymorph any less broken. At worst, it's still nuts utility in a single spell slot starting at level 7.

[eggynack]

Would have to throw my vote for just about any evocation spell. Not saying they are all terrible but save the damage for the fighter types that can do it at will.
Well, except for all the non-direct damage evocation spells. Some of those are still good. There's a decent number, like contingency, resilient sphere, wind wall, and even howling chain, despite the apparent opinion that it's overrated. Also, seeking ray is kinda nifty before scorching ray improves.

[Spuddles]

There are some pretty spectacular non-wizard evocations, too, like Wings of Flurry or Holy Word.

[nedz]

Yes, as I said earlier. Plus, who has the minis for that sort of fight?
I do.

I'm saying that your experience is completely anomalous. Encounters with 20+ combatants don't happen except with a small subset of DMs.
I run a wide variety of encounters and sometimes I throw a horde at the party — not very often but it does happen. I do this because it's fun, on occasion.

Besides I don't always have a choice: if the party decide to go and wipe out a entire goblin tribe or something then I have to run that in some manner — it's not always worth running the combat, in which case I hand-wave it, but sometimes it is.

[eggynack]

I run a wide variety of encounters and sometimes I throw a horde at the party — not very often but it does happen. I do this because it's fun, on occasion.

Besides I don't always have a choice: if the party decide to go and wipe out a entire goblin tribe or something then I have to run that in some manner — it's not always worth running the combat, in which case I hand-wave it, but sometimes it is.
It's not actually a matter of whether you run these encounters at all as it is the frequency of these encounters. Sure, if the PC's know that they're going to be killing a goblin horde, they might want to prepare something like a fireball, but let's assume for a moment that this is an encounter that you're initiating, and that they know nothing about. Based on the percentage of adventuring days where you send a horde of enemies at your party, is preparing fireball a viable tactic? If they're facing these types of encounters on a daily basis, fireball seems somewhat reasonable, but if they're only facing them on 10% of all adventuring days, the chance that my fireball will have anything approaching maximum utility is massively limited.

Meanwhile, I believe that there are other spells that are good against hordes, and are also good against non-hordes. What if the wizard uses something like stinking cloud instead? That's a spell that is fantastic at disabling and separating a group of goblins, and is similarly fantastic at shutting down a single enemy to some extent. Not quite as much, but if you can keep the enemy in the cloud long enough for him to fail a save, the party is going to win. Maybe instead of stinking cloud you can use something like sleet storm, which is better at unconditional control to some extent, or you can skip battlefield control altogether and use haste. That spell's going to be applicable in far more situations than fireball. It's not about the idea that there can be this kind of encounter. It's about the probabilistic chance that there will be this kind of encounter.

[nedz]

Oh, at no point was I arguing that Fireball is a good spell, just that Ur-Priest's assertion was a bit over generalised.

Personally I don't run hordes very often because done badly they can be very tedious, and even done well they can get old quite fast, though this does apply to any type of encounter — It's mainly a low level thing anyway.

One thing about Fireball that is overlooked it that it has Long range, which makes it quite useful in ship to ship encounters etc. I think that it's a reasonable spell for a level 5-8 wizard to carry, though there are many which are better. It's best use though is for clearing Webs.

[137beth]

Debuffs which are negated completely by a saving throw.

In general, I prefer spells which either always have an effect, or have an effect unless I miss a ranged touch attack (which basically means that I rolled a natural 1-2). If the spell allows a saving throw, I'd prefer it have a partial effect on a save.
But, when it comes to spells which are negated by a save, the issue is that there are SoD spells at almost every level. At first level, we get Color Spray, a mass SoD for those levels. There continue to be SoD spells at every level all the way up to wail of the banshee/implosion. So if the spell is negated by a save, the effect it has better be pretty darn impressive, and the effect a spell like that is competing with is "instantly win the fight." So if they need to fail a save for it to have any effect, and the effect is not "instantly win the fight", then I am underwhelmed by the spell in question.

The thing is, I love debuffing, it's my favorite kind of in-combat casting. But why would I want to cast Bestow Curse when I could just cast Rainbow Pattern or Fear and end the fight right away? Heck, Fear still does something on a successful save, so why wouldn't I just do that?

EDIT: On the topic of Fireball: in Munchkin D20 there was a "munchkin domain" for clerics which gave fireball as a 1st level domain spell, which could actually make it decent at mid levels with metamagic...also, it could be nice at low levels because the granted power for that domain was "+1 to everything, all the time, whenever you could possibly find it useful", and it would be useful for that +1 to apply to caster levels, so it makes it suck less at low levels when an extra 1d6 damage makes a difference.

[Vedhin]

The thing is, I love debuffing, it's my favorite kind of in-combat casting. But why would I want to cast Bestow Curse when I could just cast Rainbow Pattern or Fear and end the fight right away? Heck, Fear still does something on a successful save, so why wouldn't I just do that?

Bestow Curse can still hit things immune to mind-affecting spells. But there are probably non-core SoDs/SoLs that do that too.



EDIT: On the topic of Fireball: in Munchkin D20 there was a "munchkin domain" for clerics which gave fireball as a 1st level domain spell, which could actually make it decent at mid levels with metamagic...also, it could be nice at low levels because the granted power for that domain was "+1 to everything, all the time, whenever you could possibly find it useful", and it would be useful for that +1 to apply to caster levels, so it makes it suck less at low levels when an extra 1d6 damage makes a difference.

How about +1 to the binary value of "Have I won D&D?"?

[Incanur]

I've definitely run a few swarm-o-mooks encounters. In one case, tons of kobolds with acid vials ambushed the party. They did quite a bit of damage before the party sorcerer killed them all with a single area blast. Fireball and company are pretty bad in most dungeon crawls but pretty good in long-range encounters against many weaker opponents.

[Aharon]

I actually find the Planar Binding line overrated. The neccessary spells (Circle of Protection + LPB) are very badly worded, which is often ignored; the usual assumption seems to be that the most favorable interpretation should be used. By actual RAW, it would be a lot less useful, IMO.

[erikun]

I'm saying that your experience is completely anomalous. Encounters with 20+ combatants don't happen except with a small subset of DMs.
I'm had encounters that big (larger, actually) because everyone else at my table insists on using D&D rather than any other system. Also, fights like that tend to be session-enders, because it does take a long time (even properly organized) and because everyone is done for the evening once it's over.

As for figures, that's when you dig out the pocketful of pennies.

[eggynack]

Y'know, all of this discussion of fireball potentially having a couple of corner uses on a very rare basis might mean that it's a good spell to scroll. You're usually not going to face a horde of goblins, but you might, and then it's time for a fireball.

[137beth]

Y'know, all of this discussion of fireball potentially having a couple of corner uses on a very rare basis might mean that it's a good spell to scroll. You're usually not going to face a horde of goblins, but you might, and then it's time for a fireball.

Agreed, it definitely isn't worth learning for a sorcerer, or preparing very often for a wizard, but it is good scroll material. For a prepared caster, it can also be nice if the plot indicates a mass combat is coming ("an army of thousands of orcs are attacking!")

[erikun]

The problem with a scroll is that, unless you pay more gold, it is going to be the minimum spell level needed to cast it. It also doesn't scale with level, and uses the minimum ability score needed. 10d6 might be good against a bunch of mooks from a 10th level wizard with 20 INT at that level, but 5d6 with save DC 14 isn't.

[eggynack]

The problem with a scroll is that, unless you pay more gold, it is going to be the minimum spell level needed to cast it. It also doesn't scale with level, and uses the minimum ability score needed. 10d6 might be good against a bunch of mooks from a 10th level wizard with 20 INT at that level, but 5d6 with save DC 14 isn't.
I hadn't considered that. As usual, you'd probably be better off with a scroll of stinking cloud of some kind, and then you should probably just prepare stinking cloud, because that spell is pretty great.

[Torathir22]

Sneaking from experience, you can have games where you regularly have the chance to run into hordes of enemies. Admittedly the normal response for the party was to flee, but when we had to fight, a pair of fireballs generally made things much easier for the party. The Mines of Madness module that's included in the Next beta has plenty of places where you can run into a horde of enemies.

[Spuddles]

The problem with a scroll is that, unless you pay more gold, it is going to be the minimum spell level needed to cast it. It also doesn't scale with level, and uses the minimum ability score needed. 10d6 might be good against a bunch of mooks from a 10th level wizard with 20 INT at that level, but 5d6 with save DC 14 isn't.

That's my thinking.

Fireball is actually one of those spells that's better on a wizard than a sorc if you find AoE being a corner case in your games. It's in the book, and you probably only need one or two in an encounter. If you can get away with arcane eye/scrying/other scouting methods to inform you of what to prep, a couple 3rd level slots at level 10 isn't so bad. Even better with a lesser rod of empower, because empower is so good on a lesser rod.

I know running Against the Giants, Fireball is not a corner case, not even a little bit.


I hadn't considered that. As usual, you'd probably be better off with a scroll of stinking cloud of some kind, and then you should probably just prepare stinking cloud, because that spell is pretty great.

My biggest issue with spells like web, entangle, stinking cloud, and black tentacles is one of gameplay- it slows big battles down even more than they usually go. All those rolls, keeping track of who saved, who didn't, how many rounds of nausea which monster has.

Mechanically they're almost unparalleled, for the levels you get them, with that I don't disagree.

[eggynack]

My biggest issue with spells like web, entangle, stinking cloud, and black tentacles is one of gameplay- it slows big battles down even more than they usually go. All those rolls, keeping track of who saved, who didn't, how many rounds of nausea which monster has.

Mechanically they're almost unparalleled, for the levels you get them, with that I don't disagree.
That's why you cast freezing fog instead. At 1d6 damage per turn, it's almost like the enemies are racing to the finish line of death. Anyway, I've actually always liked battlefield control and summoning, partially separate from their power level as spells. There's just a lot of tactical usage there. I can see why folks who aren't me might not like it when a fight has its winner decided on the first round, and has the enemies die on the tenth round though.