PDA

View Full Version : High magic



Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 01:42 AM
When a party hits 8th level or so, they leave the world of the mundane. The fighters have magic equipment, the casters have high level evocation and nifty transport spells, which, imo, are hallmarks of high level magic. The ability to bend space and inflict massive devastation pretty much blows everything out of the water, in terms of realism.

The whole campaign world may be a low magic setting– workers aren't dimension dooring their way to the Tenser Train. Which is fine. Common magic makes things needlessly complicated, like managing the verisimilitude of social stratification and economies in what is presumably a feudal pseudo-europe.

(Enterprising sorcerors would use their spells to summon unseen servants– performing the work of 4 laborers would be a more lucrative feat than putting things to sleep, especially if you weren't particularly interested in a soldiering life.)

But this means that the PCs aren't interested in the vast majority of creatures in the world. Well, perhaps they are, as they are trying to save the world, but their energies are directed at a few more powerful, magical, and/or extraordinary individuals. Which means that the NPCs are most likely going to be outsiders, elementals, or high level creatures. Things that aren't powerful will be of little use or threat to the PCs.

What does this imply?
The PCs' world, as they gain in power, necessarily becomes high magic. Which means for any campaign that gets to mid levels, the PCs exit the realm of reality, and enter a place where magic and the ridiculous are common place.

Wizards, if given preparation and foreknowledge of a situation, tear everything up. Or down. Or really however they Wish. But at 18th level, the creatures that a party is engaging will certainly be aware of the power of wizards. Hell, most of the time, they're some sort of magic beast themselves/ Every fighter on the material plane is going to be wearing items that cast AMFs.

I posit that wizards and other casters aren't nearly as powerful as everyone in the gaming community makes them out to be– unless you play your NPCs as naive denizens who haven't ever heard of magic, or simply ignored it over the course of their 100s of years of magical, extraplanar existence. In essence, at higher levels, casters will cancel each other our. Individuals and parties will outfit themselves with antimagic and protective sorts of items, and the damage will be left to fighters.

Those 100 rampaging goblins may not be able to scrounge enough resources to afford a single ioun stone to absorb spells, and for a 25 CR encounter (yeah, right), they sure get cleaned up by fireballs. But you know who cares about 100 rampaging goblins? Commoners, paladins and apprentice wizards. Certainly not the level 15 party trying to save the world from demonic corruption.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 01:49 AM
So, what you're saying is that wizards aren't that powerful because of... other wizards.

And because... every enemy will have an antimagic field item.


...

...

Um. Yeah. 'Kay.

Halcyon_Dax
2007-01-06, 01:52 AM
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOUR POINT IS?!?!

Somehow, I did enjoy your post?

Yeah, well there you go. Good stuff. I agree that wizards arent as powerful as they are made out to be (though they are DAMN powerful).

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 02:03 AM
So, what you're saying is that wizards aren't that powerful because of... other wizards.

And because... every enemy will have an antimagic field item.


...

...

Um. Yeah. 'Kay.

Virtually, yes.

A party of wizards is going to get trumped by a single fighter with any item that can hold off magic for 60 seconds.

In a reality where magic's paramount, it will be every creature's imperative to protect itself from magic.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 02:07 AM
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOUR POINT IS?!?!

Somehow, I did enjoy your post?

Yeah, well there you go. Good stuff. I agree that wizards arent as powerful as they are made out to be (though they are DAMN powerful).

I'm saying that if your campaign world has any modicum of coherency, wizards' power will be severly limited because at high levels (when wizards become powerful), as any potential threats to a wizard will likewise have defenses against wizards!

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 02:08 AM
Right.

Except for the fact that the wizards can stay out of reach far more easily, since a fighter in an AMF can't fly, and can just fire instantaneous conjurations, which don't care about AMFs. Or drop rocks from a Bag of Holding. Or just shoot about a thousand bolts from a crossbow. Or wait for the AMF to run out.

It's easy to say "have defenses against wizards". It's much more difficult to actually do so.

purple gelatinous cube o' Doom
2007-01-06, 02:12 AM
well, unless potential threats have all phenominal saves and DR of every type, not everything is wizard proof. For example, if a creature doesn't have a great reflex save, throw a fireball or a blade barrier at it. Or use flame strike on a severed hydra head so it doesn't come back. My point is that nothing is totally wizard proof, you just have to know the weakness of what you're fighting.

oriong
2007-01-06, 02:16 AM
Unfortunately, the AMF has never been a very good plan. It is actually very well illustrated in your post. All fighters have magic, tons of gear, etc, because these things are necessary when facing enemies of that level. What antimagic feild does is completely cut a figher off from this equipment, in exchange for providing protection against direct magic. Unfortunately, this means that the fighter is restricted from ANY magic, while their spellcasting opponent is restricted from SOME magic, and since magic is very important at high levels, all you've done is screw yourself unless you are certain of your opponent's arsenal.

Far more useful is an object of spell resistance of a suitably high level. Even if it only works 25% of the time that's a 25% miss chance against magic, in exchange for a relatively much smaller penalty.

now, I do agree that the power of wizards and other spellcasters is much exaggerated, mostly because far too many people are of the attitude "a wizard can beat a fighter in a one-on-one duel, therefore the wizard is better"

Emperor Tippy
2007-01-06, 02:17 AM
Not to mention all the ways to defeat AMF's. Many of the Force line of spells ignore it or work inside of it. You cast TK Sphere on the guy with the AMF and float him up as high as you can. Then you dismiss the sphere. The Fighter falls down and thanks to his AMF item he can't turn on fly or anything else. How often can he take 20d6 falling damage? Or better yet you raise him and cast a prismatic wall underneath the sphere, which you then dismiss. AMF does not affect a prismatic wall and one of those is almost guaranteed to end a fighter. But just in case you add a second one below it.

Wizards win. At high levels AMF is at most an inconvenience and at best is actually helpful. Disjunction+Timestop+Cloudkill+Forcecage wins any fight where the target can't use magic of his own. Maybe throw in a dimensional anchor as well to be extra safe.

oriong
2007-01-06, 02:23 AM
Wizards win. At high levels AMF is at most an inconvenience and at best is actually helpful. Disjunction+Timestop+Cloudkill+Forcecage wins any fight where the target can't use magic of his own. Maybe throw in a dimensional anchor as well to be extra safe.

Well, that's not true at all, but most fights against fighters. But, that's really still not that big an issue. Duel results do not equal game balance.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 02:25 AM
now, I do agree that the power of wizards and other spellcasters is much exaggerated, mostly because far too many people are of the attitude "a wizard can beat a fighter in a one-on-one duel, therefore the wizard is better"

No, a wizard is better because he can contirbute far, far more in any encounter that doesn't take place inside a dead magic zone than the fighter. Also because he can do anything.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 02:34 AM
Right.

Except for the fact that the wizards can stay out of reach far more easily, since a fighter in an AMF can't fly, and can just fire instantaneous conjurations, which don't care about AMFs. Or drop rocks from a Bag of Holding. Or just shoot about a thousand bolts from a crossbow. Or wait for the AMF to run out.

It's easy to say "have defenses against wizards". It's much more difficult to actually do so.

Boots of flying+grapple+AMF. They all fall down. Or a cape of mountebank. A flying mount. A potion of fly. Single use items of DD. Characters are rolling in so much gold at higher levels, a fighter can easily get his mobility up to that of a wizard, temporarily. How many blasts does it take to kill a fighter? How many chops to kill a wizard?

I imagine that virtually every nonmagic character (that is, without a full caster progression) will, at higher levels, have a contigency plan for encounters with full casters, including fleeings.

If I was a monster with a big bag of loot, I'd put a few poison coins in there. Maybe some disease, too. Wizard shows up, I take off and leave my phat pot o' poisoned gold. Let's see how many fort saves he can pass!

Granted, a wizard greeting the day fresh faced and dewey-eyed, his full compliment of anti-fighter spells ready to go, will have a much greater chance of winning. But scrolls are more expensive that potion. The wizard wears out quicker. But only a fool would enter an arena situation against a well prepared wizard.

oriong
2007-01-06, 02:34 AM
No, a wizard is better because he can contirbute far, far more in any encounter that doesn't take place inside a dead magic zone than the fighter. Also because he can do anything.

Not true. Obviously the wizard can't do anything so I won't even bother to get into that.

As for the 'contribute more' claim this is only true in certain situations, in other situations it is the exact opposite. I will agree that the wizard will outshine the fighter (mostly because any straightforward fighter is a bad choice, and because they simply aren't that good a class after low-mid levels, but the difference is not nearly as significant as it's made out to be. A wizard is excellent in situations where preparation is possible and works to his advantage. The wizard is weak when the situation is one he is not prepared for, as time goes on when he becomes low on spells, or when his preparation is used against him, or when placed in a situation where his weakness can be used against him (melee, creatures highly magic resistance, against excellent saves, even the occasional dead or antimagic zone).

Of course, far more powerful than either is the fighter and wizard working together.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 02:38 AM
Unfortunately, the AMF has never been a very good plan. It is actually very well illustrated in your post. All fighters have magic, tons of gear, etc, because these things are necessary when facing enemies of that level. What antimagic feild does is completely cut a figher off from this equipment, in exchange for providing protection against direct magic. Unfortunately, this means that the fighter is restricted from ANY magic, while their spellcasting opponent is restricted from SOME magic, and since magic is very important at high levels, all you've done is screw yourself unless you are certain of your opponent's arsenal.

Far more useful is an object of spell resistance of a suitably high level. Even if it only works 25% of the time that's a 25% miss chance against magic, in exchange for a relatively much smaller penalty.

now, I do agree that the power of wizards and other spellcasters is much exaggerated, mostly because far too many people are of the attitude "a wizard can beat a fighter in a one-on-one duel, therefore the wizard is better"

AMF as use activated. A wizard is only a high level adept inside a AMF. You still have a pointy stick.
Or throw it at him.
Tanglefoot bag with a use activated AMF, a net with an AMF on it, arrows of AMF....

oriong
2007-01-06, 02:38 AM
Boots of flying+grapple+AMF. They all fall down. Or a cape of mountebank. A flying mount. A potion of fly. Single use items of DD. Characters are rolling in so much gold at higher levels, a fighter can easily get his mobility up to that of a wizard, temporarily. How many blasts does it take to kill a fighter? How many chops to kill a wizard?

None of those really work either, dimension door doesn't let you attack after you go through, and unless you start out in melee range you'll never fly fast enough to catch up to a wizard to grapple him (especially if he wins initiative when he just dimenion doors away), in theory a flying mount could help, but unless it's very fast and very resilient it's much more of a target than an ally.


But scrolls are more expensive that potion. The wizard wears out quicker. But only a fool would enter an arena situation against a well prepared wizard.actually scrolls are cheaper than potions. half the cost.


AMF as use activated. A wizard is only a high level adept inside a AMF. You still have a pointy stick.
Or throw it at him.
Tanglefoot bag with a use activated AMF, a net with an AMF on it, arrows of AMF....

You assume he's in the field, which is a bad assumption. Also, use activated means it'll be always on, which means you die from anything other than a wizard, or a wizard who is outside the field (for reasons pointed out already).

The tanglefoot bag and net both have tiny range, so you'd better win initiative (someone will bring up moment of presience I'm sure), but both interesting ideas though.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 02:41 AM
Boots of flying+grapple+AMF. They all fall down. Or a cape of mountebank. A flying mount. A potion of fly. Single use items of DD. Characters are rolling in so much gold at higher levels, a fighter can easily get his mobility up to that of a wizard, temporarily. How many blasts does it take to kill a fighter? How many chops to kill a wizard?

You're going to activate the AMF after you reach the wizard and grapple? Then the wizard(s) can kill you before you get to them. If you're flying, you have no AMF. If you have an AMF, you're not flying, unless you have natural flight (which will generally be slower than magical flight; this doesn't apply to things like, oh, dragons).

Nonmagical characters can plan all they want, but they just plain don't have as many options as casters do. Even if you allow whatever custom items people want, casters will benefit from that just as much as fighters. Casters have a bewildering array of offensive and defensive options. A useful generic list will let a wizard take on lots of different things, and since encounters can often be ended in two to four spells, the wizard will can last for a number of encounters. When he runs out of spells, he generally rests in magical safety.

Edit: an item of use-activated AMF costs 6*11*2000*1.5 = 198,000 gp.
And... everyone has one? Mm-hmm. Arrows of AMF can simply be plucked out and moved away from, good luck hitting anything far away with a net or tanglefoot back of AMF.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 02:54 AM
None of those really work either, dimension door doesn't let you attack after you go through, and unless you start out in melee range you'll never fly fast enough to catch up to a wizard to grapple him (especially if he wins initiative when he just dimenion doors away), in theory a flying mount could help, but unless it's very fast and very resilient it's much more of a target than an ally.

Forgot about not being able to do anything after you DD. Eh, just DD ontop of him for falling damage. Spiked boots. :)

Windwalk is faster than fly.


actually scrolls are cheaper than potions. half the cost.

I meant that a high level spell that has a chance to hurt a high level fighter-type will cost thousands of gold. A potion of cure costs considerably less (700 for serious). Wizard shows up, wastes spells on fighter. Fighter escapes, drinks potions, back in the fight. Wizard reduced to casting from scrolls. Scroll costs grow exponentially. If you want a chance of hitting anything with a fireball scroll, you're going to have to scribe it as a 10th level character, not a fifth. That increases the cost by a factor of 5.


But this is all digression.
I don't mean this as a single fighter vs a single wizard, without multiclassing, in a duel. That's silly. And it really isn't that great of a campaign, either.

Monsters with wealth and intelligence scores are going to have items that mitigate the effects of magic. Wizards aren't the zomg pwnzr! machines if, as a DM, you take a little time to flesh your world out.
Giants from other planes, for instance, aren't just sitting around with a bag of gold waiting for a wizard to cast a save or die spell on them. And they're pretty old. Bet you wizened men in pointy hats and robes have showed up before, trying to take their stuff. Bet you they got anti wizard plans.

Unless of course, you enjoy seeing wizards do everything.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 03:02 AM
You're going to activate the AMF after you reach the wizard and grapple? Then the wizard(s) can kill you before you get to them. If you're flying, you have no AMF. If you have an AMF, you're not flying, unless you have natural flight (which will generally be slower than magical flight; this doesn't apply to things like, oh, dragons).

Get to him and turn it on next to him. Magic goes off, both of you fall. A fighter can take a tumble. Can the wizard?


Nonmagical characters can plan all they want, but they just plain don't have as many options as casters do. Even if you allow whatever custom items people want, casters will benefit from that just as much as fighters.

True.


Edit: an item of use-activated AMF costs 6*11*2000*1.5 = 198,000 gp.
And... everyone has one? Mm-hmm. Arrows of AMF can simply be plucked out and moved away from, good luck hitting anything far away with a net or tanglefoot back of AMF.

Not anyone.
The level 19 BBEG?
Certainly.
Dragons?
Definitely.


And AMF isn't all there is. Items that absorb spells, items that cast dimensional anchor, or grant SR would all be common, as well as items used to hide from magic or escape until the mage is gone would also be present.

Even through natural selection, one would expect creatures that have energy and spell resistance to become more common. Common in the "everything the PCs are encountering are high level" sense.

Rockphed
2007-01-06, 03:51 AM
Wizards win. At high levels AMF is at most an inconvenience and at best is actually helpful. Disjunction+Timestop+Cloudkill+Forcecage wins any fight where the target can't use magic of his own. Maybe throw in a dimensional anchor as well to be extra safe.

Hmmm, at 20th level, a 1 in five chance of dispelling the anti-magic feild? For force cage to work, you need to be within about 75 feet, and it can't work in the anti-magic field, so how does that work? Cloudkill + Timestop + ForceCage would work, if there were no anti-magic field, but you have 115 feet, max between you and the feild's center, and nothing stops the fighter from just readying an arrow to shoot you if you cast a spell. Without scrolls, a 20th level abjuror can cast Disjunction 5 times a day. So the wizard has just used up all his 9th level spells on the 1st encounter of the day, when there is a giant evil villian plotting to kill the universe if you don't destroy him in 5 hours. Great planning. Great Versatility. Don't you just love the party wizard for plotting to destroy you like that.

SR 20 costs about 70 k, 30 costs 170 k, and can be purchased by a lvl 19 character. Though the one won't stop a lvl 20 caster, the 30 one will stop him half the time, and it is possible to raise the SR a bit and still be within the limit.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 04:36 AM
Not this... Argument... Again... *twitch*

EDIT:

It all comes down to this.

Wizard can contribute much more due to his versatility. Fighter migth be excellent when he gets to melee but when the dragon starts using his fly by attacks, fighter can't do that. There is a lot of enemies to which the same applies. Wizard has save or dies, save or sucks, save or loses and the belowed "no save, lose", such as forcecage combined with effects denying the target from teleporting.

HOWEVER. If you don't think that wizards are overpowered, it means that
a) Your DM nerfs them or puts stuff like antimagic fields all the time
b) Your wizard's player plays them far less effectively than he could, either intentionally or nor

Whichever is the case, it obiously doesn't matter to you so no need to participate this argument, which has been done weekly.

Skyserpent
2007-01-06, 04:48 AM
Well, there was this one cadre of apprentice Wizards who had gotten ahold of this thing called Cannabis... Dude... Color Spray... DUDE!

okay not what you meant... and darn...

But yeah, I dunno, high-magic usually means the DM doesn't pay attention to Wealth By Level... That was fun, level 8 PC getting ahold of +3 Mithral Full Plate of Speed is always fun...

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 04:56 AM
Hmmm, at 20th level, a 1 in five chance of dispelling the anti-magic feild? For force cage to work, you need to be within about 75 feet, and it can't work in the anti-magic field, so how does that work? Cloudkill + Timestop + ForceCage would work, if there were no anti-magic field, but you have 115 feet, max between you and the feild's center, and nothing stops the fighter from just readying an arrow to shoot you if you cast a spell. Without scrolls, a 20th level abjuror can cast Disjunction 5 times a day. So the wizard has just used up all his 9th level spells on the 1st encounter of the day, when there is a giant evil villian plotting to kill the universe if you don't destroy him in 5 hours. Great planning. Great Versatility. Don't you just love the party wizard for plotting to destroy you like that.

SR 20 costs about 70 k, 30 costs 170 k, and can be purchased by a lvl 19 character. Though the one won't stop a lvl 20 caster, the 30 one will stop him half the time, and it is possible to raise the SR a bit and still be within the limit.


Maximized empowered shivering touch + Ray of exhaustion disables any fighter with less than 29 dex. (Use with archmage's reach spell)

SR? At that level, wizard has casterlevel 20 from levels, +1 from item so +21 to overcome SR. Adding spell penetration is not far fetched so +23. Now, complete arcane feat to take 10 on casterlevel checks means he automatically punches through any SR under 34. If he can't punch through opponent's SR and opponent is decent in melee, it is propably a boss fight so single use items (+4 on casterlevel) seem reasonable to be used. If target has more SR than 38, wizard could just say "aww... I have to waste a spell slot..." and get assay spell resistance (it adds +10 to this, if I remember correctly). If opponents with higher sr than 48 are common, I would take even greater spell penetration. If enemies have higher SR than 50, you have a point there. Then wizard will simply be restricted to empowered orbs of <element> changed to sonic, dealing 22d6 of damage to which opponent is not resistant...

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 04:58 AM
Something tells me a wizard who is out adventuring won't be 100% prepared for any given situation 100% of the time, nor will they always be aware of it, nor will they have the convenience of little things like "space" to fly around as they please.

This argument's been done to death, but I generally agree that wizards are made to look far better than they really are. Are wizards powerful? You bet. Are they unbeatable? Hardly. And if it takes another wizard to do it so what? Another wizard taking up your wizard's attention still means that the fighter with a pointy stick is a real threat to you. That's what your own fighter is for. Keeping the other fighter out of range of your soft, defenseless flesh.

Bouldering Jove
2007-01-06, 05:22 AM
Wow, I've only been lurking for two weeks and I'm already tired of this.

Briefly: The most effective way to beat a spellcaster is to pitch enough waves of enemies at them that they'll eventually run out of spells. They will still handle those waves of enemies more effectively than a melee type would, and the process is so boring and obviously anti-caster that who would actually want to play it as anything but a strategic exercise in spell economy?

ZekeArgo
2007-01-06, 05:29 AM
Something tells me a wizard who is out adventuring won't be 100% prepared for any given situation 100% of the time, nor will they always be aware of it, nor will they have the convenience of little things like "space" to fly around as they please.

This argument's been done to death, but I generally agree that wizards are made to look far better than they really are. Are wizards powerful? You bet. Are they unbeatable? Hardly. And if it takes another wizard to do it so what? Another wizard taking up your wizard's attention still means that the fighter with a pointy stick is a real threat to you. That's what your own fighter is for. Keeping the other fighter out of range of your soft, defenseless flesh.



This is laughable. If it takes another wizard to beat a wizard so what? That means *wizards* are more powerful.

Also, a wizard of high level in the field has access one really good, but overlooked thing by most people: Divination. Use those high-level divinations to find out what spells you'll need to prepare that day, and your good.

And if *that* isn't good enough for you, check out the Complete Arcane and pickup a Thought Bottle or five. Unless there has been some serious errata its over, all contingencies are planned for and you just don't run out of spells.

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 05:42 AM
This is laughable. If it takes another wizard to beat a wizard so what? That means *wizards* are more powerful.

Also, a wizard of high level in the field has access one really good, but overlooked thing by most people: Divination. Use those high-level divinations to find out what spells you'll need to prepare that day, and your good.

And if *that* isn't good enough for you, check out the Complete Arcane and pickup a Thought Bottle or five. Unless there has been some serious errata its over, all contingencies are planned for and you just don't run out of spells.

Where in my post did I say a Wizard wasn't more powerful than a Fighter? I've never, ever made that argument. I simply said that the Fighter has its use, and that the Wizard isn't always going to be prepared for every little thing, even at higher levels. Any DM worth his salt knows some way to throw a wrench in the Wizard's plans, even if that wrench is another Wizard. Anything the PCs can do the DM can do too.

Divination is hardly infallible. Say you're scrying and somebody else catches you. Then they're fully prepared to one-up you.

People always go into these highly theoretical "best case scenario" forumlas, but it simply isn't the case. There are any number of ways to cripple a wizard or lessen his effectiveness. Wizards are far from all-powerful, although they could probably stand to be nerfed considerably whenever 4.0 comes out.

Matthew
2007-01-06, 05:51 AM
Arrows of Dispelling could solve so many problems... or maybe Arrows of Wizard Slaying...

Shazzbaa
2007-01-06, 06:15 AM
*laughs* I'm with Bouldering Jove. It's amazing how fast I feel like I've heard this a million times. ^^;

I don't understand why people constantly feel the need to prove that the classes are balanced, or that the fighter can beat the wizard, or that wizards aren't "all that powerful." Personally, if I never encounter the issue myself, it doesn't matter who can technically defeat who or which character can technically contribute more. If I enjoy my barbarian, despite the fact that the cleric is technically doing far more than him, then hey, there isn't a problem.
And if I do encounter the problem, then there've been a wealth of fixes offered to alleviate the problem, which would no-doubt be looked into.

But as to whether the problem should technically be there or not... eh, I don't really care.

Though, more on topic, I noticed something else. They were talking in the "large and very large changes to D&D" thread about how one of the problems with casters is that they're very all-or-nothing. You fail your save against my spell? You're dead. You make your save against my spell? I'm useless.
Well, here we go again. What's the proposed method of dealing with casters, primarily? An anti-magic field or dead magic zone. It's the same thing again. Either you CAN do the thing that your class is designed to do, and you do well, or you're completely denied the thing that your class is designed to do, and you can be beaten.

Why must casters be so all-or-nothing?

ZekeArgo
2007-01-06, 06:19 AM
Where in my post did I say a Wizard wasn't more powerful than a Fighter? I've never, ever made that argument. I simply said that the Fighter has its use, and that the Wizard isn't always going to be prepared for every little thing, even at higher levels. Any DM worth his salt knows some way to throw a wrench in the Wizard's plans, even if that wrench is another Wizard. Anything the PCs can do the DM can do too.

Divination is hardly infallible. Say you're scrying and somebody else catches you. Then they're fully prepared to one-up you.

Ah, while your inside of your rope trick? Or since we're assuming extremely high level here perhaps the wizard purchaced a few castings of Genesis and makes use of a Plane Shift to relax in his personal warded demiplane. Or any number of other defenses that a wizard can bring to the table.


People always go into these highly theoretical "best case scenario" forumlas, but it simply isn't the case. There are any number of ways to cripple a wizard or lessen his effectiveness. Wizards are far from all-powerful, although they could probably stand to be nerfed considerably whenever 4.0 comes out.

As you've stated a wizard can only be beaten by another wizard, and one that has to be played better than the PC. You try to bring a fighter in to "menace" the wizard then the wizards trip/disarm/sunder monk ally can make said fighter completely useless while the wizard gets to work owning everything else.

If something can only be countered by a better version of itself then how can you say the thing isn't obscenely powerful?

The Glyphstone
2007-01-06, 06:24 AM
And the problem with throwing hordes and hordes at the wizard is, that after he runs out of AoE nukes to massacre them with, he just teleports to someplace within 100 miles/caster level, then climbs inside a Rope Trick. Even a simple 9th level caster, the minimum for Teleport, has a 40,000 mile area to hide in (actually a bit less, that's a 200m diameter square, and I can't remember the formula for the area of a circle right now). Is the remnants of the horde big enough to search 40000 square miles (roughly) in 8 hours, before the wizard recovers his spell slots and does it again?

^Two posts above. Agreed - it would make casters a lot more interesting if their overall power level went down somehow, but added a lot more Partial effects to spells...say, Hold Person could have a Speed-reducing effect on a successful save.

And yes, this dead horse has been beaten into unrecognizable fragments.

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 06:34 AM
Ah, while your inside of your rope trick? Or since we're assuming extremely high level here perhaps the wizard purchaced a few castings of Genesis and makes use of a Plane Shift to relax in his personal warded demiplane. Or any number of other defenses that a wizard can bring to the table.

As you've stated a wizard can only be beaten by another wizard, and one that has to be played better than the PC. You try to bring a fighter in to "menace" the wizard then the wizards trip/disarm/sunder monk ally can make said fighter completely useless while the wizard gets to work owning everything else.

If something can only be countered by a better version of itself then how can you say the thing isn't obscenely powerful?

I have said a Wizard can be beaten with another wizard, yes. That was an example of what is probably the easiest way for a DM to do it. There are other ways to do it. A rogue with the appropriate ranks in UMD and some fun buffs as well as some items to make them undetectable, for example, could probably do in a pinch.

No spell is utterly infallible. Also, D&D is a game that assumes that a party is actively going to try to face dangers in order to obtain something (usually shinies). Sure, a Wizard can go hide in their personal demiplane fortified against whatever they can think of, but what's the fun in that? You're playing a game, which means you're being proactive. I honestly don't give a damn about the fact that a wizard CAN do that, because if you're playing in my campaign as a wizard you're either doing something or you might as well be an NPC because you aren't contributing and have no reason to play. Sure, you can say "I sit in my impenetrable demiplane". To which I say, "great, the party's going off to adventure, you can go home now and stop eating my snacks." A wizard can raise all kinds of defenses, yes. But he can't just sit in them if he's going out and adventuring, which is the point of playing the game.

Also, as an aside it's generally agreed-upon that a monk is a pretty sub-par class, but we'll ignore that for a moment and say yes, a proper monk COULD do that, thus giving the fighter types a reason to be there, i.e. to prevent someone from getting at the wizard and their soft, defenseless flesh, as I said earlier.

Gurgeh
2007-01-06, 07:17 AM
While my primary wish is for the people arguing to just shut up, I'd just like to point out that the area a wizard can hide in thanks to teleport is much, much larger than The_Glyphstone said. Pi times radius squared (900 for level 9) equals an area of more than 2.5 million square miles. For a 20th level wizard (who'll also have access to Greater Teleport and avoid those irksome failures), it's a little over 12.5 million square miles. In other words, those pursuing a teleporting wizard will have a medium-sized continent's worth of land to search through. Good luck finding him.

ZekeArgo
2007-01-06, 09:39 AM
I have said a Wizard can be beaten with another wizard, yes. That was an example of what is probably the easiest way for a DM to do it. There are other ways to do it. A rogue with the appropriate ranks in UMD and some fun buffs as well as some items to make them undetectable, for example, could probably do in a pinch.

And we're back to the same point: magic wins above all else.


No spell is utterly infallible. Also, D&D is a game that assumes that a party is actively going to try to face dangers in order to obtain something (usually shinies).I wasn't aware that all games were still dungeon crawls. Shall I pull out my Red Book and throw away all of this nifty Eberron stuff?


Sure, a Wizard can go hide in their personal demiplane fortified against whatever they can think of, but what's the fun in that? You're playing a game, which means you're being proactive. I honestly don't give a damn about the fact that a wizard CAN do that, because if you're playing in my campaign as a wizard you're either doing something or you might as well be an NPC because you aren't contributing and have no reason to play. Sure, you can say "I sit in my impenetrable demiplane". To which I say, "great, the party's going off to adventure, you can go home now and stop eating my snacks." A wizard can raise all kinds of defenses, yes. But he can't just sit in them if he's going out and adventuring, which is the point of playing the game.

*sigh* I don't believe you understood what I meant. The wizard can take steps to either find or create a plane with a null-time planar trait (or whatever the actual trait is called, need to peruse the planar handbook). Meaning he can step out, spend as much time there as he wants preparing, casting spells and whatnot, and then be back an instant later on the Prime Material plane with foreknowledge of *everything* that is going to happen.

Nevermind that we have not been talking about what is "fun" since this is a statement on the pure versitility and power of a single class above all others. Or do you have a monopoly over the definition of "fun" along with the way DnD "should" be played?


Also, as an aside it's generally agreed-upon that a monk is a pretty sub-par class, but we'll ignore that for a moment and say yes, a proper monk COULD do that, thus giving the fighter types a reason to be there, i.e. to prevent someone from getting at the wizard and their soft, defenseless flesh, as I said earlier.This comment makes no sense, since the monk or whatever character was placed there since you inserted an NPC fighter to help the NPC wizard to combat the PC wizard. 2v1 = yet another sign of the wizards ability.

NullAshton
2007-01-06, 10:34 AM
Wizards are more powerful than fighters, but wizards tend to cancel out other wizards... and a sorcerer with improved turning, mastery of turning, and casting spell turning before the battle is nigh invincible to wizards.

Thus, always have caster support with enemies, and the casters cancel each other out!

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 01:56 PM
You seem to be misunderstanding most of my posts in their entiretly. I'm arguing not that wizards aren't powerful, and saying magic isn't important in D&D is asinine because EVERYONE uses magic something in it. You have to.


And we're back to the same point: magic wins above all else.

I wasn't aware that all games were still dungeon crawls. Shall I pull out my Red Book and throw away all of this nifty Eberron stuff?

Are all your adventures dungeon crawls? I know mine aren't. Same rules apply though.


*sigh* I don't believe you understood what I meant. The wizard can take steps to either find or create a plane with a null-time planar trait (or whatever the actual trait is called, need to peruse the planar handbook). Meaning he can step out, spend as much time there as he wants preparing, casting spells and whatnot, and then be back an instant later on the Prime Material plane with foreknowledge of *everything* that is going to happen.

What kind of party would put up with that? I know mine wouldn't.

"Oh hey guys, I need to step out for eight hours. Carry on assulting the gates of hell, I'll be right back."


Nevermind that we have not been talking about what is "fun" since this is a statement on the pure versitility and power of a single class above all others. Or do you have a monopoly over the definition of "fun" along with the way DnD "should" be played?

I don't know where you get this but from the very start I've not been arguing from a pure mechanics standpoint. And where in the world did I imply that I have a monopoly over the definition of the word "fun"? Sounds to me like you're putting words in my mouth. I don't deny that the wizard is powerful AT ALL in ANY of my posts. I simply say that he's not infallible. That's ALL I've been saying.


This comment makes no sense, since the monk or whatever character was placed there since you inserted an NPC fighter to help the NPC wizard to combat the PC wizard. 2v1 = yet another sign of the wizards ability.

And you again misread my meaning to be entirely more specific than what I was. I was stating that fighter types as a whole have need to be in battle, and stated the fact that they stand between the wizard and each other as one of those reasons. And for the record, I'm aware of the dominate trick, but again, at least when I play D&D, I play it with other people, who like to do things as well.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 03:02 PM
What kind of party would put up with that? I know mine wouldn't.

"Oh hey guys, I need to step out for eight hours. Carry on assulting the gates of hell, I'll be right back."

You misunderstood the point. Wizard goes on a plane where time goes on a diffrent speed. So he spends there time 8 hours but on the plane where other characters are, only a round has passed.

What wizard sees:
*Step to other plane*
*spend there 8 hours and prepare*
*Step back with full spells*

What party sees:
*Wizard steps away*
*wizard steps back one round later*

Why would the party not tolerate that?

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 03:17 PM
Ah right, alternate time planes. However, would such a plane be safe? Genesis, by core material, is not even castable by Wizards and technically doesn't exist outside of a Shaper's abilities (which, as many people point out, isn't core). Also, it's specifically stated that you can't control the time on that plane. Sure, you could make a fortified base on another plane that DOES have the appropriate time frame involved, but you're still not 100% safe from attack and making such a base would take a lot of resources. Going by the wealth by guidelines rules, that would take a significant chunk out of the wizard's resources to get other things that make him more effective, thus meaning that his spells are, for example, might be more likely to fail at a crucial moment due to a lack of funds for a Tome of Intellect, Headband of Intellect, or any of the other myriad items that help a wizard out. A passed Will Save at a crucial juncture can mean bad news for any kind of party.

ZekeArgo
2007-01-06, 03:28 PM
You seem to be misunderstanding most of my posts in their entiretly. I'm arguing not that wizards aren't powerful, and saying magic isn't important in D&D is asinine because EVERYONE uses magic something in it. You have to.




Are all your adventures dungeon crawls? I know mine aren't. Same rules apply though.You could have fooled me from your previous statement.



What kind of party would put up with that? I know mine wouldn't.

"Oh hey guys, I need to step out for eight hours. Carry on assulting the gates of hell, I'll be right back."Read the post above to actually understand what I said. He appears at worst 1 second after he leaves.



I don't know where you get this but from the very start I've not been arguing from a pure mechanics standpoint. And where in the world did I imply that I have a monopoly over the definition of the word "fun"? Sounds to me like you're putting words in my mouth. I don't deny that the wizard is powerful AT ALL in ANY of my posts. I simply say that he's not infallible. That's ALL I've been saying.I wasn't putting words in your mouth, you stated "Sure, a Wizard can go hide in their personal demiplane fortified against whatever they can think of, but what's the fun in that?" and "might as well be an NPC because you aren't contributing and have no reason to play"

First off you *still* havent understood the mechanics of a null-time plane and how wizards can use them to utterly dominate, and from your next post about having to dedicate resources to create a stronghold? Just needs to create a single room surrounded on all sides by layers of walls of force. Negligable cost, no ones getting in there, and your able to build multiple "posts" so if one comes under attack by something that can destroy the walls, you just port to your 2nd, 3rd, etc base.



And you again misread my meaning to be entirely more specific than what I was. I was stating that fighter types as a whole have need to be in battle, and stated the fact that they stand between the wizard and each other as one of those reasons. And for the record, I'm aware of the dominate trick, but again, at least when I play D&D, I play it with other people, who like to do things as well.

They might like to do things, but what they do essentially boils down to: stand back and let the wizard work. Oh, and let us not forget the ability to break the wealth by level guidelines simply with conjuration/creation spells, or as you've said before the ability to dominate anything.

This whole thing has been dancing around a single point: wizards bring more to the table than any other class. Forget bards, a well played wizard is the true Jack of All Trades and your party is *even* stronger if they don't have any of those fighter types other than CoDzillas.

That isn't to say they are unnessicary, but in pure mechanics and what a wizard is capable of he far outshines pretty much everyone at high levels, so you either have to pull your punches and *not* play an intelligent wizard, or let it be and outclass everyone else.

Eighth_Seraph
2007-01-06, 03:46 PM
That makes two threads in which there's been some getting carried away involved this week. Zeke, get your hands off of Void's throat. Void, sheathe that dagger. Now let's try to work together to solve this problem for the 3,238,695,097th time. We all seem to agree
that wizards are indeed more powerful than fighters on most grounds, and overpoweringly so when the playing on the wizard's terms. This, my friends,
is why homebrew was invented. For those phobic of changes to tried and true methods, then I can only tell you to trust in ingenuity and have a wizard of your own handy. Yes, magic is very powerful in most campaigns, broken in others, but what of it? The point of a game is to have fun; and if that means having a party member more powerful than yourself, then so be it. I'll have fun with my trip/disarm/sunder monk, thank you very much.

*Gives Shazzbaa a high five*

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 03:51 PM
I've yet to see anybody present any kind of situation in which I can't counter what a Wizard could do, either by pure game mechanics or by a simple roleplay element. For example, with the "hiding out after every encounter" trick.

In that case, I know my ruling would be that they need to give me a darn good reason why the wizard, who is a person, isn't getting bored and wanting to do other things besides fight for a few seconds and then rest for another eight hours.

Walls of Force? Someone can teleport in. If your wizard is resting, he's NOT going to be prepared for that.

A Wizard will only outshine the rest of the party if you let him. I heartily advocate just using enemy wizards to keep the wizard busy and still giving the party a chance to do other things, but that's simply because I don't like making encounters tailored specifically for the wizard. There are many ways around the wizard that don't involve having an actual wizard, there are many ways to keep the wizard in check. It might require a little creativity, but it can be done, and it can be done easily with appropriately-leveled challenges.

Also, again on the issue of planeshifting out, by that level, I would assume that most adventuring parties who are so capable of planar travel would not be adventuring primarily on the material plane, but instead on the outer planes, in Sigil, or at some other place with appropriate challenges for them. As I recall, the outer planes are separate from most other planes, and thus require a jaunt through the astral to travel between that and any particular demiplane where you happen to have a base. That makes it hard to pop in and out.

Again, to reiterate the point: Wizards are powerful. Wizards are versatile. We know that. Wizards are NOT undefeatable, and Wizards are NOT the only people that can contribute meaningfully to every aspect of D&D.

Edit: :thog: but thog like dagger! it stabs things.

oriong
2007-01-06, 04:08 PM
The demi-plane idea doesn't work:

First, Genesis does not allow you to create an alternate time trait, let alone 'null-time' trait. So that's right out.

So the only option is to somehow find and colonize an existing one. Which means that A) one must exist (none of the standard planes have this trait), and B) the GM must allow you to make use of it.

In this case then he has no one but himself to blame, but claiming it as a strategy is akin to saying "all I have to do is get the Orb of Every Dragon control and make an army of slave-dragons." It's only possible through a combination of DM Fiat and Idiocy.

In general the 'run away and come back later' strategies are all horrible and rely on your DM being an idiot.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 04:12 PM
I've yet to see anybody present any kind of situation in which I can't counter what a Wizard could do, either by pure game mechanics or by a simple roleplay element. For example, with the "hiding out after every encounter" trick.

In that case, I know my ruling would be that they need to give me a darn good reason why the wizard, who is a person, isn't getting bored and wanting to do other things besides fight for a few seconds and then rest for another eight hours.



Tell me, if you were in wizard's position and fighting a demon lord. You could multiply your powers at the risk of becoming bored. Roleplay-wise... would you? I know I would.


Walls of Force? Someone can teleport in. If your wizard is resting, he's NOT going to be prepared for that.Anticipate teleport and Contignency come to mind if staying away from cheese. Craft contignent spell if we touch the cheese.


A Wizard will only outshine the rest of the party if you let him. I heartily advocate just using enemy wizards to keep the wizard busy and still giving the party a chance to do other things, but that's simply because I don't like making encounters tailored specifically for the wizard. There are many ways around the wizard that don't involve having an actual wizard, there are many ways to keep the wizard in check. It might require a little creativity, but it can be done, and it can be done easily with appropriately-leveled challenges.

Also, again on the issue of planeshifting out, by that level, I would assume that most adventuring parties who are so capable of planar travel would not be adventuring primarily on the material plane, but instead on the outer planes, in Sigil, or at some other place with appropriate challenges for them. As I recall, the outer planes are separate from most other planes, and thus require a jaunt through the astral to travel between that and any particular demiplane where you happen to have a base. That makes it hard to pop in and out.

Again, to reiterate the point: Wizards are powerful. Wizards are versatile. We know that. Wizards are NOT undefeatable, and Wizards are NOT the only people that can contribute meaningfully to every aspect of D&D.

Edit: :thog: but thog like dagger! it stabs things.


But what does thog do when a tarrasque comes to him? Thog is not able to kill it, trip it, grapple it... and if he is, he can not keep it dead by casting a wish.

What does thog do when a balor comes to him? If the 5 attacks per round with a vorpal sword (nearly 1/4 chance to kill per round just because of vorpal) doesn't get him, the will save spell like abilities will. And if he has mindblank, the damage and death throes might get him.

What does fighter do to a high CR dragon? It boggles the mind...

It is not about if fighter can beat wizard or not, fighter just can't contribute that much at high levels. Except if he sees monster on an open field, on the ground and is able to charge, but with - as said - everyone having access to magic, spell like abilities or magic items, it never happens with intelligent monsters at high levels.

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 04:17 PM
Why would Thog waste his money on Vorpal? Brilliant Energy is cheaper and much better :smallsmile:

Besides, everyone knows that's what Pompeii is for. Wishing the Tarrasque dead after Thog tears it apart.

Although given that it's Thog he probably WOULD get Vorpal. But nobody's requiring you to play a warrior-type with Intelligence as it's dump stat :smalltongue:

oriong
2007-01-06, 04:27 PM
But what does thog do when a tarrasque comes to him? Thog is not able to kill it, trip it, grapple it... and if he is, he can not keep it dead by casting a wish.

The tarrasque is a pretty bad comparison, it's one of those creatures that absolutely requires X to beat it, there are plenty of things that a wizard will find just as unbeatable.


What does thog do when a balor comes to him? If the 5 attacks per round with a vorpal sword (nearly 1/4 chance to kill per round just because of vorpal) doesn't get him, the will save spell like abilities will. And if he has mindblank, the damage and death throes might get him.And somehow none of these are a concern for a wizard?

Balors will slaughter the wizard just as easily as Thog, that power word stun is made to kill them (thog has too many hit points to worry about it), they have a ranged Fortitude Save-or-Die spell-like ability at DC 27, they have exceptional flight speed and the ability to slaughter any wizard within a matter of seconds if they get into 20 feet of them, especially if they grapple or entangle. And the Death Throes is even more of a danger to a wizard than to a fighter, they certainly won't make the save, and probably don't even have 100 hit points.


What does fighter do to a high CR dragon? It boggles the mind...

Survive a whole lot better than the wizard for one thing. They're both about equally screwed. While the wizard does have a few nasty options like dex damage (which is more of a problem with the spell than the class) they're also pretty doomed if the situation goes against them the fighter at least has a decent chance of survival if their strategy goes wrong.


It is not about if fighter can beat wizard or not, fighter just can't contribute that much at high levels. Except if he sees monster on an open field, on the ground and is able to charge, but with - as said - everyone having access to magic, spell like abilities or magic items, it never happens with intelligent monsters at high levels.

I think people often confuse a broad spread of abilities with the ability to contribute more. If that were the case then bards would be amazing. Fighters are not, by any means, excellent solo characters. They are classes that really need the support of a party to work with, but overall their contribution is just as high.

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-06, 04:34 PM
The tarrasque is a pretty bad comparison, it's one of those creatures that absolutely requires X to beat it, there are plenty of things that a wizard will find just as unbeatable.

And somehow none of these are a concern for a wizard?

Balors will slaughter the wizard just as easily as Thog, that power word stun is made to kill them (thog has too many hit points to worry about it), they have a ranged Fortitude Save-or-Die spell-like ability at DC 27, they have exceptional flight speed and the ability to slaughter any wizard within a matter of seconds if they get into 20 feet of them, especially if they grapple or entangle. And the Death Throes is even more of a danger to a wizard than to a fighter, they certainly won't make the save, and probably don't even have 100 hit points.



Survive a whole lot better than the wizard for one thing. They're both about equally screwed. While the wizard does have a few nasty options like dex damage (which is more of a problem with the spell than the class) they're also pretty doomed if the situation goes against them the fighter at least has a decent chance of survival if their strategy goes wrong.



I think people often confuse a broad spread of abilities with the ability to contribute more. If that were the case then bards would be amazing. Fighters are not, by any means, excellent solo characters. They are classes that really need the support of a party to work with, but overall their contribution is just as high.

Agreed. Every party member has something to bring to the table, and any party would be worse off not having that component.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 04:37 PM
I, um, think you really, really underestimate what a wizard does against a dragon or a balor. He certainly doesn't just sit there while they come up and hack at him or cast Power Word Stun (Spell Turning, anyone?).

oriong
2007-01-06, 04:43 PM
I certainly never claimed they would, but the fighter is certainly doing more than just standing there being a target himself, I was simply making the point that the fighter is no more Balor Chow than the wizard is, both are screwed without defenses already in place before the fight, at the very least the fighter has a better chance of surviving a suprise attack.

While it's all very well to say that a wizard CAN do something in theory, the ability to do it in practice is much harder. For example, let's say the balor wins initiative, it could very easily eliminate the wizard without giving him a chance to cast even a single spell. If the wizard manages to prepare extensively beforehand AND has the spells he needs, then he will be at a big advantage, but even then the balor has a very good chance of winning.

In reality, the best way to handle both foes is to have a fighter (suitably buffed by the wizard to help him survive) do his best to keep the balor and/or dragon away from the wizard while the wizard does his thing.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 04:45 PM
The problem is that the fighter CAN'T do much more than stand there and be Balor chow, charge the Balor and try to hit it, or try to fly to the balor and fail to reach it.

The wizard's got a lot more options at that.

The fighter also has absolutely NO way of keeping the Balor and/or Dragon, with their vastly superior flight speeds and SLAs/spellcasting, away. The wizard has to do that himself.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 04:52 PM
The tarrasque is a pretty bad comparison, it's one of those creatures that absolutely requires X to beat it, there are plenty of things that a wizard will find just as unbeatable.

Well, nah. Rogues and bards could use the scroll with UMD (tarrasque is rarely random encounter, so they propably knew about it so they really could have that scroll), clerics and wizards can just cast the spell. Warrior types and druid are only ones who can't keep the thing dead, no matter what.


And somehow none of these are a concern for a wizard?

Balors will slaughter the wizard just as easily as Thog, that power word stun is made to kill them (thog has too many hit points to worry about it), they have a ranged Fortitude Save-or-Die spell-like ability at DC 27, they have exceptional flight speed and the ability to slaughter any wizard within a matter of seconds if they get into 20 feet of them, especially if they grapple or entangle. And the Death Throes is even more of a danger to a wizard than to a fighter, they certainly won't make the save, and probably don't even have 100 hit points.

Well, wizard can stay far away so vorpal sword is no problem. Power word srun affects only up to 150 hit point. If 20th level wizard has con mod of even +8 (could have more, it is his second highest stat and he can craft tomes...), he has average hp of 211.5. Hell, with con mod of +4 and casting false life, he is immune to power word stun. And it is close range spell.

So wizard is far from balor's sword, spell like abilities and death throes but fighter has to be close...




Survive a whole lot better than the wizard for one thing. They're both about equally screwed. While the wizard does have a few nasty options like dex damage (which is more of a problem with the spell than the class) they're also pretty doomed if the situation goes against them the fighter at least has a decent chance of survival if their strategy goes wrong.

Situation goes wrong:
Wizard: teleport away
Fighter: try to run away as fly by attacks kill you




I think people often confuse a broad spread of abilities with the ability to contribute more. If that were the case then bards would be amazing. Fighters are not, by any means, excellent solo characters. They are classes that really need the support of a party to work with, but overall their contribution is just as high.


Bard has a lot of abilities, all suck compared to other classes's equals. Wizard has a lot, all are good. There is the diffrence.

oriong
2007-01-06, 04:58 PM
The problem is that the fighter CAN'T do much more than stand there and be Balor chow, charge the Balor and try to hit it, or try to fly to the balor and fail to reach it.

You're wrong there.

The fighter doesn't have CLASS ABILITIES that let him do this, but the fighter CAN use strategies and his magic items to keep him alive.

Here's some examples: attempt to disarm the balor's whip, it's the nastiest weapon he has and it's what's going to kill the wizard. Or even sunder it, it's only a whip after all and not a powerful one other than it's entangle ability.

Attempt to grapple the balor, this will be hideously painful for the fighter, but it can (especially if the balor continues the grapple once it starts winning) keep him in place and moderately under control.

Fight Defensively, the balor's attacks are nasty, but that's only if they hit.

And of course actually hurting the balor is the way you're goign to beat it, and the fighter is the best chance of that.



The wizard's got a lot more options at that.


This is irrellevant, more options do nto equal more power. The wizard may have many options but A) several will nto be helpful in the situation at hand, and B) many will not work when tried.



The fighter also has absolutely NO way of keeping the Balor and/or Dragon, with their vastly superior flight speeds and SLAs/spellcasting, away. The wizard has to do that himself.

And the Wizard has equally few ways to sucessfully do it.

Working together however, they do have some options, for instance, say the wizard creates an opponent hindering area (black tentacles, cloud effect, web, etc) then the fighter can try and keep the opponent in the area by physically blocking their way, bull rushes, and other strategies. Even with just an Enlarge spell a fighter could reasonably keep a balor (although admittedly no dragon) grappled and pinned down for a round or two.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 05:03 PM
I certainly never claimed they would, but the fighter is certainly doing more than just standing there being a target himself, I was simply making the point that the fighter is no more Balor Chow than the wizard is, both are screwed without defenses already in place before the fight, at the very least the fighter has a better chance of surviving a suprise attack.

While it's all very well to say that a wizard CAN do something in theory, the ability to do it in practice is much harder. For example, let's say the balor wins initiative, it could very easily eliminate the wizard without giving him a chance to cast even a single spell. If the wizard manages to prepare extensively beforehand AND has the spells he needs, then he will be at a big advantage, but even then the balor has a very good chance of winning.

In reality, the best way to handle both foes is to have a fighter (suitably buffed by the wizard to help him survive) do his best to keep the balor and/or dragon away from the wizard while the wizard does his thing.

Fighter can't do much to balor. Or well, he can. I know he has enough damage output. However, he needs to get very close and thus be fodder to the vorpal sword of balor and his spell like abilities and death throes, while wizard is far away casting spells. This is why fighters are more chew to balor.

Balor won't win initiative. He has initiative of +11, wizard about +25-+30ish (+20 from momemnt of prescience). Then wizard casts timestop. Now, wizard has 1d4 +1 (more if metamagic rods are used) rounds before anyone else acts. (And yes, spending one high level spell per encounter is reasonable, assuming the encounters per day guidelines are followed. If not, it hurts fighters more than wizards.)

Fighters can't keep dragon away. If they would, they would contribute. But they can't.

Wizards are preparing casters, so they are prepared. Yes, I really mean this. Each day wizard plans (possibly with help of divinations) how he will deal if he is surprise attacked, how he will deal if there is flying enemies, how... Fighter... Well... Fighter can choose which potions to drink while he has nothing better to do.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 05:09 PM
You're wrong there.

The fighter doesn't have CLASS ABILITIES that let him do this, but the fighter CAN use strategies and his magic items to keep him alive.
Except that he can't. That's the proiblem.


Here's some examples: attempt to disarm the balor's whip, it's the nastiest weapon he has and it's what's going to kill the wizard. Or even sunder it, it's only a whip after all and not a powerful one other than it's entangle ability.
A disarm against the Balor's +32 whip attack roll won't necessarily go very well for the fighter --plus, he has to actually get close first.


Attempt to grapple the balor, this will be hideously painful for the fighter, but it can (especially if the balor continues the grapple once it starts winning) keep him in place and moderately under control.
This is a horrible option. The Balor has a +36 to grapple, which a non-entirely-grapple-focused fighter is completely unlikely to. Additionally, he has to get close to the faster-flying, ranged-attack-having Balor. Even if he manages, the Balor is thoroughly unconcerned, taking little damage and free to use its SLAs with a completely manageable concentration check. SLAs like Blasphemy, Dominate Monster, Insanity... or Greater Teleport.


Fight Defensively, the balor's attacks are nasty, but that's only if they hit. Woo, +2 or +3 AC. That'll help. It'll hurt by making you less likely to hit *it*... and again, you have to actually close with the balor first. That's *hard*. It flies faster than items let the fighter, AND can Greater Teleport at will... unless a *spellcaster* Dimensional Anchors it.


And of course actually hurting the balor is the way you're goign to beat it, and the fighter is the best chance of that.
The fighter... or the cleric, or the druid, or summoned creatures (Sonorous Hum + Elemental Monolith, anyone?), or effects that disable it completely and make killing it easy.


And the Wizard has equally few ways to sucessfully do it.
That's not true; the wizard has tons of ways to be highly effective against a balor or dragon. Do you really want them all listed? There are loads of spells of all levels that help a lot.
The wizard doesn't have to close.
The wizard can stay out of range of the Balor's SLAs and dangerous attacks, like Entangle.
The wizard has modes of attack that are vastly more effective than the fighter's "I hit it", and can be done from farther away.


Working together however, they do have some options, for instance, say the wizard creates an opponent hindering area (black tentacles, cloud effect, web, etc) then the fighter can try and keep the opponent in the area by physically blocking their way, bull rushes, and other strategies. Even with just an Enlarge spell a fighter could reasonably keep a balor (although admittedly no dragon) grappled and pinned down for a round or two.
By "working together", you mean "the fighter is only there to hit things the wizard has disabled". An Enlarge spell won't do it, and grappling remains a horrible option; the wizard would be best off casting directly at the balor--at +19, it'll fail a will save if it needs to make two or three, not to mention no-save options.


The Fighter has a very hard time doing anything to a Balor, much less anything significant. The spellcasters don't have that problem, they have lots of things to do it it.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 05:22 PM
The fighter... or the cleric, or the druid, or summoned creatures (Sonorous Hum + Elemental Monolith, anyone?), or effects that disable it completely and make killing it easy.

You forgot to list golems. Everyone forgets them.

Crafting a greater stone golem costs 105k, yes. However, his attack automatically hit balor (two attacks with +42 mod to hit). Give him a weapon that bypasses DR and... As a mindless construct, it is immune to about everything possible. Getting it to fly is a problem but if wizard can disable fly and teleportation from the enemy, greater stone golem is pretty nice. It also has grapple mod of +52.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 05:23 PM
...wow. A fighter is worth less than 105k.

oriong
2007-01-06, 05:26 PM
Well, nah. Rogues and bards could use the scroll with UMD (tarrasque is rarely random encounter, so they propably knew about it so they really could have that scroll), clerics and wizards can just cast the spell. Warrior types and druid are only ones who can't keep the thing dead, no matter what.

Missing my point, it was that tarrasque absolutely needs X, which limited classes have access to, all you're illustrating is that most PARTIES can have access to it, which is really all that's important.



Well, wizard can stay far away so vorpal sword is no problem. Power word srun affects only up to 150 hit point. If 20th level wizard has con mod of even +8 (could have more, it is his second highest stat and he can craft tomes...), he has average hp of 211.5. Hell, with con mod of +4 and casting false life, he is immune to power word stun. And it is close range spell.

Riiiiight

First, it's not 'no problem', you're dealing with a fast flying, at-will teleporting creature with a reach of 20 (the sword is not a wizards concern anyway), unless the wizard is more than 200 feet away then he's dead if the balor beats initiative.


So wizard is far from balor's sword, spell like abilities and death throes but fighter has to be close...

No, the wizard is as far away as the balor lets him be. considering the balor has mobility advantage then the wizard is in bad shape.



Situation goes wrong:
Wizard: teleport away
Fighter: try to run away as fly by attacks kill you


Right, and that's not at all a bad idea. All it means is that the wizard loses he manages to survive while leaving the rest of his fellows to die, if the fighter loses then he dies. You both lost, and really there are several ways for a fighter to escape, they just all involve him using non-class abilities (i.e. magic items).

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-06, 05:33 PM
The wizard has a mobility advantage on a Phantom Steed. The Balor can Greater Teleport over, which is a standard action; he can't attack the wizard on the round he does that.

The wizard hits him with a Dimensional Anchor and moves or dim-doors away. The Fighter doesn't have that luxury.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 05:33 PM
Missing my point, it was that tarrasque absolutely needs X, which limited classes have access to, all you're illustrating is that most PARTIES can have access to it, which is really all that's important.

I am illustrating that most parties have characters which can contribute against it, fighter is not one of them.


Riiiiight

First, it's not 'no problem', you're dealing with a fast flying, at-will teleporting creature with a reach of 20 (the sword is not a wizards concern anyway), unless the wizard is more than 200 feet away then he's dead if the balor beats initiative.

No, the wizard is as far away as the balor lets him be. considering the balor has mobility advantage then the wizard is in bad shape.

You just showed us why fighter is not useful even in keeping it away - it teleports on the other side.

Wizard can keep balor away by dimension anchor + forcecage. So there goes the mobility advantage.



Right, and that's not at all a bad idea. All it means is that the wizard loses he manages to survive while leaving the rest of his fellows to die, if the fighter loses then he dies. You both lost, and really there are several ways for a fighter to escape, they just all involve him using non-class abilities (i.e. magic items).


Why did we both lose? Sure, it might be more fun for the fighter's player if his character hangs around but... The fighter is not able to contribute anyways. My success rating for the next encounters won't go down by much.

Besides, magic items are made with low CL, so balor can easily dispel them. It is harder to dispel a wizard, though.

ZekeArgo
2007-01-06, 05:35 PM
Right, and that's not at all a bad idea. All it means is that the wizard loses he manages to survive while leaving the rest of his fellows to die, if the fighter loses then he dies. You both lost, and really there are several ways for a fighter to escape, they just all involve him using non-class abilities (i.e. magic items).

You know how a wizard wins that fight? Timestop/Forcecage/Dimensional Anchor/Whatever else.

Hell, if he wins initiative he dosent even need Timestop to use a Greater Quicken Metamagic rod and completly disable the Balor's Flight and teleportation in a round.

Not everyone in equal. Two Wizards, a Cleric and a Druid are *far* more powerful than a "balanced" team of a Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard.

grinner666
2007-01-06, 05:46 PM
*yawns*

And once again we get to engage in the "Wizards are overpowered!!", "No they're not!!" argument. I'm really tired of it. I've only been here a couple of months and I'm already really, really tired of it. Tired enough, in fact, not to give much of a flying **** about whether I get banned for this post.

Get the **** over it. Learn to live with your differences. Neither side is going to convince the other. You've proven that, or you should have, over and over. And over. And over. And over again. Until EVERYONE without some weird emotional attachment to the argument is weary-unto-deat of hearing it. Both sides should just shut the **** up about it.

Having said that, I'll contribute to the argument ... just to this small extent.

A lot has been said about the wizard's ability to emulate the fighter or the rogue. Sure the wizard can ALMOST equal either class ... FOR A SHORT TIME. Tenser's Transformation can make him almost equal to the fighter ... for a while ... except that he won't have any of the fighter's feats 'cause he's used all his up to increase his spellcasting or item creation abilities. As he should have. And he's not wearing any armor or using a shield. Overall it seems the wizard is more useful using lower-level spells like Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, Cat's Grace (or the Mass versions of these), and Haste to buff the actual fighting classes than trying to buff himself into a fighter.

And sure the wizard can outshine the rogue at opening locks ... five times a day at level 20 ... assuming he took nothing but Knock for second-level spells. What happens when he comes across the sixth lock of the day when the party's pressed for time? And how, exactly, does the wizard/sorcerer/cleric/druid/whatever get past the mechanical trap on the door or chest? I've yet to see a spell that does that.

A lot has ALSO been said about the wizard's (and to a lesser extent the cleric's) "save-or-die" and "save-or-suck" spells. Unfortunately for the Wizards-Are-Awesome crowd, most of these higher-level spells either allow Fort saves, or have strict Hit Point limits on what can be affected. These are both fighter (and ranger, and paladin, and barbarian, and knight) strong suits. Frankly a 20th level fighter (etc.) who doesn't have at least 150 hit points isn't much of a fighter. And lower-level spells are, frankly, not worth talking about at the highest levels.

The fighter may be only a meatshield at the highest levels, but that certainly beats earlier editions where that's all he was from level 6 or so. Think about THAT.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 05:57 PM
*yawns*

And once again we get to engage in the "Wizards are overpowered!!", "No they're not!!" argument. I'm really tired of it. I've only been here a couple of months and I'm already really, really tired of it. Tired enough, in fact, not to give much of a flying **** about whether I get banned for this post.

Get the **** over it. Learn to live with your differences. Neither side is going to convince the other. You've proven that, or you should have, over and over. And over. And over. And over again. Until EVERYONE without some weird emotional attachment to the argument is weary-unto-deat of hearing it. Both sides should just shut the **** up about it.

If you are really that tired, just don't read these threads.


Having said that, I'll contribute to the argument ... just to this small extent.AHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAHAAH :D:D:D:D:D

I really should have seen that one coming.


A lot has been said about the wizard's ability to emulate the fighter or the rogue. Sure the wizard can ALMOST equal either class ... FOR A SHORT TIME. Tenser's Transformation can make him almost equal to the fighter ... for a while ... except that he won't have any of the fighter's feats 'cause he's used all his up to increase his spellcasting or item creation abilities. As he should have. And he's not wearing any armor or using a shield. Overall it seems the wizard is more useful using lower-level spells like Bull's Strength, Bear's Endurance, Cat's Grace (or the Mass versions of these), and Haste to buff the actual fighting classes than trying to buff himself into a fighter.Bull's strengh won't stack with belt of giant strenght, haste won't stack with weapon of speed. No matter how he buffs fighter, it won't help as much as he actually doing something himself at high levels.


And sure the wizard can outshine the rogue at opening locks ... five times a day at level 20 ... assuming he took nothing but Knock for second-level spells. What happens when he comes across the sixth lock of the day when the party's pressed for time? And how, exactly, does the wizard/sorcerer/cleric/druid/whatever get past the mechanical trap on the door or chest? I've yet to see a spell that does that.Summon monster 1, summon a monkey, he opens chest, he gets killed, he was summoned so he just returns to his plane without having actually died so it is not even evil.


A lot has ALSO been said about the wizard's (and to a lesser extent the cleric's) "save-or-die" and "save-or-suck" spells. Unfortunately for the Wizards-Are-Awesome crowd, most of these higher-level spells either allow Fort saves, or have strict Hit Point limits on what can be affected. These are both fighter (and ranger, and paladin, and barbarian, and knight) strong suits. Frankly a 20th level fighter (etc.) who doesn't have at least 150 hit points isn't much of a fighter. And lower-level spells are, frankly, not worth talking about at the highest levels.[quote]

Maximized+empowered Shivering touch + ray of exhaustion disables anything with less than 28 dex if they succeed on their saves. If they fail, anything with less than 30 dex.

[quote]The fighter may be only a meatshield at the highest levels, but that certainly beats earlier editions where that's all he was from level 6 or so. Think about THAT.
So things were somehow diffrently in earlier editions, how does it affect this edition?


But naturally, you are too sick of this argument to continue...

To quote yourself, "just shut the **** about it", especially if you don't know what you are talking about. :P

I_Got_This_Name
2007-01-06, 07:40 PM
As I understand it, the issue isn't with the wizard usurping the fighter's role by buffing himself and heading in, as the wizard rendering the fighter redundant. "Why yes, Mr. Fighter, it is very nice what you can do with those swords to the monster. Sorry you didn't get to try because I killed it at 200 paces/inside a forcecage/any other way that renders them unable to reach the fighter." The other problem is that when the wizard doesn't render the fighter redundant, the monster renders him useless, unless the wizard prevents it. "Pit Fiend! Charge!" *Greater Teleport* "I'm over here, fool."

The role they usurp is the rogue's: locks through Wands of Knock, letting them cast it 50 times for a mere 4,500 GP (half if they make it), and have ways (sometimes even Cantrips) of averting traps (Open/Close, Summon Monster I); scouting is handled through divinations (Scrying, Prying Eyes). That leaves the poor rogue relegated to sneak attack damage, which is really, nice, except that the wizard has a chance of taking most anything down in a single round (depending on where its bad save is, Hold (later Dominate), any of the numerous Fort-or-die spells, or that one Reflex-or-stuck spell from Complete Arcane).

For the usurper of the Fighter's role, you have to look at the Cleric, especially with Divine Metacheese. Divine Favor (can be persistant at level 13), Divine Power (needs Divine Metacheese to persist, level 15 to quicken w/o cheese or a rod), and Righteous Might, and suddenly the cleric is better at melee damage than the fighter, and handles area control better, too, by having a 10' natural reach. The Druid can do this too (buff. Share with animal companion, and keep it that way. Wild Shape. Win. With Natural Cheese, you can reverse the order of the first few steps).

I'd agree that the Clr/Drd/Wiz/Wiz party beats a standard party.

That said, the Book of Nine Swords adds some stuff to let the melee-types not be rendered as useless by monster abilities. Of course, it's very little help to the Fighter, but it adds new classes that are what the Fighter should be.

Pegasos989
2007-01-06, 07:52 PM
As I understand it, the issue isn't with the wizard usurping the fighter's role by buffing himself and heading in, as the wizard rendering the fighter redundant. "Why yes, Mr. Fighter, it is very nice what you can do with those swords to the monster. Sorry you didn't get to try because I killed it at 200 paces/inside a forcecage/any other way that renders them unable to reach the fighter." The other problem is that when the wizard doesn't render the fighter redundant, the monster renders him useless, unless the wizard prevents it. "Pit Fiend! Charge!" *Greater Teleport* "I'm over here, fool."

The role they usurp is the rogue's: locks through Wands of Knock, letting them cast it 50 times for a mere 4,500 GP (half if they make it), and have ways (sometimes even Cantrips) of averting traps (Open/Close, Summon Monster I); scouting is handled through divinations (Scrying, Prying Eyes). That leaves the poor rogue relegated to sneak attack damage, which is really, nice, except that the wizard has a chance of taking most anything down in a single round (depending on where its bad save is, Hold (later Dominate), any of the numerous Fort-or-die spells, or that one Reflex-or-stuck spell from Complete Arcane).

For the usurper of the Fighter's role, you have to look at the Cleric, especially with Divine Metacheese. Divine Favor (can be persistant at level 13), Divine Power (needs Divine Metacheese to persist, level 15 to quicken w/o cheese or a rod), and Righteous Might, and suddenly the cleric is better at melee damage than the fighter, and handles area control better, too, by having a 10' natural reach. The Druid can do this too (buff. Share with animal companion, and keep it that way. Wild Shape. Win. With Natural Cheese, you can reverse the order of the first few steps).

I'd agree that the Clr/Drd/Wiz/Wiz party beats a standard party.

That said, the Book of Nine Swords adds some stuff to let the melee-types not be rendered as useless by monster abilities. Of course, it's very little help to the Fighter, but it adds new classes that are what the Fighter should be.

I think I should sig this as a spoiler to keep in store for future debates. :/

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 09:36 PM
You know, if you spend 10 hours away from your house on the null-plane where one round = 8 hours, something like 5 years has elapsed? That means if you don't return to you null plane for 10 hours, half a decade has gone by on the plane.
As a DM, I see all sorts of opportunities to cause trouble with that.


Of course magic is powerful; it's magic! This means that at high levels, as a DM, you're going to have to be designing adventures with wizards specifically in mind.

Now you might say, this is unfair to wizards. But it makes sense, both in and out of game. In game, if you ever get to level 15, or even level 10, you're going to have to use magic, and have defenses against it. Out of game, no one likes to be constantly overshadowed by the wizard.

Combat ends within a handful of rounds, too, due to everyone flinging save-or-die spells. Winning comes down to who wins initiative.

Force wizards to make concentration checks. 1's come up every now and then.

Have extremely windy or loud environemnts, where the wizard can't properly hear himself. He can still prepare all his spells silented, or use a rod. Occasional gusts toss flying creatures to the ground. Limited visibilty adds a miss chance to ranged attacks, including spells. Force swim checks, or fights underwater.

Have mobs of enemies in areas of architectural unstability, hazardous material, or valuable treasure, which makes casting evocation spells much less appealing.

In the Cathedral of Hextor, the masons ground the bones of cursed wizards into the mortar. Any arcane spell cast within its unhallowed halls has a 10% chance of failure. (An Iron Fortress of Dispater prevents druidic magic and wildshaping in a similar manner.)

Traps. Force fortitude and reflex saves. Make the wizard spend his spells on keeping himself alive. Dimensionally lock the hallway with a crushing wall, forcing the wizard to disintegrate the wall. Use inhaled poisons and diseases. Design traps that need a rogue to find and disable. A summoned monkey can set them off, sure, but what happens when they reset, or when traps or trapped, or trapped in sinister, devious and unpredictable ways?

Have enemies with ranged attacks and unique forms of movement that allow them to go for the wizard. This will force the wizard to retreat, buff, and come back, leaving the others to mop up.

Time limits. Three days to do X. The wizard can't take a break everytime he runs out of spells. Have dungeons (or environments) that force the wizard to burn through spells– multiple encounters, multiple castings of DD, etc, until the wizard has to rely on his other party members.

Enemies will also have protection against divination, and dimensionally lock their lairs. Not barring extraplanar movement in parts of your dungeon is like leaving your front door open.

Kantolin
2007-01-06, 10:05 PM
I think the problem we're having with the majority of these and similar changes is that, well... sure, a wizard can be stopped.

It's just that anything that stops a wizard is quite a bit more likely to also snuff out a fighter.

Pretty much the only two things that tend to stop wizards unequivocably more than a fighter are silence, and antimagic fields. Silence can be circumvented, while antimagic fields... yeah, those work if the wizard is for some reason unable to walk out of them and teleport away.

At the same time... man you can do a lot with a spell slot of that level. All of which can be stopped by a wizard without a ton of effort really... but most of which can't really be stopped by a fighter without some serious work.

And if you make a dungeon that only a wizard can get through, and the wizard needs to spend pretty much all of his spells to do so... what is the rest of the party doing during this time? Nothing at all? Attempting to be less useful?

And if your entire campaing takes place in a giant permanent antimagic field, is that really fun for... pretty much anybody? I'm willing to bet that a Balor can rip a fighter in half if neither has any magic items due to merit of half a fighter's 'balance' being that he has magic items with which to... well, attempt something.

(Not to mention, half your fixes don't really help. I mean, limited visibility? If anything, that absolutely murders the fighter who relies rather exclusively on hitting things, and now is having trouble with that. And fighting underwater is rather hard on a fighter , especially when you note that the spellcaster's the one with the spell water breathing and that the fighter may or may not have a weapon to use in that situation)

Edit: As an additional comparison, if the world does prepare to stop spellcasters, the sheer ease in doing so compared to stopping a fighter is problematic. I mean, if the enemy has a single (say) solid fog spell/scroll and claps most fighters with it, that pretty much shuts them down right there, so an enemy can actually afford to prepare 90% of their spells to defeat the wizard, and then have a couple backup ones to rather negate any silly fighters that cause problems. (Or alternately, a scroll of dominate if the fighter has not downed his potion of Protection from evil yet... now whatever creative defenses the fighter's got are on your side, and it may force the wizard to spend a valuable spell getting his buddy out of trouble).

NullAshton
2007-01-06, 10:17 PM
As I understand it, the issue isn't with the wizard usurping the fighter's role by buffing himself and heading in, as the wizard rendering the fighter redundant. "Why yes, Mr. Fighter, it is very nice what you can do with those swords to the monster. Sorry you didn't get to try because I killed it at 200 paces/inside a forcecage/any other way that renders them unable to reach the fighter." The other problem is that when the wizard doesn't render the fighter redundant, the monster renders him useless, unless the wizard prevents it. "Pit Fiend! Charge!" *Greater Teleport* "I'm over here, fool."

The role they usurp is the rogue's: locks through Wands of Knock, letting them cast it 50 times for a mere 4,500 GP (half if they make it), and have ways (sometimes even Cantrips) of averting traps (Open/Close, Summon Monster I); scouting is handled through divinations (Scrying, Prying Eyes). That leaves the poor rogue relegated to sneak attack damage, which is really, nice, except that the wizard has a chance of taking most anything down in a single round (depending on where its bad save is, Hold (later Dominate), any of the numerous Fort-or-die spells, or that one Reflex-or-stuck spell from Complete Arcane).

For the usurper of the Fighter's role, you have to look at the Cleric, especially with Divine Metacheese. Divine Favor (can be persistant at level 13), Divine Power (needs Divine Metacheese to persist, level 15 to quicken w/o cheese or a rod), and Righteous Might, and suddenly the cleric is better at melee damage than the fighter, and handles area control better, too, by having a 10' natural reach. The Druid can do this too (buff. Share with animal companion, and keep it that way. Wild Shape. Win. With Natural Cheese, you can reverse the order of the first few steps).

I'd agree that the Clr/Drd/Wiz/Wiz party beats a standard party.

That said, the Book of Nine Swords adds some stuff to let the melee-types not be rendered as useless by monster abilities. Of course, it's very little help to the Fighter, but it adds new classes that are what the Fighter should be.

To wizards usurping the rogues place in the party, what about magical traps that can't be bypassed? Wizards only have a limited number of dispel magic they can prepare, and even then, they fail half of the time. Also, the wizard sucks at social encounters, such as convincing someone that the party isn't the enemy they should be fighting...

Kantolin
2007-01-06, 10:20 PM
Also, the wizard sucks at social encounters, such as convincing someone that the party isn't the enemy they should be fighting...

I'd say charm spells, but hey... you do have a cleric. Diplomacy and Sense motive are in class for them. Although personally, I'd go CoDzilla, CoDzilla, CoDzilla, Wizard over CoDzilla, CoDzilla, Wizard, Wizard, but that's a matter of taste.

NullAshton
2007-01-06, 10:34 PM
I'd say charm spells, but hey... you do have a cleric. Diplomacy and Sense motive are in class for them. Although personally, I'd go CoDzilla, CoDzilla, CoDzilla, Wizard over CoDzilla, CoDzilla, Wizard, Wizard, but that's a matter of taste.

Charm spells after all, DO fail. And they know that they succeeded on saving. "YOU USED MAGIC ON ME, NOW DIE!" Clerics still suck at bluff, and doesn't help with, say, people from other faiths than their own?

A party full of CoDzillas and wizards would quickly fall to a standard adventuring party. Why? Both clerics and wizards have antimagic fields, and all they have to do is get within range... Suddenly the caster party is just full of fighters without bonus feats, and a commoner... while the adventuring party still has two people that are hampered less than the casters, and one still somewhat effective party member.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-06, 10:39 PM
I think the problem we're having with the majority of these and similar changes is that, well... sure, a wizard can be stopped.

It's just that anything that stops a wizard is quite a bit more likely to also snuff out a fighter.

Pretty much the only two things that tend to stop wizards unequivocably more than a fighter are silence, and antimagic fields. Silence can be circumvented, while antimagic fields... yeah, those work if the wizard is for some reason unable to walk out of them and teleport away.

At the same time... man you can do a lot with a spell slot of that level. All of which can be stopped by a wizard without a ton of effort really... but most of which can't really be stopped by a fighter without some serious work.

And if you make a dungeon that only a wizard can get through, and the wizard needs to spend pretty much all of his spells to do so... what is the rest of the party doing during this time? Nothing at all? Attempting to be less useful?

And if your entire campaing takes place in a giant permanent antimagic field, is that really fun for... pretty much anybody? I'm willing to bet that a Balor can rip a fighter in half if neither has any magic items due to merit of half a fighter's 'balance' being that he has magic items with which to... well, attempt something.

(Not to mention, half your fixes don't really help. I mean, limited visibility? If anything, that absolutely murders the fighter who relies rather exclusively on hitting things, and now is having trouble with that. And fighting underwater is rather hard on a fighter , especially when you note that the spellcaster's the one with the spell water breathing and that the fighter may or may not have a weapon to use in that situation)

Edit: As an additional comparison, if the world does prepare to stop spellcasters, the sheer ease in doing so compared to stopping a fighter is problematic. I mean, if the enemy has a single (say) solid fog spell/scroll and claps most fighters with it, that pretty much shuts them down right there, so an enemy can actually afford to prepare 90% of their spells to defeat the wizard, and then have a couple backup ones to rather negate any silly fighters that cause problems. (Or alternately, a scroll of dominate if the fighter has not downed his potion of Protection from evil yet... now whatever creative defenses the fighter's got are on your side, and it may force the wizard to spend a valuable spell getting his buddy out of trouble).

Limited visibility, not no visibility. Penalties to ranged attacks, not melee. It's easy to hit someone right infront of you. This forces wizards into closer positions to ensure hitting their opponents, which makes meat shields all the more valuable.

And I meant making a dungeon where the wizard has to spend spells to keep himself alive. The fighter's high fort save lets him escape most things uninjured, and the rogue has got evasion. A fireball trap goes off, and hits the party. Guess who gets hurt the most? Unless, of course, a) the rogue found and disarmed the trap b) the wizard spent money or spell slots protecting himself from fireballs which then means that the rogue is serving a purpose, and the wizard will have less offense to mete out later, leaving the fighter a time to shine. A wizard can do everything, yes, but he often has to choose what he wants to do for the day.

The rogue will also have to be disabling traps the wizard doesn't even know are there (unless the wizard suck a lot in search, but if you have a rogue in the party, why bother?). In a place with limited space, it will be the tanks' responsibility to keep monsters off the wizard. In a wide open arena, a handful of well organized hobgoblins with class levels and flying mounts can really hammer a wizard if he is not prepared for such a situation and doesn't have fighter support.

If he is prepared for a pitched battle, he's not loaded up on control spells v. a big baddie, or way to get around hazards. If he dips into his scrolls, which cost quite a bit, that means he has less to spend on items that boost the saves of his DCs.

Undead with their high will saves and mindlessness can also put a hamper on things. Especially if they're incorporeal. Level drain sure can hurt a wizard.

The idea is to construct adventures that let everyone do stuff. Let everyone shine. This makes sense, in game. An adventuring crew will need a rogue to get them around traps, a cleric to heal and buff, a melee-type to fight, and a wizard to do wizardy stuff. Sure, a wizard can do a rogue's job, or a fighter's, or a cleric's. But he can only do one. He can't play all the roles at once. Which means if the cleric, rogue and figther are pulling their weight, then the wizard should be doing wizardy stuff. At high levels, when magic is common, the enemy will be perfectly familiar with what a wizard can do, and so a dungeon will be such that a single wizard couldn't get through it (or a single fighter, or a single rogue, or a single cleric).

grinner666
2007-01-07, 04:41 AM
AHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAHAAH :D:D:D:D:D

I really should have seen that one coming.

Happy somebody got the joke. :smallbiggrin:


Bull's strengh won't stack with belt of giant strenght, haste won't stack with weapon of speed. No matter how he buffs fighter, it won't help as much as he actually doing something himself at high levels.

So everybody in your group's parties has a Belt of Giant Strength and a Weapon of Speed? I've been playing for twenty-six years and happened across one of each. Unless they were created by the party's spellcasters (which means they're doing their job, supporting the fighters), it ain't gonna happen in any but the worst Monty Haul campaigns.


Summon monster 1, summon a monkey, he opens chest, he gets killed, he was summoned so he just returns to his plane without having actually died so it is not even evil.

Again, five times a day. Maybe six for a first-level spell. So ... maybe eleven times a day. IF your wizard gives up all his Magic Missile spells ... and his second-level damage spells (most of which remain useful at higher levels because they don't allow saves) and other spells that might be useful (Grease and Glitterdust leap immediately to mind). What happens, then, when he comes across something that can only be harmed by force effects? Let the cleric handle it? Die?

And you're assuming he's going to find the frickin' things in the first place (he isn't). Or is he going to summon some puny, low-strength monster to open every door, scout every corridor? Way to use those one-ROUND-per-level spells.


Maximized+empowered Shivering touch + ray of exhaustion disables anything with less than 28 dex if they succeed on their saves. If they fail, anything with less than 30 dex.

I use only the Player's Handbook and DMG, so I don't have those spells handy. But you're talking about two spells of at least sixth level. That'll happen ... let's see ... carry the two ...

... About once an adventure. And it sounds to me like at least one of those spells has a range of touch. Which means casting it would most likely involve an attack of opportunity. Bad idea.

Unless you're talking about the party wizard deciding to take on the party fighter. Dumb idea, as it'll tend to honk off the rest of the party. Actually IRL it would make any group fall apart. Frankly as a DM I'd immediately end a campaign that had degenerated that far, and find a different group to play with.


So things were somehow diffrently in earlier editions, how does it affect this edition?

Actually things were somehow DIFFERENT, not "diffrently", whatever the hell that means. IF I understand your snide remark, it DOESN'T affect this edition. It just shows that things have improved, dramatically, for fighters.


But naturally, you are too sick of this argument to continue...

To quote yourself, "just shut the **** about it", especially if you don't know what you are talking about. :P

*yawns* "Just shut the **** about it? How about "just shut the **** UP about it"?

But I believe I've shown that I DO know what I'm talking about, or at least that YOU are talking out of your backside. Arguments like this just demonstrate to me that the player's DM just doesn't know how to make use of the fighter's and rogue's versatility.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 05:09 AM
Happy somebody got the joke. :smallbiggrin:
So everybody in your group's parties has a Belt of Giant Strength and a Weapon of Speed? I've been playing for twenty-six years and happened across one of each. Unless they were created by the party's spellcasters (which means they're doing their job, supporting the fighters), it ain't gonna happen in any but the worst Monty Haul campaigns.

You... um. Are aware, that in standard D&D, played with the wealth-by-level guidelines (i.e., how 3.5E is deisgned and balanced), you can just... buy these things? They're standard DMG loot. Gloves of Ogre Strength +2 cost 4000 gp, a Belt of Giant Strength +4 costs 16,000 gp, and a Belt of Giant Strength +6 costs 36,000 gp. A +1 Speed weapon costs 32,000 gp plus masterwork costs. Yes, you should expect fighters to have these things by the time they're level 11 or so. At level 3, sure, casting Bull's Strength is a great way to go. At level 5, Haste is awesome. Eventually, not so much.

I don't know what kind of games you play, but they seem to be nothing close to by-the-book. And there's nothing wrong with that--it just makes your experience totally irrelevant when it comes to discussing D&D played the typical way.

The magic items in the DMG are there for a reason. Characters buy magic items, with their gold


Again, five times a day. Maybe six for a first-level spell. So ... maybe eleven times a day. IF your wizard gives up all his Magic Missile spells ... and his second-level damage spells (most of which remain useful at higher levels because they don't allow saves) and other spells that might be useful (Grease and Glitterdust leap immediately to mind). What happens, then, when he comes across something that can only be harmed by force effects? Let the cleric handle it? Die? There are tons of ways to disable or avoid traps. A good party can manage it without a rogue.


And you're assuming he's going to find the frickin' things in the first place (he isn't). Or is he going to summon some puny, low-strength monster to open every door, scout every corridor? Way to use those one-ROUND-per-level spells.Ideally, the "trapmonkey" wizard will be a Beguiler or an Arcane Trickster. But a wand of Summon Monster I is 750 gp. That's very affordable once you've got a few levels under your belt.



I use only the Player's Handbook and DMG, so I don't have those spells handy. But you're talking about two spells of at least sixth level. That'll happen ... let's see ... carry the two ...

... About once an adventure. And it sounds to me like at least one of those spells has a range of touch. Which means casting it would most likely involve an attack of opportunity. Bad idea.Um. Once an adventure?
Try every day once you can cast sixth level spells. Games do reach level 11, you know. Not everyone plays "start at level 1, torturously progress to level 10 over the course of five years" D&D.
Attack of opportunity? OH NO! Casting defensively is SO DIFFICULT!


But I believe I've shown that I DO know what I'm talking about, or at least that YOU are talking out of your backside. Arguments like this just demonstrate to me that the player's DM just doesn't know how to make use of the fighter's and rogue's versatility.No, you've shown an ignorance of how D&D works.

Pegasos989
2007-01-07, 06:38 AM
Happy somebody got the joke. :smallbiggrin:



So everybody in your group's parties has a Belt of Giant Strength and a Weapon of Speed? I've been playing for twenty-six years and happened across one of each. Unless they were created by the party's spellcasters (which means they're doing their job, supporting the fighters), it ain't gonna happen in any but the worst Monty Haul campaigns.

Not everybody. Wizard won't have one. However, 20th level fighter has items worth over 700k. Belt of giant strenght costs 16k. Seems reasonable that the fighters have those.



Again, five times a day. Maybe six for a first-level spell. So ... maybe eleven times a day. IF your wizard gives up all his Magic Missile spells ... and his second-level damage spells (most of which remain useful at higher levels because they don't allow saves) and other spells that might be useful (Grease and Glitterdust leap immediately to mind). What happens, then, when he comes across something that can only be harmed by force effects? Let the cleric handle it? Die?

He crafts wand. Or he has taken extradimensional spell -feat and harms enemy with any spell.


And you're assuming he's going to find the frickin' things in the first place (he isn't). Or is he going to summon some puny, low-strength monster to open every door, scout every corridor? Way to use those one-ROUND-per-level spells.

No but reasonable DM won't make commonly used doors trapped, etc... Using knock + summon monster 1 on the doors/chests/etc. of the BBEG's room is something you can do. At, say 15th level, it lasts for 1.5 minutes.


I use only the Player's Handbook and DMG, so I don't have those spells handy. But you're talking about two spells of at least sixth level. That'll happen ... let's see ... carry the two ...

... About once an adventure. And it sounds to me like at least one of those spells has a range of touch. Which means casting it would most likely involve an attack of opportunity. Bad idea.

They can be used on range if you have a level of archmage. And at that 13th level, you can use them a lot more than once per adventure.


Unless you're talking about the party wizard deciding to take on the party fighter. Dumb idea, as it'll tend to honk off the rest of the party. Actually IRL it would make any group fall apart. Frankly as a DM I'd immediately end a campaign that had degenerated that far, and find a different group to play with.

The problem is that party fighter does not contribute. It is not wizard's fault but fighter's mechanics. It should be dealt with by fixing fighter, not by kicking out the wizard.




Actually things were somehow DIFFERENT, not "diffrently", whatever the hell that means. IF I understand your snide remark, it DOESN'T affect this edition. It just shows that things have improved, dramatically, for fighters.

*yawns* "Just shut the **** about it? How about "just shut the **** UP about it"?

But I believe I've shown that I DO know what I'm talking about, or at least that YOU are talking out of your backside. Arguments like this just demonstrate to me that the player's DM just doesn't know how to make use of the fighter's and rogue's versatility.


Not really.

Tor the Fallen
2007-01-07, 07:28 AM
Ideally, the "trapmonkey" wizard will be a Beguiler or an Arcane Trickster. But a wand of Summon Monster I is 750 gp. That's very affordable once you've got a few levels under your belt.

Neither a Beguiler nor an Arcane Trickster are quite wizards. Beguiler has far fewer spells, and the Arcane Trickster will be 3 levels behind in spellcasting. The Arcane Trickster will also be using more spells that have attack roles to take advantage of that sneak attack, and have a smaller repetoire of high level control spells.


No but reasonable DM won't make commonly used doors trapped, etc... Using knock + summon monster 1 on the doors/chests/etc. of the BBEG's room is something you can do. At, say 15th level, it lasts for 1.5 minutes.

At, say, 15th level, BBEGs are going to be real cautious of knock. A second level spell that opens two locks on any door? How can we avoid this travesty....

Matthew
2007-01-07, 09:36 AM
You... um. Are aware, that in standard D&D, played with the wealth-by-level guidelines (i.e., how 3.5E is deisgned and balanced), you can just... buy these things? They're standard DMG loot. Gloves of Ogre Strength +2 cost 4000 gp, a Belt of Giant Strength +4 costs 16,000 gp, and a Belt of Giant Strength +6 costs 36,000 gp. A +1 Speed weapon costs 32,000 gp plus masterwork costs. Yes, you should expect fighters to have these things by the time they're level 11 or so. At level 3, sure, casting Bull's Strength is a great way to go. At level 5, Haste is awesome. Eventually, not so much.

Quite amusing in the context of this discussion . All pretty much true for Default and Core D&D 3.x, though.



I don't know what kind of games you play, but they seem to be nothing close to by-the-book. And there's nothing wrong with that--[I]it just makes your experience totally irrelevant when it comes to discussing D&D played the typical way.


This is a little bit strong, I would have thought.

Valairn
2007-01-07, 01:10 PM
Neither a Beguiler nor an Arcane Trickster are quite wizards. Beguiler has far fewer spells, and the Arcane Trickster will be 3 levels behind in spellcasting. The Arcane Trickster will also be using more spells that have attack roles to take advantage of that sneak attack, and have a smaller repetoire of high level control spells.



At, say, 15th level, BBEGs are going to be real cautious of knock. A second level spell that opens two locks on any door? How can we avoid this travesty....

Actually there are multiple different methods of leveling an Arcane Trickster that don't require 3 caster levels lost. Rogue 1/ Wizard ?/Unseen Seer ?/ Arcane Trickster works for that.

Or if you want to lose two you can do Rogue 1/Spellthief 1/ Wizard 5/ AT .....

That's two caster levels lost. Though I prefer the former method.

Caster levels are sacred.

grinner666
2007-01-07, 01:15 PM
You... um. Are aware, that in standard D&D, played with the wealth-by-level guidelines (i.e., how 3.5E is deisgned and balanced), you can just... buy these things? They're standard DMG loot. Gloves of Ogre Strength +2 cost 4000 gp, a Belt of Giant Strength +4 costs 16,000 gp, and a Belt of Giant Strength +6 costs 36,000 gp. A +1 Speed weapon costs 32,000 gp plus masterwork costs. Yes, you should expect fighters to have these things by the time they're level 11 or so. At level 3, sure, casting Bull's Strength is a great way to go. At level 5, Haste is awesome. Eventually, not so much.

I don't know what kind of games you play, but they seem to be nothing close to by-the-book. And there's nothing wrong with that--it just makes your experience totally irrelevant when it comes to discussing D&D played the typical way.

The magic items in the DMG are there for a reason. Characters buy magic items, with their gold

No. They don't. Not in any balanced campaign where the DM has any control over his players. I've looked and looked, but I've yet to find any rule in any rulebook that says, "You must have a Magic-Items-backwards-R-Us store in your campaign where players can buy any ridiculous thing they want." If those are the kinds of campaigns you play in, I can understand your prejudice concerning spellcasters. If you run that kind of game, I feel very, very sorry for you. And your players. Good DMs use the wealth-by-level charts, sure. By providing magic items and treasure appropriate to the characters' levels. Not by placing a Toys-backwards-R-Us-for-Adventurers in the game. So again: either the spellcaster has burned XPs creating multitudes of magic items he'll never get back, or he does the smart thing and uses up a couple of spell slots to buff the party.


There are tons of ways to disable or avoid traps. A good party can manage it without a rogue.

Ideally, the "trapmonkey" wizard will be a Beguiler or an Arcane Trickster. But a wand of Summon Monster I is 750 gp. That's very affordable once you've got a few levels under your belt.Uh-HUH. First, I don't see "celestial monkey" or "celestial ANYTHING with hands" before the small elemental at Summon Monster 3. Suddenly it becomes much more difficult (about four levels' worth) to open those tasty treasure chests. A druid can do it if you have one handy, that's the only class that can with Summon 1. Again, let's discuss the rules as written and not whatever weird spin you've decided to put on them. And you need line of effect to control or maintain a spell. Knock will open doors, but it won't deactivate traps. I'm betting that by the third time a fireball gets dropped on the druid who's using his summoned monkeys as trap monkeys, or the wizard with the wand of Knock, they'll be wishing somebody had decided to PLAY a trap monkey. By the fifth time, they'll be looking for a rogue follower.


Um. Once an adventure?
Try every day once you can cast sixth level spells. Games do reach level 11, you know. Not everyone plays "start at level 1, torturously progress to level 10 over the course of five years" D&D.Okay, here we're just talking differences in focus. I'm focussed on what the party's going to encounter. You're focussed on what the party wizard could do to the party fighter. The one time there was a serious intra-party fight, I ended the campaign and found another group. So your argument doesn't apply.


Attack of opportunity? OH NO! Casting defensively is SO DIFFICULT!Sure. Cast defensively. Then when somebody with an IQ greater than that of oh, say ... an oak tree ... decides to prepare an action against your casting a spell you get to make two concentration checks. Maybe three, if you blow the "cast defensively" roll and the fighter also gets an AoO. Sixth-level spells aren't that easy to make Concentration checks on that I'd want to have to make two or three in a row. Sure you can do it at 20th level, but the damage you take from the prepared action might screw the spell up for you anyway. A properly equipped fighter at 20th level is going to average 25 or 30 points of damage per strike. That's a 35 or 40 DC the wizard's going to have to make, Sparky. More if the fighter gets a critical. Unless there's another fighter blocking the opposition for him.


No, you've shown an ignorance of how D&D works.*yawns* And you have once again demonstrated your irrational prejudice.

Valairn
2007-01-07, 01:31 PM
grinner you have officially drifted into the realm of telling people how they should be having fun, your arguments no longer mean anything. First of all, DnD is about the group you are with, the group decides a lot of things. Second of all, wizards have a ton of options, more options than a fighter will ever have, fighters are still fun to play, otherwise people wouldn't talk about them so much....

I personally like high powered campaigns, where combat can end quickly and brutally for either side, the way magic works is what makes this possible, without all those crazy spells wizards could cast, where would the suspense be? I hit the goblin with my power attack, its takes 20 damage.... blah.... I mean there are ways to make that exciting too, but often times, its fun to overcome challenges that are unexpected, and a lot of this falls straight on the DM's shoulders. The game can be fun no matter how you play it, its not about what you consider to be fun, and you shouldn't talk as if there is only one way to, cause that makes you ten large amounts of obtuse.

grinner666
2007-01-07, 01:54 PM
grinner you have officially drifted into the realm of telling people how they should be having fun, your arguments no longer mean anything. First of all, DnD is about the group you are with, the group decides a lot of things. Second of all, wizards have a ton of options, more options than a fighter will ever have, fighters are still fun to play, otherwise people wouldn't talk about them so much....

I personally like high powered campaigns, where combat can end quickly and brutally for either side, the way magic works is what makes this possible, without all those crazy spells wizards could cast, where would the suspense be? I hit the goblin with my power attack, its takes 20 damage.... blah.... I mean there are ways to make that exciting too, but often times, its fun to overcome challenges that are unexpected, and a lot of this falls straight on the DM's shoulders. The game can be fun no matter how you play it, its not about what you consider to be fun, and you shouldn't talk as if there is only one way to, cause that makes you ten large amounts of obtuse.

???????

Oh, right. I mentioned game balance. Sorry. I've honked off the Munchkin Brigade. Mea culpa. I've mentioned that the DM should have some control over the availability of magical toys and should be able (without much difficulty) to create situations wherein rogues and fighters are necessary to the well-being of the party.

My bad. I've suggested that the game can be fun for everyone, not just the spellcasters. I won't do so again.

Until the next time this ridiculous argument arises, that is. :smallyuk:

Valairn
2007-01-07, 01:57 PM
The DM should have control over what's available, but you make it sound as if the DM should take control by default. Some of us LIKE powergaming, some of us even like MUNCHKINING from time to time, OH NOES, someone likes being cheesy!!!! OH GOD, he's ruining my fun even though we don't even play together!

I'm certainly not like this all the time, I've played my share of low-magic campaigns, and would love to again, but high level cheese against monsters using the same cheese can be scary and fun, and shouldn't be overlooked.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 02:21 PM
No. They don't. Not in any balanced campaign where the DM has any control over his players. I've looked and looked, but I've yet to find any rule in any rulebook that says, "You must have a Magic-Items-backwards-R-Us store in your campaign where players can buy any ridiculous thing they want." If those are the kinds of campaigns you play in, I can understand your prejudice concerning spellcasters. If you run that kind of game, I feel very, very sorry for you. And your players. Good DMs use the wealth-by-level charts, sure. By providing magic items and treasure appropriate to the characters' levels. Not by placing a Toys-backwards-R-Us-for-Adventurers in the game. So again: either the spellcaster has burned XPs creating multitudes of magic items he'll never get back, or he does the smart thing and uses up a couple of spell slots to buff the party.
The DMG has rules for town/city wealth, and what can be found there: namely, anything under a certain amount of GP.
You feel very sorry for me because... because characters can go to a city and actually buy some equipment that someone made? Um. Yeah. You do that.
Nobody said anything about "any ridiculous thing they want", but why WOULDN'T they be able to sell their loot and buy some of the totally standard magic items in the DMG, which are intended to be bough? I don't understand how you play. What DOES the party get? Does the party never get a chance to buy any magic item that they might actually want? If so, CR ratings will be out of whack for you... and spellcasters will be even better off compared to fighters. They'll be even more vital and even more relatively effective, since fighters are far more gear-reliant.
D&D characters are assumed to get stat-boosting items, AC-boosting items, et cetera as they level up. This is standard. They shouldn't assume they'll get, I dunno, an Instant Fortress, but they can take their loot, sell it, and buy the stuff they want at any city of a size where stuff of that value is freely availible unless you for some reason make them unable to... which is worse for fighters than for casters, making them even more useless and caster-reliant on his own, and able to face weaker enemies. Fighters will become even less powerful relative to casters.


Uh-HUH. First, I don't see "celestial monkey" or "celestial ANYTHING with hands" before the small elemental at Summon Monster 3. Suddenly it becomes much more difficult (about four levels' worth) to open those tasty treasure chests. A druid can do it if you have one handy, that's the only class that can with Summon 1. Again, let's discuss the rules as written and not whatever weird spin you've decided to put on them. And you need line of effect to control or maintain a spell. Knock will open doors, but it won't deactivate traps. I'm betting that by the third time a fireball gets dropped on the druid who's using his summoned monkeys as trap monkeys, or the wizard with the wand of Knock, they'll be wishing somebody had decided to PLAY a trap monkey. By the fifth time, they'll be looking for a rogue follower.Celestial monkey is on the list. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterI.htm) Knock will open the door, traps can be Shattered or dispelled or triggered or otherwise disabled; the druid can get a form with the right kind of Burrow and make a tunnel around; and so on. Ideally, the trapmonkey wizard would be an Arcane Trickster, who can still get 9th level spells by 20th, and can keep Search and Disable Device high.


Okay, here we're just talking differences in focus. I'm focussed on what the party's going to encounter. You're focussed on what the party wizard could do to the party fighter. The one time there was a serious intra-party fight, I ended the campaign and found another group. So your argument doesn't apply....because... all the CR 11 monsters you face are immune to Dex damage? This is a non-viable anti-monster tactic... why?


Sure. Cast defensively. Then when somebody with an IQ greater than that of oh, say ... an oak tree ... decides to prepare an action against your casting a spell you get to make two concentration checks. Maybe three, if you blow the "cast defensively" roll and the fighter also gets an AoO. Sixth-level spells aren't that easy to make Concentration checks on that I'd want to have to make two or three in a row. Sure you can do it at 20th level, but the damage you take from the prepared action might screw the spell up for you anyway. A properly equipped fighter at 20th level is going to average 25 or 30 points of damage per strike. That's a 35 or 40 DC the wizard's going to have to make, Sparky. More if the fighter gets a critical. Unless there's another fighter blocking the opposition for him.BRILLIANT. You're a GENIUS. The enemy will STOP FIGHTING and ready an action against you.
Oh, wait. When you see that they haven't attacked anyone, you'll... move back (five-foot step, anyone?) and use a different spell. If they attack someone else that round, step back in and cast; if they keep readying, they've made themselves useless and the cleric and druid can beat on them for free while you cast spells from out of readied action range.
Or cast the touch spell out of range and deliver it next round.


*yawns* And you have once again demonstrated your irrational prejudice.No, once again you've demonstrated that you pretty much don't know what you're talking about, and try to make up for it with vitriol.


Valarin, I think you missed the point. There's nothing cheesy about a fighter buying a Belt of Giant Strength.

Roland St. Jude
2007-01-07, 02:27 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: This thread is treading perilously close to insulting and belittling others. Insulting others based on playing preferences is specifically forbidden. Please continue the discussion, if you like, without the rancor. Thank you.

Valairn
2007-01-07, 02:33 PM
If you run that kind of game, I feel very, very sorry for you.

So again: either the spellcaster has burned XPs creating multitudes of magic items he'll never get back, or he does the smart thing and uses up a couple of spell slots to buff the party.


This selection of quotes is my entire reference for my point.

First of all, his prejudice for a certain type of game preference above another is all well and good, that's his choice, but he didn't say that, he said he feels sorry for anyone who plays different than him. When arguin about game mechanics the discussion should be left to mechanics, not particular DM rulings or player preferences on how the game "should" be played.

grinner666
2007-01-07, 02:48 PM
The DM should have control over what's available, but you make it sound as if the DM should take control by default. Some of us LIKE powergaming, some of us even like MUNCHKINING from time to time, OH NOES, someone likes being cheesy!!!! OH GOD, he's ruining my fun even though we don't even play together!

I'm certainly not like this all the time, I've played my share of low-magic campaigns, and would love to again, but high level cheese against monsters using the same cheese can be scary and fun, and shouldn't be overlooked.

Let's see, here ... what went on?

Bears insisted that by level 20 EVERY character in the party(except the Wizard ... thanks, Pegasos) will have a Weapon of Speed and Belt of Giant Strength. I suggested campaigns in which this does not happen. For which you attacked me. Am I missing something here? Or is that what went down?

Because it's far more important for every player to be able to own every magic item he wants than for every player to have fun, right?

Right?!!??

And the DM does take control by default, whether you like it or not. It's his (her) game. Lack of control equals lack of spine. I've had it happen, but not in the last twenty years. It inevitably leads to campaigns where nothing is a challenge and the DM ends up chucking it all in.

Which sucks for everybody. Wizard, cleric, druid, fighter, rogue ... they ALL suck if they have no campaign to play in.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 02:56 PM
Let's see, here ... what went on?

Bears insisted that by level 20 EVERY character in the party(except the Wizard ... thanks, Pegasos) will have a Weapon of Speed and Belt of Giant Strength. I suggested campaigns in which this does not happen. For which you attacked me. Am I missing something here? Or is that what went down?
By level 20, if anyone in your world sells them (and why woudln't they have these profitable, popular items for sale...?), the party has the gold and the travel resources (read: Teleport) to get them. Are you seriously suggesting a level 20 fighter without a stat-boosting item for his primary stat, despite the fact that the group has about 760,000 gp in gold and (sellable) items? And are you seriously suggesting that that will make the game MORE fun, especially for the fighter?

And the DM does take control by default, whether you like it or not. It's his (her) game. No, it's the group's game. The DM can't run it without players just like players can't play without a DM.


Lack of control equals lack of spine. I've had it happen, but not in the last twenty years. It inevitably leads to campaigns where nothing is a challenge and the DM ends up chucking it all in.
No, a good GM communicates with his players. "Lack of spine"? GMing isn't some kind of iron-fisted dictatorship.

Behold_the_Void
2007-01-07, 02:57 PM
Let's see, here ... what went on?

Bears insisted that by level 20 EVERY character in the party(except the Wizard ... thanks, Pegasos) will have a Weapon of Speed and Belt of Giant Strength. I suggested campaigns in which this does not happen. For which you attacked me. Am I missing something here? Or is that what went down?

Because it's far more important for every player to be able to own every magic item he wants than for every player to have fun, right?

Right?!!??

And the DM does take control by default, whether you like it or not. It's his (her) game. Lack of control equals lack of spine. I've had it happen, but not in the last twenty years. It inevitably leads to campaigns where nothing is a challenge and the DM ends up chucking it all in.

Which sucks for everybody. Wizard, cleric, druid, fighter, rogue ... they ALL suck if they have no campaign to play in.

By RAW, every city has a listed GP limit. It's in the DMG and written into the rules that any player may purchase any item of a price within the GP limit of the city by size. That does mean that yes, if they so desired every character could and probably will have items such as those, which are not extraordinarily expensive and thus well within the purchasing power and the character's ability to procure.

And as far as DM lacking control, I honestly find that way of thought to be inherently flawed. Lack of control does not necessarily (although it can) equal a lack of spine.

I know that I like to have imput from other players about how the game should be played, and I like to make sure my characters are going on quests and adventures they want to go, not ones that I tell them they want to go on. A DM is the storyteller, but the DM needn't be a power-hungry control freak.

And yet, I still can, given enough time, think of any number of available counters to most party situations. Admittedly I'm not as good as some, but I can still make it a challenging and engaging experience for all of the players involved, be they fighter or wizard or cleric or rogue or any other of the myriad classes D&D allows for.

And I do it all without resorting to needlessly "taking control", as you so put it.

It's not the DM's game. It's everybody's game. And if I played with a DM who, like you suggested, takes control, I would quit. I'm not going to spend my leisure time with a DM who is wholly unwilling to let me play as I want (I am, however, more than happy to make concessions with an accomodating DM. We can't all have it our way and I'll be the first to admit to that). And sometimes, my character wants some shiny new magical gear. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It IS a high fantasy setting, after all.

Pegasos989
2007-01-07, 02:57 PM
Well, yes. Every melee oriented character.

Using guidelines, character has about 760'000gp worth of equipment at level 20, if I remember correctly. Even though they might not all be self bought, they should be helpful to player. I think that taking 16'000gp away from that to raise your grapple modifier, attack rolls and damage rolls (and a lot of misc rolls like some skills and bull rush) by +2 or more seems very reasonable choice.

In fact, it seems so reasonable that NPC warrior types would have bought them from NPC wizard types. As such, they would already exist. So, when you kill an NPC fighter over level 8, the chances are starting to be on the side of him having strenght boosting item. Not every NPC fighter, but enough that party has two or more of them by high levels.

So it doesn't need "magic items 'r us", just some consistency in the game world.

(BTW, BwL. Make sure you won't get yourself banned like TLN. I would hate to see you coming back under some similar alias, like Broilers want Laxatives..)

Kantolin
2007-01-07, 03:01 PM
Bears insisted that by level 20 EVERY character in the party(except the Wizard ... thanks, Pegasos) will have a Weapon of Speed and Belt of Giant Strength. I suggested campaigns in which this does not happen.


Because it's far more important for every player to be able to own every magic item he wants than for every player to have fun, right?

But... a belt of giant's strength? A basic stat improvement?

I suppose there are low-magic games where a strength-based fighter can't get an item that boosts strength. But games with lousy gear really, really hurt a fighter, and (while they mildly bother a wizard) really won't stop the wizard from doing his thing.

A major problem with your statement is your choice of magic items, as it seems absolutely acceptable for a typical fighter to end up with an item that boosts what he's good at, strength. I mean, your average fighter will also have a +1 weapon after not terribly long; these things are assumed so you can keep up with monsters. Your average weapon finesse rogue will want an item of dexterity boosting at around the same time.

Also, not getting magic items that help him really snuffs the fighter, and makes full spellcasters particularly more powerful, which is the basic problem people are having in the first place.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 03:03 PM
Shhh, Kantolin. Balance isn't important as long as the dm TAKES CONTROL!!!!!!!!111111one.

Valairn
2007-01-07, 03:04 PM
Actually according to me its the players game, if I'm not having fun with the DM, I'm not gonna play the game.

All I'm saying is you don't like playing one way, and I even mentioned that that is fine, you seem to think I'm attacking you personally, which I'm not. Though I may have mispoke earlier about your opinion not mattering, I wasn't meaning that as a personal affront, I just kind of got a little overzealous trying to get you to read what you just wrote from an outsiders perspective.

Sorry. It is the DM's game in regard that he should be working to make if fun for everybody, in that you are right, but honestly, its hard to make it fun for fighters at high levels, they suffer from limited functionality problems. And there seems to be this silly idea that they shouldn't have magical abilities in a high magic system.

Furthermore, there are spell and feat combinations which clerics/druids can engage in to outshine the fighter in pretty much every regard while retaining full spellcasting, healing abilities and other neat tricks. Personally if I am playing a fighter type I honestly just convert another class to what I want, its silly to think a class defines your character concept anyway.

Matthew
2007-01-07, 03:08 PM
But... a belt of giant's strength? A basic stat improvement?

I suppose there are low-magic games where a strength-based fighter can't get an item that boosts strength. But games with lousy gear really, really hurt a fighter, and (while they mildly bother a wizard) really won't stop the wizard from doing his thing.


You're assuming that Low Magic games change no other aspect. Usually, along with Magic Items, they don't hand out as many Spells, Gold or Experience Points. Balance is fairly easy to maintain, because such games rarely go past Level 10. Obviously its not for everyone or every occasion.

Valairn
2007-01-07, 03:13 PM
You're assuming that Low Magic games change no other aspect. Usually, along with Magic Items, they don't hand out as many Spells, Gold or Experience Points. Balance is fairly easy to maintain, because such games rarely go past Level 10. Obviously its not for everyone or every occasion.

MUNCHKIN POWERS UNITE FORM OF POLYMORPH!

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 03:14 PM
Shape of... Treant!

Better yet, shape of... Fleshraker dinosuar oh god it's killing my face with its four natural attacks and pouncing and pinning me and poisoning me all in the same round why god why.


Edit:

(BTW, BwL. Make sure you won't get yourself banned like TLN. I would hate to see you coming back under some similar alias, like Broilers want Laxatives..) - uh, I think I'm being fairly civil here; I haven't insulted anyone, and I don't see any reason to ban me.

I_Got_This_Name
2007-01-07, 03:16 PM
Pegasos: It's yours to sig.

Anyway, what I seem to be hearing here is that the wizard isn't overpowered because they need their spell slots to buff the fighter, because the fighter doesn't have any magical equipment. So, put another way, the wizard isn't more powerful than the fighter, because the fighter is underequipped. The wizard, then, is not overpowered, because the fighter is weak.

Except, well, it doesn't work that way. You don't give the fighter the magic equipment he wants (not necessarily all of it, but the fighter should be able to commission or find the important parts, like a Speed weapon and Belt of Giant Strength), and he ends up ineffective even when the enemies don't make him redundant. If the wizard has to spend his action to cast Haste instead of, for instance, Forcecage, that gives the monster an extra round in which to maul the party. The right thing for the Wizard to do is cast Forcecage there, win the battle, and save his Haste for when he's able to prepare for battle.

The fighter is less effective when underequipped (and, yes, a fighter with an Instant Fortress (for example) instead of a Belt of Giant Strength is underequipped, even though he has 19,000 GP more in stuff), and, given the choice spending an action to bring the fighter up to par, and spending that action to end the fight, the wizard can and should choose to end the fight, because it is simply the better option. This is better even for the fighter (less damage taken). However, for the fighter's player, this is utterly unsatisfying; the wizard just defeated the monster singlehandedly, and the fighter might as well have not showed up.

Giving the fighter his magical equipment, on the other hand, helps the fighter's power and brings it up to the point that the fighter is decently effective, when not negated (Pit Fiend) or rendered redundant (any one of a number of Win spells). Not giving the fighter equipment is going to make him less effective when neither negated or redundant, unless the wizard buffs him, in which case it's the wizard's power added to the fighter that's doing the important stuff. It will make the fighter negated more often (the Wizard wants a Dimensional Anchor on the Pit Fiend just as much as the Fighter does; it can teleport next to him and kill him easily, and the fighter can't overcome this limitation with equipment), if it even works to get the wizard to buff the fighter (which it probably won't). It won't make the fighter any less redundant, because when the wizard can make the fighter redundant, that's generally the best solution for everyone (except the fighter's player, who isn't having any fun).

In conclusion, underequipping the fighter, or equipping him with stuff that he doesn't want, and not letting him trade it in as per the DMG rules for GP Limit and so on and so forth, will bring the Fighter's power level down much more than it hurts the Wizard, and it won't even hurt the Wizard when we're talking about situations where the Fighter becomes redundant.

Valairn
2007-01-07, 03:20 PM
Pegasos: It's yours to sig.

Anyway, what I seem to be hearing here is that the wizard isn't overpowered because they need their spell slots to buff the fighter, because the fighter doesn't have any magical equipment. So, put another way, the wizard isn't more powerful than the fighter, because the fighter is underequipped. The wizard, then, is not overpowered, because the fighter is weak.

Except, well, it doesn't work that way. You don't give the fighter the magic equipment he wants (not necessarily all of it, but the fighter should be able to commission or find the important parts, like a Speed weapon and Belt of Giant Strength), and he ends up ineffective even when the enemies don't make him redundant. If the wizard has to spend his action to cast Haste instead of, for instance, Forcecage, that gives the monster an extra round in which to maul the party. The right thing for the Wizard to do is cast Forcecage there, win the battle, and save his Haste for when he's able to prepare for battle.

The fighter is less effective when underequipped (and, yes, a fighter with an Instant Fortress (for example) instead of a Belt of Giant Strength is underequipped, even though he has 19,000 GP more in stuff), and, given the choice spending an action to bring the fighter up to par, and spending that action to end the fight, the wizard can and should choose to end the fight, because it is simply the better option. This is better even for the fighter (less damage taken). However, for the fighter's player, this is utterly unsatisfying; the wizard just defeated the monster singlehandedly, and the fighter might as well have not showed up.

Giving the fighter his magical equipment, on the other hand, helps the fighter's power and brings it up to the point that the fighter is decently effective, when not negated (Pit Fiend) or rendered redundant (any one of a number of Win spells). Not giving the fighter equipment is going to make him less effective when neither negated or redundant, unless the wizard buffs him, in which case it's the wizard's power added to the fighter that's doing the important stuff. It will make the fighter negated more often (the Wizard wants a Dimensional Anchor on the Pit Fiend just as much as the Fighter does; it can teleport next to him and kill him easily, and the fighter can't overcome this limitation with equipment), if it even works to get the wizard to buff the fighter (which it probably won't). It won't make the fighter any less redundant, because when the wizard can make the fighter redundant, that's generally the best solution for everyone (except the fighter's player, who isn't having any fun).

In conclusion, underequipping the fighter, or equipping him with stuff that he doesn't want, and not letting him trade it in as per the DMG rules for GP Limit and so on and so forth, will bring the Fighter's power level down much more than it hurts the Wizard, and it won't even hurt the Wizard when we're talking about situations where the Fighter becomes redundant.

Quoted for truth and justice!

Thanks for taking the thoughts swirling in my head and making them appear for me!

Kantolin
2007-01-07, 03:24 PM
You're assuming that Low Magic games change no other aspect. Usually, along with magic, they don't hand out as many Spells, Gold

If you're in a low magic game, then there is nothing a fighter can do to help after almost immediately, while there's a whole lot a wizard can still do. And hello, the power which is CoDzilla, which gets incrementally more useful than a fighter the more you limit (Divine Favor's a level one spell; when nobody gets magical weapons, it's even more awesome).

Unless, I suppose, you're taking away the two spells/level a wizard automatically gets in the name of balance. Since I believe, even with just those spells per level, a wizard can offer a heck of a lot more to a standard encounter, especially starting from level 5. And remember, sleep has the nasty habit of solving the majority of encounters you run into at extremely low levels (Except possibly undead, but against undead you turn to the Cleric to make the bad monsters go away, not the Fighter).

Limiting it further runs dangerously close to 'now nobody is having fun'.


or Experience Points.

As an aside in here, not handing out as many experience points doesn't necessarily constitute 'balance', it just kind of keeps the game at the same level for awhile, which may or may not balance anything. I mean, if X can solve all battles at level 3, and Y can't do anything, then no matter how long you spend at level 3 this will be the case.


Balance is fairly easy to maintain, because such games rarely go past Level 10. Obviously its not for everyone or every occasion.

Really, while the problem is most apparant at high levels for the poor fighter, problems begin before that. Especially in low-magic locations... now the enemy spellcaster can dominate/charm the fighter and there's no protection potions he can dive for to fix this.

I suppose as a mild digression, if I was in a low-magic campaign that was that low-magic, I'd play a sorceror over a wizard, which wouldn't in particular be hurt by it. 'Course, the idea of playing a fighter who may, by level 10 when the campaign is ending, get a single +1 weapon sounds even less appealing since you won't be able to do anything, especially to monsters of that approximate level who have been scaling as if everyone had gear.

So, a low-magic game doesn't effect people at levels 1 and 2, and then quickly begins to make the fighter less and less useful. Even at level 2, the fighter can contribute but the wizard really is still being awesome.

I suppose you could remove wizards entirely, but that makes the game rather less fun. You could also have the entire game take place in a giant, world-spanning antimagic field, and watch the poor fighter get ripped in thirds by a balor or dragon or something with his nonmagical gear since the wizard opted to just stay home.

And as a note, half these problems extend to Clerics and Druids as well, and a well played sorceror can just as contribute far better than a fighter.

Edit: Gee, and amidst the massive simu-post, I_Got_This_Name did a better job of explaining things. Oh well.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 03:26 PM
Clerics are absolute horrors in low-magic games, what with Greater Magic Weapon and Magic Vestment and Shield of Faith and stat-boosting spells and all.

Pegasos989
2007-01-07, 03:36 PM
Well, if I ran low-magic game, I would replace cleric with favored soul and limit his spells he can take or possibly even replace him with paladin.

I would propably also have a lot less dragons, demon lords, etc. encounters, too.

But as it is so diffrent and everyone runs it so diffrently, we can hardly start comparing class balance in just "low magic campaign" without more specifications.


(And by my earlier comment, I didn't seriously mean that you have been posting stuff even near the borders of bannable, somehow the thought just crossed my mind.)

grinner666
2007-01-07, 03:48 PM
But... a belt of giant's strength? A basic stat improvement?

I suppose there are low-magic games where a strength-based fighter can't get an item that boosts strength. But games with lousy gear really, really hurt a fighter, and (while they mildly bother a wizard) really won't stop the wizard from doing his thing.

A major problem with your statement is your choice of magic items, as it seems absolutely acceptable for a typical fighter to end up with an item that boosts what he's good at, strength. I mean, your average fighter will also have a +1 weapon after not terribly long; these things are assumed so you can keep up with monsters. Your average weapon finesse rogue will want an item of dexterity boosting at around the same time.

Also, not getting magic items that help him really snuffs the fighter, and makes full spellcasters particularly more powerful, which is the basic problem people are having in the first place.

Actually I have no problems with a Belt of Giant Strength. Or a Weapon of Speed. But one for every party member who enters melee? Without the spellcasters spending XPs to create them? That I have a problem with.

As to lack of magic items snuffing the fighter, we just look at it differently. You see it as making the fighter less useful. I see it as giving the wizard a chance (it's a teamwork game, remember?) to allow the fighter 20 with the +5 holy frost burst flaming burst longsword with which he's specialized and gotten Improved Critical another chance to do his 30 or 40 points of damage ... which won't all be absorbed by the monster's DRs and ERs. IF the party spellcasters have properly prepared the fighter.

Matthew
2007-01-07, 03:54 PM
MUNCHKIN POWERS UNITE FORM OF POLYMORPH!

I can't even pretend to understand the sentiment behind this. I'm not saying Low Magic is better, all I'm saying is that when you change this aspect of the default game you generally change a number of others to balance things out.

Bears With Lasers
2007-01-07, 03:54 PM
A "+5 Holy frost burst flamingburst longsword" doesn't sound like a lack of magic items. But bursts suck and +X sucks (Greater Magic Weapon), so the fighter should sell that monster sword (which is, incidentally, +11-effective) and buy himself a +1 Holy sword of Speed, plus a Belt of Giant Strength if he doesn't have one for some reason.

Why would any remotely intelligent wizard give the fighter another chance to do 30 or 40 points of damage, when he could do something far more effective?

Kantolin
2007-01-07, 04:04 PM
...I see it as giving the wizard a chance (it's a teamwork game, remember?) to allow the fighter 20 with the +5 holy frost burst flaming burst longsword...


Um. I believe I got this name just explained how that would about work out.

It'd be less:

Fighter: Oh no! The balor just appeared! I could walk over and do damage, but I'd do on average two more damage than I was doing a moment ago if you'd bull's strength me, Mr. wizard!
Wizard: Wow, that's by and away my best option at the moment, since you do not have a belt of giant's strength! Sure!

And more of:

Fighter: Oh no! The balor just appeared! I could walk over and do damage, but I'd do on average two more damage than I was doing a moment ago if you'd bull's strength me, Mr. wizard!
Wizard: But I need to dimensional anchor the balor or he'll teleport all over the place, and then I could forcecage him in place so... so I can win. Sorry.
Fighter: Aw man. Too bad I can't get my +4 strength myself, and it's too bad I don't have a weapon of speed with which to contribute. You sure you can't haste?
Wizard: Uh, maybe if I get a free moment. I kind of have a lot I'm doing right now to actually help.
Fighter: Mr. Cleric?
Cleric: Sorry, Righteous Might and Divine Power are self-only.

There just aren't a ton of situations where not having an item of speed or a belt of giant's strength (Or whatever basic item which the fighter could use to help him fight better) results in, basically, the wizard being even more useful, and the fighter being even more 'Sitting out and watching'.

Not to mention, not all wizards want to spend their time buffing the fighter when they can themselves be doing stuff. Which, if you ask me, is why fireball remains a popular choice despite not being terribly effective, but hey.

(Or, alternately, you can give your fighter enough magic gear that the fighter can live without the +4 strength bonus from the Belt, in which said fighter can live just fine without the +4 strength bonus from bull's strength too. This actually lets the fighter run forward and pretend he's being effective before the wizard forcecages).

Edit: I'd say that, if the party's very well prepared for a fight, there may be some actual buffing for the fighter in there since it's pre-emptive. But that also significantly increases the odds of the wizard real quick winning on pre-emptive turn 1 before the fighter can run over and pretend to be useful.

Matthew
2007-01-07, 04:09 PM
If you're in a low magic game, then there is nothing a fighter can do to help after almost immediately, while there's a whole lot a wizard can still do. And hello, the power which is CoDzilla, which gets incrementally more useful than a fighter the more you limit (Divine Favor's a level one spell; when nobody gets magical weapons, it's even more awesome).

Fighters are great until about Level 5, from then onwards Casters get a better deal; it's the same in High Magic as Low Magic.



Unless, I suppose, you're taking away the two spells/level a wizard automatically gets in the name of balance. Since I believe, even with just those spells per level, a wizard can offer a heck of a lot more to a standard encounter, especially starting from level 5. And remember, sleep has the nasty habit of solving the majority of encounters you run into at extremely low levels (Except possibly undead, but against undead you turn to the Cleric to make the bad monsters go away, not the Fighter).


Yes, that is sometimes the case.



Limiting it further runs dangerously close to 'now nobody is having fun'.


I would think that is something of a bold statement if you never have actually played D&D as a Low Magic game.



As an aside in here, not handing out as many experience points doesn't necessarily constitute 'balance', it just kind of keeps the game at the same level for awhile, which may or may not balance anything. I mean, if X can solve all battles at level 3, and Y can't do anything, then no matter how long you spend at level 3 this will be the case.


Yes, it means slower progression. A Campaign remains at lower levels for longer, but the plot continues at a normal pace. Remember these games don't generally go into High Levels (Somewhere between 6-10 being where they end).



Really, while the problem is most apparant at high levels for the poor fighter, problems begin before that. Especially in low-magic locations... now the enemy spellcaster can dominate/charm the fighter and there's no protection potions he can dive for to fix this.


There are usually not many enemy Casters in Low Magic Campaigns. It's a bit like Conan.



I suppose as a mild digression, if I was in a low-magic campaign that was that low-magic, I'd play a sorceror over a wizard, which wouldn't in particular be hurt by it. 'Course, the idea of playing a fighter who may, by level 10 when the campaign is ending, get a single +1 weapon sounds even less appealing since you won't be able to do anything, especially to monsters of that approximate level who have been scaling as if everyone had gear.


That's really a very extreme view. By Level 10 I would expect a Fighter to have more than one +1 Item, perhaps one +3, but it depends how low magic the game is. There are usually plenty of Masterwork Items around.



So, a low-magic game doesn't effect people at levels 1 and 2, and then quickly begins to make the fighter less and less useful. Even at level 2, the fighter can contribute but the wizard really is still being awesome.


Well it does. It changes Wealth by Level. If you really think the Wizard is awesome at Level 2, then that is something we just have to disagree about.



I suppose you could remove wizards entirely, but that makes the game rather less fun. You could also have the entire game take place in a giant, world-spanning antimagic field, and watch the poor fighter get ripped in thirds by a balor or dragon or something with his nonmagical gear since the wizard opted to just stay home.


You could. I don't think removing the Wizard means lack of fun. Plenty of default games are run without Wizards.



And as a note, half these problems extend to Clerics and Druids as well, and a well played sorceror can just as contribute far better than a fighter.


Yes, all Casters have the same sort of impact on Low Magic games. Sometimes their Spell lists are restricted, sometimes not.



Edit: Gee, and amidst the massive simu-post, I_Got_This_Name did a better job of explaining things. Oh well.

Thought I would give your hard work meaning.:smallwink:

What I'm saying amidst this mess is not that Low Magic Games are better balanced than High Magic, but that they do not equal just handing out less Magic Items. In order for them to work a number of aspects have to be addressed.



In conclusion, underequipping the fighter, or equipping him with stuff that he doesn't want, and not letting him trade it in as per the DMG rules for GP Limit and so on and so forth, will bring the Fighter's power level down much more than it hurts the Wizard, and it won't even hurt the Wizard when we're talking about situations where the Fighter becomes redundant.

Yes this is true, and though it applies to all Classes, it does not apply equally (harms Wizards less). A Low Magic Game is more than just not handing out enough Shinies, though. I think the 3.0 DMG has some advice for running such a Campaign.

Seriously, what is with all the claims that people would 'walk' if they weren't getting the default number of Shinies? Sounds crazy to me. You rely on the DM to provide reasonable challenges and reasonable rewards; it's up to him, not the DMG. If the game goes bad, that's another issue, but it's no reason to walk, it's time to initiate dialogue.

Kantolin
2007-01-07, 04:28 PM
Fighters are great until about Level 5, from then onwards Casters get a better deal; it's the same in High Magic as Low Magic.

I will agree that fighters are more useful at low levels than they are at high levels. At the same time, a wizard gets a sizeable amount of spells which result in all that's left is cleanup, even at startlingly low levels. Sleep tends to be a win button at low levels.


Yes, it means slower progression. A Campaign remains at lower levels for longer, but the plot continues at a normal pace.

Yes, but that doesn't necessarily constitute balance. Once again, if player X is utterly better than player Y at level 3, then this will not go away over 4 runs (in which you finally level up), nor will it go away over 20 runs (in which you finally level up).


There are usually not many enemy Casters in Low Magic Campaigns. It's a bit like Conan.

It only really takes one, though.


Well it does. It changes Wealth by Level. If you really think the Wizard is awesome at Level 2, then that is something we just have to disagree about.

What I'm saying is that from levels 1 and 2ish, it's rather feasible to not be effected by a lack of magic items, so the low-magic nature of the world doesn't in particular matter. I mean, the fighter won't notice not having a +1 sword at level 2 (He couldn't afford it), and the wizard won't notice not having a ton of spells at level 2 either (He couldn't afford very many). Ergo, it doesn't effect anyone until you get a bit higher than that, upon which the fighter starts getting less and less useful.


I don't think removing the Wizard means lack of fun. Plenty of default games are run without Wizards.

I suppose. You could, however, generalize 'wizard' into 'spellcaster', as all four of the major ones (Wizard, Sorceror, Cleric, Druid) rather outperform the rest, and I can't think of a default/normal campaign that lacked at least one of the four. Most have two of the four (An arcane, and a divine).

A low-magic campaign can work, but you'd have to do some serious snarking of classes before it became within realm of balance, especially if the goal is 'Make the fighter on par with the wizard'.

As a note...




Limiting it further runs dangerously close to 'now nobody is having fun'.
I would think that is something of a bold statement if you never have actually played D&D as a Low Magic game.

My first D&D character was a dwarven fighter. The campaign ended at level 12. When it ended, he had two magic items: His axe, which wasn't what I had my weapon focus in and was essentially +1 to-hit, +3 to damage, and a flute which had a spirit in it that I could talk to but didn't otherwise do anything. I actually lost said flute due to pseudo-plot. Losing that flute rather upset me, as it was interesting.

Life's not much fun when you can't do anything. Well, short of get hit repeatedly through your increasingly-miserable armour class. But even if you do enjoy it, that doesn't constitute anything resembling 'balance'... I thought the goal of using this low-magic sequence was to make the fighter more on-par with the wizard?

Edit: Huh. I think I'm not using quote tags properly...

Edit2: Do note, while on the subject, that fighters are my favorite class in D&D. I just don't keep any delusions about being particularly useful in combat compared to other units, since I almost never am. So eh.

Pegasos989
2007-01-07, 04:30 PM
Um. I believe I got this name just explained how that would about work out.

It'd be less:

Fighter: Oh no! The balor just appeared! I could walk over and do damage, but I'd do on average two more damage than I was doing a moment ago if you'd bull's strength me, Mr. wizard!
Wizard: Wow, that's by and away my best option at the moment, since you do not have a belt of giant's strength! Sure!

In the name of fairness, if he is two-hander and power attacks, it is +7 damage!


...


...WHAT?

Matthew
2007-01-07, 04:44 PM
Oh dear. Sounds like you had a bad experience. A Level 12 Dwarf with two Magic Items sounds like a problem, especially all else being equal.

I'm not saying Low Magic is more balanced than High Magic, just that Fighters remain more useful for longer because the game remains low level, even though the plot continues at the same pace.

Sleep can be a problem, but a Caster would have to be quite lucky to have it be a Win Button. It's the usual Save or Suck scenario.

It's up to the DM to balance encounters, the number of Enemy Casters in a Low Magic game tends to be *very* few.

Yes, usually Low Magic Campaigns take action to limit the powers of all Casters, but it rarely ruins the fun. Usually the limits apply to Higher Levels rather than Lower (I ahve even seen games that make Lower Level Casters *more* powerful).

Low Magic Campaigns tend to hand out less Magic Items, less Gold, less Experience and less Spells. They tend to be restricted to low levels where the powers of the Classes are not so disproportionate. What Magic Items do get given out tend to be Weapons and Armour, with Spells being the 'Magic Item' of the Caster. They aren't more balanced than High Magic Games, but they often appear that way because they are played at lower levels.

Kantolin
2007-01-07, 05:00 PM
Nah, it just taught me what a low-magic campaign was like, and threw the astounding limitations of the fighter class into my face. :smallsmile: Which is good, that way I know exactly what fighters can (not a lot) and can't (A whole lot) do.

Result is that I'm quite aware that fighters are weaker than casters. I'd like this fixed, but eh... I'm willing to accept it for the time being, and play fighters. Although playing the wizard once in awhile is fun too due to options.

Anyway...


Sleep can be a problem, but a Caster would have to be quite lucky to have it be a Win Button. It's the usual Save or Suck scenario.

'Quite lucky'? What are you fighting at low levels? If the enemy has under a 50% chance to succeed, then that doesn't constitue as lucky. The enemy would have to be quite lucky to not lose. Your average pile of orcs, goblins, evil rogues, evil fighters... not a lot tends to be able to hit the will save required with anything resembling a 50/50.

I mean, as a comparison, if the fighter can only hit on a 20, then the fighter would have to be quite lucky for his attack to succeed. But if the fighter can only miss on a roll of less than 9, then I'd say the fighter's got a pretty good go there, as he'd be really unlucky if he failed.

And again, if there is a single enemy spellcaster in a low-magic campaign, you'd have to take steps to ensure that said spellcaster didn't just charm/dominate the fighter, making a bad situation worse.

Remember, at level 1, that evil Cleric of Gruumsh with 18 wisdom has a will save of +6. A Wizard with 18 intelligence has a save DC for sleep of 15. Anything with either less will save than a cleric, or less wisdom than the wizard has intelligence (or both) will fail the save more than 50% of the time. That's rather good for a win button, especially against things who tend to have both poor will saves and poor wisdom. (Say, orcs)

It also, generally, sounds like your low-magic world ideals are more 'low-level world' ideals. The two don't need to be connected to each other; a standard world that ends at level 5 will produce about the same effect, and result in the fighter occasionally contributing along with the wizard (A fact which will only be aided by the fighter getting himself some magic gear). Also, I've seen quite a few low-magic games (And even some that border on no-magic games) that went to epic levels.

(Now, bring in a cleric or druid and we have a whole new ballgame in which the fighter becomes a pinch-hitter at best, or waterboy at worse, but nevermind that).

Matthew
2007-01-07, 05:20 PM
Well, Sleep affects Four Hit Die of Creatures within a 10' Radius Burst. Each one gets a Save. Say Four Kobolds are unfortunate enough to end up in the burst, if the Wizard has a +4 Intelligence Bonus, the Difficulty Class is 15. The Kobolds have a -1 Will Save, so they 16 to Save. The Caster would have to be lucky to put them all to sleep, even luckier to catch them in the burst effect. If he does manage it, all well and good.

But, sure, the point is that Low Magic Campaigns are not equivalent to 'not enough shinies' Campaigns. The DM has to set the encounters with Spell Casting problems in mind, just as he does in a High Magic Campaign.

MeklorIlavator
2007-01-07, 05:50 PM
Well, Sleep affects Four Hit Die of Creatures within a 10' Radius Burst. Each one gets a Save. Say Four Kobolds are unfortunate enough to end up in the burst, if the Wizard has a +4 Intelligence Bonus, the Difficulty Class is 15. The Kobolds have a -1 Will Save, so they 16 to Save. The Caster would have to be lucky to put them all to sleep, even luckier to catch them in the burst effect. If he does manage it, all well and good.

It's not all that lucky, considering that you roll a 16 or higher 1/4 of the time. Also, catching four creatures in side a 20-ft circle might be easy unless the PCs scatter, which is a stupid tactic.

KoDT69
2007-01-08, 12:58 PM
You know in the traditional Fighter vs. Mage battle there will always be somebody stuck to a one dimensional opinion because of some scenario they have stuck in their mind of how it would go down. It's never all favored conditions for one or the other. The one main thing that WILL decide which is better, the people role-playing them. I'm sorry, but regardless of anything anybody can say, the player's skill plays more heavily than the class abilities. I had the misexperince of dealing with a 2E Druid that didn't know Wizard spells were not under his range of power. :smallconfused:

Mikal
2007-02-05, 11:47 AM
No. They don't. Not in any balanced campaign where the DM has any control over his players. I've looked and looked, but I've yet to find any rule in any rulebook that says, "You must have a Magic-Items-backwards-R-Us store in your campaign where players can buy any ridiculous thing they want."

That's because you're strawmanning his argument while being an elitist perhaps? The standard campaign DOES allow people to purchase those items, provided they're in a city large enough to do so.

Rules 1. You 0.


If those are the kinds of campaigns you play in, I can understand your prejudice concerning spellcasters. If you run that kind of game, I feel very, very sorry for you. And your players. Good DMs use the wealth-by-level charts, sure. By providing magic items and treasure appropriate to the characters' levels. Not by placing a Toys-backwards-R-Us-for-Adventurers in the game. So again: either the spellcaster has burned XPs creating multitudes of magic items he'll never get back, or he does the smart thing and uses up a couple of spell slots to buff the party.

Or he buys them from the aforementioned places that the standard campaign allows for, unlike your skewed and totally biased example.


Uh-HUH. First, I don't see "celestial monkey" or "celestial ANYTHING with hands" before the small elemental at Summon Monster 3.

That's because once again you don't know what you're talking about. From the d20 srd




Summon Monster I list animals:
Monster Alignment
Celestial dog LG
Celestial owl LG
Celestial giant fire beetle NG
Celestial porpoise1 NG
Celestial badger CG
Celestial monkey CG
and some others...


Suddenly it becomes much more difficult (about four levels' worth) to open those tasty treasure chests. A druid can do it if you have one handy, that's the only class that can with Summon 1.

Wrong wrong wrong. Druids don't even GET Summon Monster. They get Summon Natures ally.


Again, let's discuss the rules as written and not whatever weird spin you've decided to put on them.

The irony here makes my stomach hurt... but ok, let's.


And you need line of effect to control or maintain a spell.
Not always. For instance... Summon Monster spells don't.


Knock will open doors, but it won't deactivate traps. I'm betting that by the third time a fireball gets dropped on the druid who's using his summoned monkeys as trap monkeys, or the wizard with the wand of Knock, they'll be wishing somebody had decided to PLAY a trap monkey. By the fifth time, they'll be looking for a rogue follower.

Yes, because it's not as if the summoned monster can get far away to do it... oh wait, they can. And it's not as if Knock has a minimum of 110 foot distance, while the standard fireball as a maximum of whole 20 foot radius spread... oh wait. It does.



Okay, here we're just talking differences in focus. I'm focussed on what the party's going to encounter. You're focussed on what the party wizard could do to the party fighter. The one time there was a serious intra-party fight, I ended the campaign and found another group. So your argument doesn't apply.

Yes, his argument does apply. He's talking about what could happen in a regular campaign, not what happens in your la-la world where wizards cant knock doors further then a fireball and celestial monkeys arent on the summon monster I list.


Sure. Cast defensively. Then when somebody with an IQ greater than that of oh, say ... an oak tree ... decides to prepare an action against your casting a spell you get to make two concentration checks.

Wow... first of all, even if someone readies the action to attack the wizard, he a) has to be able to hit said wizard's magically augmented AC/defenses and b) do damage if he hits.
This still doesn't make two concentration checks though. Once again if you read casting defensively means that he only makes a DC 15+spell level check, which, at high levels, is laughably easy to make (even on a natural 1) to TOTALLY avoid AoO's for casting, which means that at MOST he only has to succeed at one concentration check from the held action unless, you know, as a wizard he just uses a contingency to get out of there, or, you know 5 foot steps away from the fighter and avoids the held action since he no longer threatens.


Sixth-level spells aren't that easy to make Concentration checks on that I'd want to have to make two or three in a row.

Casting Defensivly DC for 6th level spell equals DC 21. Minimum class level for 6th level spells is 11. That means in ranks alone the wizard will be able to hit DC 25 by taking 10, if they have a 0 con mod, which a standard wizard will not, and barring items, feats, and skill synergies. In other words, its an automatic success.


Sure you can do it at 20th level, but the damage you take from the prepared action might screw the spell up for you anyway. A properly equipped fighter at 20th level is going to average 25 or 30 points of damage per strike. That's a 35 or 40 DC the wizard's going to have to make, Sparky. More if the fighter gets a critical. Unless there's another fighter blocking the opposition for him.

At 20th level, a wizard can easily have a concentration check in the near 60's. And that's IF the fighter can get close to the wizard, which is laughable to even consider, "Sparky". In fact by that level a fighter even trying to get within 50 feet of a wizard is something that's more of a joke then an actual consideration.


*yawns* And you have once again demonstrated your irrational prejudice.

*yawns* and once again you show you know nothing about which you speak.

Seriously, dude? Read the books before you start actually trying to form a argument. It's like watching a middle school kid trying to debate with a college team here.
I'm sad that this is the actual post that actually drew me from lurkerdom...

daggaz
2007-02-05, 01:49 PM
While your logic is pretty much solid, Mikal... I think you made a small mistake..


A readied action (attack the wizard) isn't an AoO. So if you are a wizard, and you call defensive casting, you make a concentration check (which yeah is easy at high levels) and you avoid all AoO's. But then the fighter/rogue whatever surprises you by calling out that he has readied an action to hit you if you try to cast, and he attacks and if he hits, yeah, you gotta do another concentration check, this time using damage dealt in the DC. All of this in the same round. So yeah, two concentration checks there.

It doesnt change the gist of the whole argument much tho. Especially when having noticed that the fighter mysteriously did not attacked the round before, the wizard properly guesses that an attack is being readied and instead moves out of range first, wasting the fighters action.

Rigeld2
2007-02-05, 01:54 PM
Especially when having noticed that the fighter mysteriously did not attacked the round before, the wizard properly guesses that an attack is being readied and instead moves out of range first, wasting the fighters action.
Yeah..
Sneaky Fighter: "I dont attack this round."
Smart Wizard: "... I 5' step away and <insert fun spell> the area S.F. is standing in."
Sneaky Fighter: "... Darn. I was sure that readied action would work!"

Piccamo
2007-02-05, 02:33 PM
If you experience problems with the current magic system do not attempt to change the way the game works, use an alternate one. Pact Magic from Tome of Magic is a good system to adopt. I'm sure there are others out there. In DnD Full Casters win and nothing you do will change it, short of stripping them of magic (in which case you may as well just remove them from the game).

Kantolin
2007-02-05, 02:34 PM
That's when the fighter uses a spiked chain, or any reach weapon with spiked armour or I believe improved unarmed strike. Let's see you 5' away from that!

Of course, that's also when the wizard does a quickened anything.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-05, 02:35 PM
The wizard's invisible. And also flying, so how's the fighter near him?

MeklorIlavator
2007-02-05, 04:03 PM
don't you remember the original poster?

Everyone has AMF-items and magical items that allow them to fly so they can grapple the enemy casters!

Hey, if a AMF cancels all magical effects in the area, and a Magical item is generating it, wouldn't the field cancels out the magical item, thereby ending the field? I feel a catch 22 coming on.

Mikal
2007-02-05, 04:33 PM
While your logic is pretty much solid, Mikal... I think you made a small mistake..

[LEFT]A readied action (attack the wizard) isn't an AoO. So if you are a wizard, and you call defensive casting, you make a concentration check (which yeah is easy at high levels) and you avoid all AoO's. But then the fighter/rogue whatever surprises you by calling out that he has readied an action to hit you if you try to cast, and he attacks and if he hits, yeah, you gotta do another concentration check, this time using damage dealt in the DC. All of this in the same round. So yeah, two concentration checks there.

Except as I originally posted the wizard could just take the 5-foot step away or regular move away from said fighter/whichever. Or I thought I did. Might have been unclear.


That's when the fighter uses a spiked chain, or any reach weapon with spiked armour or I believe improved unarmed strike. Let's see you 5' away from that!

The spiked chain can't be 5 foot stepped from, true. But someone with unarmed strike and wearing spiked armor can be five foot stepped as easily as any other non reach melee fighter. :smallannoyed:


Hey, if a AMF cancels all magical effects in the area, and a Magical item is generating it, wouldn't the field cancels out the magical item, thereby ending the field? I feel a catch 22 coming on.

No, the item itself is still able to generate the field, but everything else doesn't work unless specifically stated.

Kantolin
2007-02-06, 03:34 AM
But someone with unarmed strike and wearing spiked armor can be five foot stepped as easily as any other non reach melee fighter. :smallannoyed:
Uh. The statement was Reach Weapon + Spiked armour, or Reach Weapon + Unarmed strike. That way, the (say) Guisarme threatens 10', while the spiked armour threatens 5'. So, no 5' step for you (Well, not to safety).

The addendum was because, well... I'm not sure if it works with reach weapon + unarmed strike. I'm pretty sure it does with Reach + Spiked armour, but unarmed strikes are sort of confusingly worded.

Rigeld2
2007-02-06, 07:06 AM
But... are you willingly going to step to 5' (and hence cover 10') with a weapon that you arent specced in? With that kind of build, its the reach weapon that gets all the attention feat and magic wise... so I'll suck it up and eat the AoO from the spikes/unarmed.

Piccamo
2007-02-06, 09:55 AM
Or cast then move (if your cast isn't getting away from the guy to begin with).

Indon
2007-02-06, 10:40 AM
So I glossed over the 4 or so pages of Wizard vs. Fighter (of which I've already read more than enough pages of), and didn't really notice anything regarding the point in the original post.

If I missed something actually having to do with the original post, I apologize.

That said, I think the OP has an interesting point. High-level campaigns neccessarily turn high-magic (at least, if they remain dungeon crawler style), even on a low-magic world. This is pretty absurd, and would at least require some deus ex machina justification like planar travel or something.

This thread seems to have taken the direction of blaming this odd scenario on the magic.

I'd like to turn things around and ask how a 20'th level wizard PC exists on a low-magic world which has during the entirety of its' existence probably seen less than a handful of 20'th level wizards, ever. What is _keeping_ this environment from being a high-magic world in the first place, if there's nothing exceptional to stop someone from a linear progression to max caster level?

My point is, low magic environments (perhaps including lower levels of standard-magic level campaigns) should have some kind of check on casters, and the PC's should not be exempted. Otherwise, it wouldn't be low magic. This way, a lower-magic environment wouldn't need to suddenly scale up as its' players gain levels.

Examples:
Explanation: There are few spellcasters because spellcasting requires training and mentoring from more powerful spellcasters.
Mechanic: In order to gain a level in a spellcaster class, a caster must find a higher-level caster in that class once they have sufficient experience to gain a level.

Explanation: Magic is relatively unexploited in this area.
Mechanic: The caster must manually research many spells which would pre-exist in a higher magic environment.

Seriously. If you're in a world in which a wizard can just saunter to a magic shop and buy and inscribe every spell in the PHB in any given mid-size town, you're playing in a VERY high magic game, and really shortchanging the meleers if they don't get access to similarly ridiculous toys.

Piccamo
2007-02-06, 11:01 AM
The way DnD is presented each city/town has a gp limit on what they can sell you. They also have guidelines on how much everything costs. Its not unreasonable to assume if one can buy magic items that they can also buy access to spells.

If it requires mentoring or training how does one progress beyond level one?


If it requires research into the new spells they PCs would also be completely justified in going with new spells not found in the PHB, which could create unforeseen circumstances.

The reason the heroes are special is because they are not like everyone else; if the campaign goes on long enough for a Wizard to hit 20th level and there has been a handful of such since the beginning of time he has become one of a special group; likewise I feel that there probably wouldn't be many level 20s of any other classes, either. In order for a campaign to go on until level 20 there would have to be challenges all the way up to that point, representing something that the world has not need to defend against in a long time.

Even in a high magic setting, though there aren't enough ways presently in the game to defend against spellcasters. In a discussion of RAW you cannot bring up new house rules and limiters, unless expressly defined and then it becomes a discussion of those limiters rather than a discussion of the RAW.

The best solution for a "low magic" setting is not to simply say "this is low magic", but may be to either change the magic system or to specifically state what makes it low magic.

Matthew
2007-02-06, 01:54 PM
The best Low Magic Campaigns invariably have to change the magic system, though that depends on what you mean by 'low magic' to an extent.