4 wizard party

[maniacalmojo]

I keep hearing that wizards, clerics and druids are the best classes. I say starting at level 3 and going until 20 do you think that a group of 4 wizards could reliably survive? No cohorts, no body guards. You have yourself and your spellbook nothing else.

[killem2]

It would be a slaughter for just about anything you tossed at them.

Especially if they optimized.

[Story]

Definitely. They'd probably do better than a classic party too.

Heck, even starting at level 1 is possible, though noone is good at level 1 except Incarnates and there's always the risk of an unlucky death. But Wizards have a much better chance of surviving level 1 than Fighters if they take Abrupt Jaunt, so it's still advantage:Wizards.

[Gavinfoxx]

They just need to (possibly) start with some mules or dogs to tank, or have the Transmuter specced to tank and melee fight, and they can kick ass even at level 1.

[eggynack]

I'd take the other two options, four clerics or four druids, over four wizards at low levels, but a team of four wizards can compete pretty well. Even at low levels, they have some spells capable of completely incapacitating their enemies, and between the four of them they're likely to have a bunch of those. I doubt it's even much of a challenge by level three, when second level spell craziness comes online. It's not the best group, but it's a good group.

[Bullet06320]

did a campaign once with 4 wizards, an evoker, a conjurer, a necromancer and a transmuter, yea it rocked, we planned our spells at level ups so no one doubled up, then just shared spellbooks to copy out of, and planned our daily spells together so as many possible scenarios was covered at any given time. with summons and necro minions we always had muscle and fodder

[Kane0]

Yeah, an illusionist/enchanter, an evoker/abjurer, a necromancer/transmuter and a conjurer/diviner would be a fine party. Pick or take turns summoning, buffing, debuffing, BFCing, facing and blasting and you'll have a grand time.

[Osiris]

Yeah, an illusionist/enchanter, an evoker/abjurer, a necromancer/transmuter and a conjurer/diviner would be a fine party. Pick or take turns summoning, buffing, debuffing, BFCing, facing and blasting and you'll have a grand time.

Very true, but what about 1 wizard, 1 cleric, and 1 druid? How would we optimize that?

[Arc_knight25]

All I can see is your adventuring days will be short. As in they will burn through spells to quickly to actually get through a dungeon in a timely manner.

Now come level 7 then ya they can do it all, just the lack of spell slots will slow down their adventuring day while they are early in their career.

I still personally would prefer a well rounded party. Melee, skill monkey, wizard and cleric. This party can go further in a day at level 4 then the wizards I would say.

[GungHo]

Very true, but what about 1 wizard, 1 cleric, and 1 druid? How would we optimize that?

Just say "We win" and go to Hooters.

[eggynack]

Just say "We win" and go to Hooters.
Pretty much. I don't even understand the question. A three wizard party isn't really the best three man party imaginable, because they would find closing out encounters difficult without expending resources. A cleric, wizard, and druid party is one of the best three man parties imaginable, because they can do pretty much anything, including consuming the faces of your enemies.


All I can see is your adventuring days will be short. As in they will burn through spells to quickly to actually get through a dungeon in a timely manner.

Now come level 7 then ya they can do it all, just the lack of spell slots will slow down their adventuring day while they are early in their career.
I rather disagree. They will burn through spells to some extent, yes, but they have an absolute ton of spells. A single spell is often enough to win an encounter, and when each party member has enough spells to cast one in each encounter, you're unlikely to run dry quickly.


I still personally would prefer a well rounded party. Melee, skill monkey, wizard and cleric. This party can go further in a day at level 4 then the wizards I would say.
I think it depends on what those roles are being filled by. If the melee is a fighter, and the skill monkey is a rogue, then I'd probably stick with the wizards. If the melee is a druid, and the skill monkey is another cleric or something (maybe a factotum), then I'd go with the balanced party.

[Arc_knight25]

@Eggynack

I just see that most of the wizards will need to buff for any combat. So that is in 1 encounter at least 1-2 spells each used to buff. Even if there is crowd control that's still 1 spell per encounter, and at lvl 4 things won't be dead in 4 rounds for most spells.

Add in traps and even at min/lvl your searching through things and discussing plans. That find traps loses its potency pretty quick.

I'm not saying they can't do it. I just feel like in a day they will burn through their spells and will need to rest before the "balanced" group at lvl 4.

[The Grue]

I'm not saying they can't do it. I just feel like in a day they will burn through their spells and will need to rest before the "balanced" group at lvl 4.

Unless the "balanced" group is comprised entirely of Warforged and needs neither food nor rest, this is a moot point.

[eggynack]

I just see that most of the wizards will need to buff for any combat. So that is in 1 encounter at least 1-2 spells each used to buff. Even if there is crowd control that's still 1 spell per encounter, and at lvl 4 things won't be dead in 4 rounds for most spells.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Wizards are highly capable of creating a situation of overwhelming advantage, such that even low grade damage over time, like plinking away with a crossbow, can mean the death of the enemy. The group almost certainly needs to spend at least one spell overall, but I doubt that you would even need to spend one spell per wizard per fight. Also, something as simple as a purchased riding dog can easily make up for most fighting deficiencies.

[Psyren]

I keep hearing that wizards, clerics and druids are the best classes. I say starting at level 3 and going until 20 do you think that a group of 4 wizards could reliably survive? No cohorts, no body guards. You have yourself and your spellbook nothing else.

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Magicka-Zombie-Driver-HD-and-More-Now-Have-Steam-Trading-Cards-2.jpg?1371796651

Gonna go with yes

[Story]

Unless the "balanced" group is comprised entirely of Warforged and needs neither food nor rest, this is a moot point.

Or Necropolitans, of course. You'll probably want to give them some source of unlimited self healing though.

[Ortesk]

My current group is decently large, with 3 druids 1 cleric a wujen, 2 wizards a beguiler, a sorceror a warlock and a bard. At level 3 were walking through everything we see. We just save resourses and take turns filling roles. At higher levels i see no way the dm can challenge us without just making up i win buttons for the monsters

[Fouredged Sword]

Wizard party - Abjurist Gish (ban necromancy and conjuration), Necromancer (Ban enchantment and illusion), Summoner (ban evocation and abjuration) and a utility caster (elven generalist) who takes over healing.

Level 1 - Everyone takes wild cohort. 4 riding dogs will tear through most CR 1 encounters.

Level 3 - the monsters start to pass the riding dogs in HD, but now 2nd level spells cripple encounters. The necromancer gets his hands on command undead and after a few scrolls of raise dead, has some big tough meat shields.

Level 6 - the dogs become less than great, but now the wizards are starting to get necromancy and summoning off the ground. Healing is an issue, so someone take arcane disciple and touch of healing.

Level 10 - The gish is off the ground and almost through abjurant champion. The necromancer has tough meat shields, and the summoner can control the battlefield easily. The healer caster is still struggling to fill his role, but he takes craft construct and gets a dedicated wright to churn out scrolls.

Level 14 - The party is almost unstoppable. They have dominated a rogue to trapfind for them, and are binding angles and demons to serve them as divine casters. Zombie dragons and hydras fill the front liner roll.

Level 20 - LOL

[Arc_knight25]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I know that a party of wizards mid to high level will rofl stomp most encounters may they be skill or combat.

Just those 1st few levels will be trying. If they get over run by numbers I feel like they would be done. Casting spells defensively, low hp, low ac. Just a multitude of things I can think of that are against the party at those low levels. Not saying it can't be done. Just feel like it would be hard to do.

Sure you can buy them riding dogs, taking feats to get cohorts and what not, which brings with it another discussion.

[Fouredged Sword]

Level 1 is swingy. Numbers will kill any party. A fighter has maybe twice the HP of a wizard, but is just as likely to die of a lucky crit. Loosing a party member is a real risk no mater the party makeup. Most CR 1 encounters are with 1-3 targets, and multiple targets generally have VERY few HP. Wizards would do just fine if they were cautious and didn't get pressed into a rush.

[Dread_Head]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I know that a party of wizards mid to high level will rofl stomp most encounters may they be skill or combat.

Just those 1st few levels will be trying. If they get over run by numbers I feel like they would be done. Casting spells defensively, low hp, low ac. Just a multitude of things I can think of that are against the party at those low levels. Not saying it can't be done. Just feel like it would be hard to do.

Sure you can buy them riding dogs, taking feats to get cohorts and what not, which brings with it another discussion.

Abrupt Jaunt ACF makes a Wizard probably one of the most survivable 1st level characters as you can avoid 3+ attacks per day. Additionally each wizard will have 2 or more spells and can use those for Colour Spray or Sleep which are both area effect spells that disable opponents completely opening them up for CDG. Beyond that they can use their crossbows to plink away doing small amounts of damage but its not really necessary.

[Zombulian]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I know that a party of wizards mid to high level will rofl stomp most encounters may they be skill or combat.

Just those 1st few levels will be trying. If they get over run by numbers I feel like they would be done. Casting spells defensively, low hp, low ac. Just a multitude of things I can think of that are against the party at those low levels. Not saying it can't be done. Just feel like it would be hard to do.

Sure you can buy them riding dogs, taking feats to get cohorts and what not, which brings with it another discussion.

"Oh sure you could be reasonable, but I don't see what reason has to do with this."

Cmon now don't be silly.

[dascarletm]

Level 1 - Everyone takes wild cohort. 4 riding dogs will tear through most CR 1 encounters.


While that would be useful, in the given scenario....


No cohorts, no body guards. You have yourself and your spellbook nothing else.

While I think the party would be fun to play, I think level three wouldn't be as "cake" as people make it out to be.

I win button spells usually allow for a save, and saves can be made. AoEs at that level are usually small radius. A moderately spread out force will see most of their troops out of it.

[strider24seven]

Wizard party - Abjurist Gish (ban necromancy and conjuration)

How are the words "ban" and "conjuration" appearing in the same sentence without a "not" or "never" or "don't" between them?

[Zombulian]

While that would be useful, in the given scenario....

You can still probably pull some useful summons, and at lvl 1 a wizard with Enlarge Person up is basically as strong as a fighter except HP wise.

[eggynack]

How are the words "ban" and "conjuration" appearing in the same sentence without a "not" or "never" or "don't" between them?
Indeed. Seems like a poor choice, especially when having all of your wizards not-die because of abrupt jaunt requires them all having abrupt jaunt. It might be worth tossing some domain wizard in there, and also maybe focused specialist. The latter especially seems pretty good here, as the party can cover all of the ground if it so chooses (each bans a different three out of enchantment, evocation, illusion, and necromancy).

[Fouredged Sword]

I feel safe for a gish to ban conjuration WHEN THREE OTHER WIZARDS IN THE PARTY ALL HAVE CONJURATION!

Seriously, I would rather one of them ban conjuration so they can take all the illusion and enchantment spells because they are useful at times. The Gish isn't going to be summoning or blasting, but transmuting and fighting.

Getting to 3rd level will be tricky without cohorts, but still, a wizard with improved initiative, a humming bird familiar, good dex, and color spray will end most encounters before they start.

[dascarletm]

You can still probably pull some useful summons, and at lvl 1 a wizard with Enlarge Person up is basically as strong as a fighter except HP wise.

+1 damage in melee, -2 to AC. Sounds like ranged attack waiting to happen.


Summons only will last a turn per level, and come out a turn in delay.

That also negates their usefulness for trapfinding. Supposing you need to go into a likely trapped dungeon.

[eggynack]

I feel safe for a gish to ban conjuration WHEN THREE OTHER WIZARDS IN THE PARTY ALL HAVE CONJURATION!

I disagree. Conjuration does a lot of things, and you're going to want all of your wizards to be capable of doing those things. By contrast, enchantment only really does one thing, so you're only going to want one of your wizards to be capable of doing those things. I just don't see why banning conjuration is a necessary or desirable thing.

[Fouredged Sword]

I concede the point on abrupt jaunt as a superior defense vs everything.

[killem2]

It is true that, if one mook or baddie gets by the color spray brigade, then they could cause some trouble.

Depending on the stats if they are rolled/buy, race choice, splat books used, it can get really really nasty.

[Zombulian]

It is true that, if one mook or baddie gets by the color spray brigade, then they could cause some trouble.

Depending on the stats if they are rolled/buy, race choice, splat books used, it can get really really nasty.

Which is why you have one of the Wizards on Grease + Fire duty :smallbiggrin:

[Arc_knight25]

So starting at level 3 is what OP had said.

That gets each wizard:
4 cantrips
2+1(+2 if 20 Int) 1st total of 3-4
1+1 2nd

Also add one for specialists and elven generalist. +2 for focused specialists.

For a total of 4-6 lvl 1 spells and 3-4 lvl 2 spells at lvl 3

Buff spells lasts 3 rounds/min/hrs depending on what they take. Dmg spells will hurt but not kill most creatures around this CR. Most control effects give a save, or have a means to get out of them (i.e Web).

They can pop off their ranged weapons to some effect depending on their dex scores, but that +1 BAB isn't doing all to much.

I just wanted to see what the numbers were. I have more faith in the wizard party here. But I still stand by my original statement of they are going to have to rest more often then a "balanced" party.

[Big Fau]

A Changeling Focused Specialist Wizard (banning Necromancy, Enchantment, Evocation, and Abjuration) can get Alter Self+Invisibility at 1st level via Precocious Apprentice. Fist of Stone and maybe an instance of Shape Soulmeld can turn him into a dedicated Gish as early as 1st level. This also gives him Color Spray on backup.

The blaster Wizard can use Precocious Apprentice to get a reserve feat (Acid being the best, as you can bypass traps by destroying them). He can now dedicate the rest of his spells to buffing the Gish and playing support.

The Conjurer needs the UA ACF to make his summons viable, and needs to boost the CL on his spells somehow. That's the biggest hurdle he'll have.

The "healer" isn't necessary, but the Lifebond Vestments soulmeld can make it work if you absolutely want healing. He'll probably need some other method of healing though.

[eggynack]

Also add one for specialists and elven generalist. +2 for focused specialists.

I think you forgot to account for domain wizard in the elven generalist part. Thus, generalists get three extra spells, specialists get two, and focused specialists get four, at second level anyway. Pretty much the only reason to go regular specialist is if you want an ACF, or if you want something from outside the domain list in your extra slots. Those domain spells are sweet sometimes though.

[Fouredged Sword]

In general, "If X happens due to a bad roll, it can get nasty" is a given for any party makeup of low level characters. It's unavoidable due to low HP to soak errors. It can be a mook that avoids the color spray and rolls better than the other three wizards on AC, or it could be the mook with a scroll of color spray that takes out the party cleric and fighter. These things happen at low levels, and it's why low levels are swingy.

I think a party of wizards are not much more weak vulnerable to bad luck than any other party.

On the other hand, everyone taking Precocious Apprentice would even the playing field a great deal. 2nd level spells are just that powerful. It means that the party necromancer can buy a scroll of create undead and control a skeleton or zombie from level 1.

[Zombulian]

In general, "If X happens due to a bad roll, it can get nasty" is a given for any party makeup of low level characters. It's unavoidable due to low HP to soak errors. It can be a mook that avoids the color spray and rolls better than the other three wizards on AC, or it could be the mook with a scroll of color spray that takes out the party cleric and fighter. These things happen at low levels, and it's why low levels are swingy.

I think a party of wizards are not much more weak vulnerable to bad luck than any other party.

On the other hand, everyone taking Precocious Apprentice would even the playing field a great deal. 2nd level spells are just that powerful. It means that the party necromancer can buy a scroll of create undead and control a skeleton or zombie from level 1.

I was having this discussion with a friend recently actually. WHY ARE 2ND LEVEL SPELLS SO GOOD? How did that even happen?

[DrDeth]

How do you heal? What happens if the foes don;t just line up and let you kill them, for example you get ambushed without buff spells up? or they jump you while you sleep?

All cleric-sure. Unless you are going thru a dungeon full of Gygaxian traps.

[Fouredged Sword]

A low level wizard is just 1 or 2 points of damage and attack bonus different than a fighter, and maybe 4 HP behind. The best battlefield control spells, at low levels, require no prep ether.

Things are swingy. I realize this. Getting to 3rd level without a character death is a matter of luck for ANY party.

[eggynack]

I was having this discussion with a friend recently actually. WHY ARE 2ND LEVEL SPELLS SO GOOD? How did that even happen?
That is very true. Alter self alone is thoroughly ridiculous, and it's accompanied by stuff like web and glitterdust.

What happens if the foes don;t just line up and let you kill them, for example you get ambushed without buff spells up? or they jump you while you sleep?
I don't know. That's why four wizards are so awesome. The answer really could be anything, and it could probably be tailored to just about any particular instance. Maybe they cast a relevant silent image that gives them an out, or maybe there's any kind of clumping and a color spray will be effective, or maybe any number of things. There is a massive pile of solutions, and the team likely has access to most of them, because when you're talking about four wizards, well, Schrodinger's wizard starts becoming something like a real game object. Maybe there will be some party death, but honestly, if the ambush is strong enough to take the wizard party out, it'd probably take out most parties.

[DigoDragon]

A party of 4 wizards? Yeah, they can definitely survive an adventure, even at low levels. They can also be horribly murdered. A lot depends on the compitance of the players, the DM, and what the dice demand for a sacrifice that day. :smallbiggrin:

[Venger]

How do you heal? What happens if the foes don;t just line up and let you kill them, for example you get ambushed without buff spells up? or they jump you while you sleep?

As mentioned, arcane disciple + touch of healing will help mitigate that somewhat. at mid-high levels, summons such as unicorns or bloodbag imps can help pick up the slack and heal you pretty much all you need.

an all wizard party will never not have 1 rope trick available for the party to sleep in.


All cleric-sure. Unless you are going thru a dungeon full of Gygaxian traps.

even then (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/findTraps.htm)

[Zombulian]

That is very true. Alter self alone is thoroughly ridiculous, and it's accompanied by stuff like web and glitterdust.

I don't know. That's why four wizards are so awesome. The answer really could be anything, and it could probably be tailored to just about any particular instance. Maybe they cast a relevant silent image that gives them an out, or maybe there's any kind of clumping and a color spray will be effective, or maybe any number of things. There is a massive pile of solutions, and the team likely has access to most of them, because when you're talking about four wizards, well, Schrodinger's wizard starts becoming something like a real game object. Maybe there will be some party death, but honestly, if the ambush is strong enough to take the wizard party out, it'd probably take out most parties.

This is a very important thing that lots of people arguing for the "balanced party" are leaving out. Sure this group of wizards may be wiped out by a really hard and well thought out encounter, but how would the "balanced party" fair?

[DigoDragon]

Sure this group of wizards may be wiped out by a really hard and well thought out encounter, but how would the "balanced party" fair?

Depends on what's in the encounter. I imagine a goblin with an antimagic field will be more annoying to a low-level wizard than a low level rogue. :smallbiggrin:

[Namfuak]

Depends on what's in the encounter. I imagine a goblin with an antimagic field will be more annoying to a low-level wizard than a low level rogue. :smallbiggrin:

Antimagic field is a 6th level spell, so if that goblin can cast it he's probably going to turn just about any 1st level party into paste, regardless of the rogue's presence.

[Story]

Has anyone done a same game test to actually test this?

[Endarire]

This has been my solo Wizard experience (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=16848817).

Once reaching level 9, lesser planar binding to get me a Mirror Mephit (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) means I can get a free simulacrum of a desired creature 1/day. Add in caster level boosters and suddenly, Sim Solars become uber party members. (Oh yes, I make Sim Mirror Mephits and Sim Efreet, too!)

After getting sims of my desired creatures, fewer things can stop me. Beyond that, it depends on what I feel like doing.

[Spore]

Uhm I predict a TPK from a desperate DM trying to put up a challenge. Namely a dozen assassins all sneak attacking at the same time, after not being detected.

Your lack of skills outside knowledge could prove problems.

[YossarianLives]

I've been in a all primary caster party. It had a wizard(conjurer i think) sorcerer(me) cleric and a druid.

We destroyed everything.

[Doc_Maynot]

I wonder, is the ACF that replaces a wizard's familiar with a druids animal companion allowed being used in this debate? If so the first 3 levels should be less of a problem.

[Zombulian]

Depends on what's in the encounter. I imagine a goblin with an antimagic field will be more annoying to a low-level wizard than a low level rogue. :smallbiggrin:

The Conjurer's could still blast him down couldn't they? Lesser orb of acid and fire and the lot aren't stopped by AMF I thought.

[dascarletm]

It can be thrown in, but it cannot be cast from within the area of effect.

The level 1 goblin warrior was cursed with a permanent anti-magic field.

[Fouredged Sword]

4 wizards scatter in 4 directions and pump him full of crossbow bolts and rejoice for beating what is probably a CR3 encounter (I am calling the anti magic field a trap like thing) at level 1.

Whoever he chases keeps running, whoever he doesn't is free to fire unthreatened.

Also, to get you through those low levels, one of the wizards can take craft alchemy as a skill. Those flasks of alchemists fire are really useful at low levels, if you craft them.

[dascarletm]

4 wizards scatter in 4 directions and pump him full of crossbow bolts and rejoice for beating what is probably a CR3 encounter (I am calling the anti magic field a trap like thing) at level 1.

Whoever he chases keeps running, whoever he doesn't is free to fire unthreatened.

Also, to get you through those low levels, one of the wizards can take craft alchemy as a skill. Those flasks of alchemists fire are really useful at low levels, if you craft them.

A more challenging encounter would be 1.5xparty size number of goblins with cover shooting crossbows at yonder party scattered around them.

[Fouredged Sword]

That would be 6 goblins, so CR 2 for 6 of them (1.5 times a 4 person party).

They have a ranged attack bonus of +3, so they hit 1 about half the time. They are not profficent in crossbows, so they instead are wielding javelins (crossbows are not that different anyway) so they deal 1d4 damage on a hit. It takes 2-3 hits to kill a wizard with 6 HP, and even then, that is likely -HP, not death.

So they can focus fire and maybe kill someone/likely drop someone (they can do this to a balanced party as well)

Then the wizards open up with sleep spells, and at least half of them are asleep. They can catch more if the goblins are clumped at all, and if they are in pairs, they are all asleep.

Then the remaining three fire at the wizards, likely not killing anyone, the wizards then fire their remaing spells, likely having another SLO for at least one of them, and then it's down to a crossbow duel between the two sides, three wizards with crossbows VS 1 or 2 goblins.

The wizards are beaten up, wounded, drained, but likely alive. They stabalize the wounded character and rest for the night.

They beat a CR 2 ambush VS an enemy with favorable terrain, so likely a CR 3 encounter. It's hard, but that is what a CR 3 encounter should be for a level 1 party. They handle it as well or better than a balanced party would likely do.

[Story]

You could also just give someone Astral Vambraces and have them tank. I doubt the goblins are smart enough to recognize a soulmeld.

[Slipperychicken]

I think we mentioned it already, but at least one of our wizards could use summons to pull beatstick duty, at least once the duration is good enough to last through ~4 rounds.

At level 1, a wizard could also use Handle Animal on purchased creatures to pull beatstick. Just have a bunch of riding dogs (or something to that effect) form the meatshield.

If some of our wizards are elves, they could use longbows for level 1 dps. A scythe (x4 critical) should be sufficient for any CDGs which need to happen at that level. It doesn't matter that wizards aren't proficient with scythes -CDGs are automatic hits.

[Fouredged Sword]

Very true. A goblin javeliner will be useless VS someone with DR4/magic. Won't help the rest of the team though. It may be a good idea to have EVERYONE take that feat though, as it removes a wizards main weakness, being squishy.

A party of wizards where everyone has DR4/magic at level 1 would likely make it to level 3.

[dascarletm]

We can hypothesize scenarios all day, but it's far from any sort of proof for either of us.

I gotta say though, Warriors are proficient in all simple and martial weapons, one in three targets of the sleep statistically will make the save, and hitting an AC of 19 with a crossbow (+3 from dex?) is only going to hit statistically 1 in every 4 shots.


Yonder standard party potentially spots the goblins by having a class with that as a class skill, has a better chance to not be hit, and a better chance to shoot them.

Spells, are just not the end-all solutions at that level.

The party you described would be SOL fighting elves for example as all those prepared sleep spells would be wasted.

[Story]

That's why you prepare multiple spells. Sleep, Color Spray, Silent Image, possibly even Fist of Stone.


Anyway, wizards can afford to burn feats surviving level 1 because they'll still be far more useful later on than a Fighter.

[zeboss]

Pardon me if I repeat things that have already been said, but I'm sick right now and don't have the capacity to read a whole thread.
That being said, I've been in a situation similar to this, where a party had two wizards, a psion, and an anima mage. First of all, you're probably going to want one person to either focus on summons or gishing so you can have someone to tank damage. Although you don't necessarily need a tank, especially at later levels when you can prevent anything form even getting near you, tanks are nice to have if you don't want to optimize like crazy/have books thrown at you. Another thing thats nice about a party set up like this is the way you can spread out utility spells. With tier one caster types you tend to be expected to prepare a copy or two of certain utility spells especially if you know what you're going to be up against (knock/detect traps if you're going through a dungeon crawl etc.). With a setup like this, you can easily spread the utility spells over the party, allowing the whole party to have more spellslots open for useful combat spells or other spells that don't generally work as utility. For example our psion had psychoportive shelter so the wizards and anima mage never had to prepare rope trick. So yeah, basically spread out the spells that will be necessary to survival and then have fun with it, you have four wizards.

[Arc_knight25]

Originally Posted by Fouredged Sword

They beat a CR 2 ambush VS an enemy with favorable terrain, so likely a CR 3 encounter. It's hard, but that is what a CR 3 encounter should be for a level 1 party. They handle it as well or better than a balanced party would likely do.

This is the point I'm trying to make. This is just 1 encounter, and already they need to rest up and heal and get spells back. Depending on how the combat went even a standard party may need to rest, but I suspect they could handle another encounter before needing to rest.

dascarletm makes a good argument about theorizing about different scenario's. We all could come up with different scenario's were the wizards could fail or succeed, and vice versa for a standard party.

Only an actual play test could really settle this and even then the DM's dice maybe wanting blood from one of the parties.

[Fouredged Sword]

As for spotting ambushes, one of the wizards can have a hawk familiar, with it's +19 spot check and ability to fly up and scout. That far outscores anything a ranger can do at level 1. Getting 4 goblins into ambush positions may be much harder than the DM thinks.

Also, in a balanced party, 6 goblins shooting all at one target who looks squishy will rick dropping that someone to negative HP. If the party is 4 wizards or 1 wizards, a rogue, a fighter, and a cleric. Resting would be almost always required after something like that.

[Zombulian]

This is the point I'm trying to make. This is just 1 encounter, and already they need to rest up and heal and get spells back. Depending on how the combat went even a standard party may need to rest, but I suspect they could handle another encounter before needing to rest.

dascarletm makes a good argument about theorizing about different scenario's. We all could come up with different scenario's were the wizards could fail or succeed, and vice versa for a standard party.

Only an actual play test could really settle this and even then the DM's dice maybe wanting blood from one of the parties.

Yes it's a CR 3 encounter for a team of lvl 1 Wizards. I don't understand why people keep using these hard encounters as a reason for this Wizard party to not work, but the "balanced" party to do well. Because it would in all likelyhood be just as hard for the non-all-wizard party.

[Fouredged Sword]

I would be interested in being in/running an all wizard game. I would perfer to be in rather than run, but I have a really funny idea for a plot.

I think I am gonna post a recruitment thread later. Who wants to be apprentices at the Maldorph School of Wizardry? Only the best graduates come from Maldorphs! After all, they have a 80% mortality rate!

[Zombulian]

I would be interested in being in/running an all wizard game. I would perfer to be in rather than run, but I have a really funny idea for a plot.

I think I am gonna post a recruitment thread later. Who wants to be apprentices at the Maldorph School of Wizardry? Only the best graduates come from Maldorphs! After all, they have a 80% mortality rate!

So down. So very down.

[Story]

To be fair, you'd probably want to run a classic party through the same adventure.

Also to keep things simpler, it might be a good idea to use an existing premade adventure.

[Fouredged Sword]

I care about the statement of "A 4 wizard party is VIABLE at low levels" not "An all wizard party is BETTER than a standard party"

I want to run 4 wizards through a gauntlet of fairly standard low level encounters and see if they can make it to level 6. Monsters, social encounters, and traps are all fair game.

I am further going to put some restrictions on the wizards to pair back some of the more non-class specific ways to get though the first three levels (no wild cohorts, the school has a strict no pets policy. If it doesn't have an int score high enough to pass the entrance exam (6), it can't get in.)

There will be issues with when you can rest and deadlines for quest completion.

I am curious how well they will do in practice.

[DigoDragon]

Antimagic field is a 6th level spell, so if that goblin can cast it he's probably going to turn just about any 1st level party into paste, regardless of the rogue's presence.

Or it could be a goblin with an item that mimics the effect.
Somewhat based on an encounter a GM threw at the party I was in--

The BBEG was a high level vampire and we were around 3rd-4th level. The vampire sent a group kobolds to ambush us, and she gave a vest to one of the kobolds that had a temporary Anti-magic field on it (lasted something like 4 rounds when activated). So the combat was a game a tag where the kobold kept chasing the wizard, the wizard kept trying to run outside the field to cast spells, and the rogue kept chasing this darn kobold to kill it.

The vampire did several tricks like that; Send minions after us with limited charged magic items that thwart magic since most of us had spellcasting abilities. Was quite clever I thought, but after gaining a few more levels the tricks lost effectiveness.

[Vogonjeltz]

Abrupt Jaunt ACF makes a Wizard probably one of the most survivable 1st level characters as you can avoid 3+ attacks per day. Additionally each wizard will have 2 or more spells and can use those for Colour Spray or Sleep which are both area effect spells that disable opponents completely opening them up for CDG. Beyond that they can use their crossbows to plink away doing small amounts of damage but its not really necessary.

So, what is plan B for that first level wizard being attacked by a 1st level bandit from say 70' with rapid shot?

[Story]

I care about the statement of "A 4 wizard party is VIABLE at low levels" not "An all wizard party is BETTER than a standard party"

I want to run 4 wizards through a gauntlet of fairly standard low level encounters and see if they can make it to level 6. Monsters, social encounters, and traps are all fair game.

I am further going to put some restrictions on the wizards to pair back some of the more non-class specific ways to get though the first three levels (no wild cohorts, the school has a strict no pets policy. If it doesn't have an int score high enough to pass the entrance exam (6), it can't get in.)

There will be issues with when you can rest and deadlines for quest completion.

I am curious how well they will do in practice.

The thing though is that you need to compare them with the standard party to see whether they are resting more or less often. Otherwise, the first time they rest at all, someone will say, 'ha, Wizards aren't viable after all'.

[Fouredged Sword]

Well, I am mostly doing it because I think it's funny. No need to overcomplicate things.

[SinsI]

What are you doing to replace Restoration/Lesser Restoration?
How do you deal with monsters or traps that inflict Negative levels or Attribute Damage, especially from distance?

[Doc_Maynot]

Depending on if they are allowing the Knight of the Weave PrC, then there are arcane versions of Lesser Restoration (1st level spell, very nice for an eternal wand), and Restoration (4th level spell, still usable for a basic wand).

They themselves could get into the class if they had either +5 BAB, or found a way to spontaneously cast 3rd level spells.

[Fouredged Sword]

Well, a higher levels, the party better prepare a means of replacing those abilities. Arcane Deciple (renewal domain) is one solution, but there are others.

My little test intends to end before 6th level, so I don't see a problem. The party may have to invest some money in potions, but that is part of what I want to see. Will that be enough of a problem to show that a 4 wizard party is unviable?

Personally, I consider any build that ends up with 17 levels of wizard casting a "wizard build" so

Wizard 3 / Cleric 1 / Mystic Thurge 10 / Incantrix 6 counts with versatile spellcaster for early entery.

[Bonzai]

We ran what we called our "Hogwarts" campaign. Everyone was a master specialist from a different school of magic. We had;

Myself: Focused Specialist Conjurer 3/Master Specialist 10/Thaumaturgist 3

I focused on battle field control and supplemental damage. Tie things up in evards and caustic mire, use offensive and defensive teleports, speed bump summons, and then area of effects like acid storm.

Evoker/master specialist/?

He was our primary damage dealer. I would try and tee them up by dimensional shuffling enemies into evards and such, so they were all perfectly clumped up for a fireball, and let him go to town. He was pretty straight forward.

Abjurer/ Master specialist/?

He focused on counter magic. He shut down all enemy casters and debuffed. He was the unsung hero of our party, as he nullified our greatest vulnerability... other casters. When not counter spelling, he debuffed with amped up dispels.

Transmuter/ master specialist/ War Weaver.

He was our resident buffer. With War Weaver he got even better at it.

The campaign ended at 15th level, and even then the DM was throwing Titans and other epic level stuff at us. So can an all wizard party work? Surprisingly well actually. I think the key is the division of labor and making sure everyone knows what their job is, with a small bit of redundancy just in case.

[SinsI]

The problem with Arcane Disciple is this:

Each day, you may prepare (or cast, if you cast spells without preparation) a maximum of one of these domains spells of each level.

Potions might work, but how many of those can you afford, especially at low levels?

You are not exactly trained in things like Spot, so getting ambushed will often mean a TPK.

As for Knight of the Weave, Wizards usually don't qualify for it till lvl 10, as they are prepared casters.

In a way, those suggestions are akin to all of you taking Leaderships with Cleric or Favored Soul as cohorts, or even just getting a bunch of NPC hirelings - you are not really a party of Wizards any more.

[maniacalmojo]

I care about the statement of "A 4 wizard party is VIABLE at low levels" not "An all wizard party is BETTER than a standard party"

I want to run 4 wizards through a gauntlet of fairly standard low level encounters and see if they can make it to level 6. Monsters, social encounters, and traps are all fair game.

I am further going to put some restrictions on the wizards to pair back some of the more non-class specific ways to get though the first three levels (no wild cohorts, the school has a strict no pets policy. If it doesn't have an int score high enough to pass the entrance exam (6), it can't get in.)

There will be issues with when you can rest and deadlines for quest completion.

I am curious how well they will do in practice.

I would like in on this actually. First hand experience if anything

[atomicwaffle]

way back when i was lvl 3, a transmutation spell from the SC that is INSANELY useful is Fist of Stone. If you aren't an elf and specialized with a longsword, this little ditty can put a lot of cr2 - 3 foes in a hurt locker.

[Fouredged Sword]

Ok, here is the game thread for Moldrake's School of Wizardry (3.5 low level all wizard game) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17038291#post17038291). Let's see who bites.

[georgie_leech]

Ok, here is the game thread for Moldrake's School of Wizardry (3.5 low level all wizard game) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17038291#post17038291). Let's see who bites.

I never seem to be able to work with PbP games, but may I just say that is a fantastic write up; I now wish that was a webcomic or show or something.

[Venger]

I never seem to be able to work with PbP games, but may I just say that is a fantastic write up; I now wish that was a webcomic or show or something.

Well, you can always lurk the IC thread. it'll be just as good.

[evyldead]

Well, a higher levels, the party better prepare a means of replacing those abilities. Arcane Deciple (renewal domain) is one solution, but there are others.

My little test intends to end before 6th level, so I don't see a problem. The party may have to invest some money in potions, but that is part of what I want to see. Will that be enough of a problem to show that a 4 wizard party is unviable?

Personally, I consider any build that ends up with 17 levels of wizard casting a "wizard build" so

Wizard 3 / Cleric 1 / Mystic Thurge 10 / Incantrix 6 counts with versatile spellcaster for early entery.

mystic thurge requires you to cast 2nd level arcane AND DIVINE spells in order to take that class so you would have to take 3 levels in cleric and wizard

[georgie_leech]

mystic thurge requires you to cast 2nd level arcane AND DIVINE spells in order to take that class so you would have to take 3 levels in cleric and wizard

That build uses Versatile Spellcaster to be able to burn 2 prepared spells to spontaneously cast Cure Moderate Wounds, a 2nd level Divine Spell; strictly speaking, a Cleric's Spontaneous Casting Feature doesn't require you to be able to cast a 2nd level spell normally for it to work, as at the time it was written, ways to use lower level slots to fuel higher level spells weren't yet a thing.

[Gnaeus]

The problem with Arcane Disciple is this:


Potions might work, but how many of those can you afford, especially at low levels?

You don't need potions. You are a party of wizards. Someone has scribe scroll. At level 5, someone will have craft wands for anything you use often. Since it is on your spell list, even if you can only CAST it once per day, you can still use spell trigger/completion items.

Alternately, you designate one wizard as the "party face" and give him a good charisma. Since he has Int as a primary stat, with decent Cha, he also keeps UMD maxed. At level 3, your guy with Craft Wondrous crafts him a headband of Cha +2 and an item of UMD +3-5. Then you just buy a lesser restoration wand. The ability to craft and relative ability independence should mean that your party has plenty of cash for such an item (especially if your DM will agree to one created by a paladin.)

[hemming]

If you were using random dungeon generation per the DMG I think they would have a real tough time at levels 3 or 4. A CR3 trap has a good chance to one hit kill a level 3 wizard. Just getting through the number of locked and stuck doors this method generates would be a challenge and would eat some spells.

If you made a dungeon specifically for a party of wizards using level appropriate encounters I think they would probably be just fine.

[SinsI]

You don't need potions. You are a party of wizards. Someone has scribe scroll. At level 5, someone will have craft wands for anything you use often. Since it is on your spell list, even if you can only CAST it once per day, you can still use spell trigger/completion items.

Alternately, you designate one wizard as the "party face" and give him a good charisma. Since he has Int as a primary stat, with decent Cha, he also keeps UMD maxed. At level 3, your guy with Craft Wondrous crafts him a headband of Cha +2 and an item of UMD +3-5. Then you just buy a lesser restoration wand. The ability to craft and relative ability independence should mean that your party has plenty of cash for such an item (especially if your DM will agree to one created by a paladin.)

You are level 3. Your combined wealth is 10800 gold.
Cloak of Charisma is +2 is 4000 gold, crafted is 2000 gold (+80 XP)
wand of lesser restoration is 2*3*750 = 4500 gold. (and no, DM should never discount items just because they "might be" created by a paladin. Especially dealing with Wizards that are only kept on a leash by WBL)
BTW, that wand is also more than 1/4 of each individual's WBL, so DM's are free to forbid it.

You are using more than 60% of all your combined resources (and spending a feat + some XP to boot) on your lesser restorations. Don't forget that scribing spells into book has a cost (at least the ink for it). Not sure if you should subtract the cost of wizard's spellbook from his WBL - if you do, you won't even have that much money).
It also requires all the characters to be too willing to pool their resources - not something you can assume a party can do.


UMD is not your class skill, your maximum ranks are (3+3)/2 = 3.
DC to use wand is 20, if you roll 1 you can't retry for 24 hours.

So on average you'll be able to use it 4-5 times a day.

It might be better to buy a custom command word activated 1/day Lesser Restoration item. (only 2*3*1800/5 = 2160 gold).

[Harrow]

I don't see why people are putting all of these restrictions on Wizards.

"No meatshields except from spells"

"Can't use things everyone else has access to"

The reason Wizards are better than Fighters is that Wizards can replicate Fighters with feats, ACFs, and money, all from level 1 and all while still being a Wizard. In organic gameplay, you'd be likely to see a party of 4 1st level Wizards with Shape Soulmeld, Wild Cohort, the Animal Companion, quick summoning, or Abrupt Jaunt ACFs.

In Core Only, things become a bit more limited. Ok, a lot more limited. But there's still no reason they wouldn't save every copper they could to buy riding dogs or horses or mules and use them as meatwalls while they leveled up high enough that gold-based meatwalls stop being as effective and spell-based meatwalls become more effective.

The only reason that a party of 4 Wizards in an actual campaign would be anything other than unstoppable juggernauts would be if they had arbitrary anti-Wizard restrictions placed on them.

[Slipperychicken]

If you were using random dungeon generation per the DMG I think they would have a real tough time at levels 3 or 4. A CR3 trap has a good chance to one hit kill a level 3 wizard. Just getting through the number of locked and stuck doors this method generates would be a challenge and would eat some spells.

If you made a dungeon specifically for a party of wizards using level appropriate encounters I think they would probably be just fine.

By level 3, one of them might have taken a reserve feat such as Acidic Splatter, which would allow them to do some dps and bypass hardness to knock doors down. And obviously, if someone throws down 10ft thick Riverine/Adamantine doors, they could finagle some way to steal them.

[Story]

If you were using random dungeon generation per the DMG I think they would have a real tough time at levels 3 or 4. A CR3 trap has a good chance to one hit kill a level 3 wizard. Just getting through the number of locked and stuck doors this method generates would be a challenge and would eat some spells.

If you made a dungeon specifically for a party of wizards using level appropriate encounters I think they would probably be just fine.

How many of those traps do acid damage or nonhp damage? I'm curious how well my Troll Blooded Trapfinder concept will work.

[evyldead]

That build uses Versatile Spellcaster to be able to burn 2 prepared spells to spontaneously cast Cure Moderate Wounds, a 2nd level Divine Spell; strictly speaking, a Cleric's Spontaneous Casting Feature doesn't require you to be able to cast a 2nd level spell normally for it to work, as at the time it was written, ways to use lower level slots to fuel higher level spells weren't yet a thing.

But the feat reads "You can use two spell slots of the same level to cast a spell you know that is one level higher. For example, a sorcerer with this feat can expend two 2nd-level spell slots to cast any 3rd-level spell he knows."

So you would have to be 3rd level cleric to cast that spell in order to know it to cast it. Its like saying a 3rd level wizard knows fireball in his book but he doesn't know how to cast it cuz he isnt the level in order to cast it. an you cant use scrolls and say hey i know a higher level spell. you need to know the spell in order to cast the spell and by i mean know you need to be the level in which you know that level of spells order to cast it. so that feat would only work if you were 3 wiz and 3 cleric so you can use that feat to give up two 2nd level spells to cast a 3rd level spell he already knows. You cant use the feat to cast a spell he doesn't have the level to actually know the spell in which to cast it.


EDIT: sorry " so that feat would only work if you were 3 wiz and 3 cleric so you can use that feat to give up two 1st level spells to cast a 2nd level spell he already knows.

[Doc_Maynot]

They could gain early entry via Sanctum Spell or Versatile Spellcaster along with Heighten Spell

[SinsI]

Sanctum Spell is 3.0
Versatile Spellcaster doesn't qualify you (as you don't yet know that higher spell)

[Doc_Maynot]

Sanctum Spell is 3.0
Versatile Spellcaster doesn't qualify you (as you don't yet know that higher spell)

Sanctum spell is from Complete Arcane, Versatile Spellcaster can let one cast a heightened version of a spell you do know. (Why I said, that heighten was needed too.)

[evyldead]

IF you have that but just straight out using versatile spellcaster is impossible to do what he wants that build to do. without that metamagic feat you HAVE to take 3 levels in wizard AND 3 levels in cleric.

[hemming]

How many of those traps do acid damage or nonhp damage? I'm curious how well my Troll Blooded Trapfinder concept will work.

I should clarify that I'm looking at 3.5 DMG -

If using random generation rules for a level 3 party (p82), then there is only about a 10% chance of a trap you encounter doing either acid or nonhp dam. I'm not counting traps that have non-damaging other effect (ghouls touch, etc.).

2% chance of acid/trap - 8% chance of poison

-------------

For every room you explore there is an 8% chance of finding a trap (not accounting for doors)

Every door has a 15% of being trapped (assuming you are randomly generating for each 'door frame' space

[Gnaeus]

You are level 3. Your combined wealth is 10800 gold.

Or you could do it at level 4. Or level 5. It shouldn't be fatal not having it yet at level 3.


(and no, DM should never discount items just because they "might be" created by a paladin..

And yet, a wand of lesser restoration created by a paladin is a perfectly legal 1500 gp item. 750 if it is created by an archivist. Many are the character sheets of mine that have enjoyed their level 1 lesser restoration wand.


(and no, DM should never discount items just because they "might be" created by a paladin. Especially dealing with Wizards that are only kept on a leash by WBL)

Woah! Woah! Woah! You are moving the goalposts big time here. If the party of all wizards is not better than a standard 4 person party, there is no reason to handicap them by making them work harder than bog standard party. If the party of all wizards IS better than standard 4 person party, this line of reasoning is justified, but your entire argument in the thread is invalidated.


Cloak of Charisma is +2 is 4000 gold, crafted is 2000 gold (+80 XP)
wand of lesser restoration is 2*3*750 = 4500 gold.
BTW, that wand is also more than 1/4 of each individual's WBL, so DM's are free to forbid it.

You are using more than 60% of all your combined resources (and spending a feat + some XP to boot) on your lesser restorations.

For a WAND of lesser restoration. The only reason you would need a wand of lesser restoration is if you expect to be encountering lots of ability damage, in which case, the standard 4 person party will likely also be looking for a similar wand (because their cleric isn't likely to be packing many restorations at this level). Otherwise, your Scribe Scroll guy makes a couple of scrolls, at a huge cost of 25 gp/2=12.5 gp +10 (or 20) gp to have the archivist (or paladin) cast the spell. Then, at level 5, Your wand guy pays 375 (or 750)+ 10 (or 20) gp and makes the wand.

Alternately there are partially charged wands.

And the + charisma and + UMD items are long term investments for the party. They aren't JUST to get your restoration needs met. They help you cover all the gaps that come from not having a divine caster, including how you use any divine wands and scrolls that you find and don't want to sell. Heck, it even lets your Focused Specialist UMDer bypass his banned schools.

And no, you aren't "Spending a feat" to get scribe scroll or craft wands for lesser restoration. You are joyfully taking scribe scroll and craft wands because they let your party of 4 wizards roll MUCH longer without resting, while radically increasing their versatility and introducing WBL to a new world of hurt. You will also take craft wondrous. You MAY even have someone take craft arms and armor, just for your enchanted robes or spell storing weapons, but you might escape that.


UMD is not your class skill, your maximum ranks are (3+3)/2 = 3.
DC to use wand is 20, if you roll 1 you can't retry for 24 hours.

So on average you'll be able to use it 4-5 times a day.

Your party face has 14 charisma, so +2. 3 Ranks gives +5. Masterwork UMD item is +2, for +7. Custom +3 UMD item costs 900 (450 crafted). Total cost 950 gp (500 with craft wondrous). Total UMD bonus +10. +11 with the charisma headband. Maybe +13 with an aid another from his familiar. You should be good. Depending on DM ruling, your raven may be able to use it with HIS version of your UMD if you roll 1.


It might be better to buy a custom command word activated 1/day Lesser Restoration item. (only 2*3*1800/5 = 2160 gold).

Or you could do that.

[DMVerdandi]

Reserve feats are your friend early on.

All day blasting for the cost of keeping one slot full. worth it.

[Venger]

Reserve feats are your friend early on.

All day blasting for the cost of keeping one slot full. worth it.

Tragically, the earliest reserve feats can come online is lvl 3 (requiring 2nd lvl spls)

precocious apprentice will let you cast a 2 at 1, but you'll have to keep it on ice for 2 whole levels to get much juice out of a reserve feat. the way range scales makes this a little problematic too (acidic splatter for example is 5ft/lvl, a risky proposition at lvl 1)

unless you meant later on (3-6 or so) in which case, definitely agree.

[Killer Angel]

I know I'm late, but...


I say starting at level 3 and going until 20 do you think that a group of 4 wizards could reliably survive? No cohorts, no body guards. You have yourself and your spellbook nothing else.

you would do well even with 4 sorcerers.

[Marnath]

Tragically, the earliest reserve feats can come online is lvl 3 (requiring 2nd lvl spls)

precocious apprentice will let you cast a 2 at 1, but you'll have to keep it on ice for 2 whole levels to get much juice out of a reserve feat. the way range scales makes this a little problematic too (acidic splatter for example is 5ft/lvl, a risky proposition at lvl 1)

unless you meant later on (3-6 or so) in which case, definitely agree.

What are you talking about? Precocious Apprentice for Acid Arrow, human bonus feat or Flaw for Acidic Splatter and done. 2d6 acid at ten feet forever, from level 1.

[hemming]

Would using core only significantly impact survivability at 3rd level? If your answer is no, then the reserve feats, etc. don't really matter.

Throwing out cross classed or prestige classed wizard builds also seems to be cheating the question to me - although, personally, I still think 4 core build wizards would likely do just fine

[ZeroNumerous]

Four level 1 wizards that adventure? Hm.

Warforged Focused Transmuter 1. Ban Enchantment, Abjuration, and Necromancy. Take the ACF to trade Scribe School and Wizard bonus feats for fighter bonus feats. Take Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple via your bonus feat. Stat weights: INT/STR/CON/Everything else. Take an Octopus Familiar via Stormwrack.

Spells you like: Babau Slime, Color Spray, and Fist of Stone. Plus whatever you'd like as per standard God wizard.

Job: Buff up, then hold down a big threat. Grapple losers at a +STR touch attack with a +7+STR grapple mod. Deals 1d4+STR + 1d8 if Babau Slime is cast first. Fist of Stone and a 14 STR(elite array gets this easily) nets a touch of +5 to start a grapple and a +12 grapple mod at level 1. Deals 1d6+STR + 1d8(Babau).

Human Focused Conjurer 1. Ban Evocation, Illusion, and Necromancy. Take the ACF to trade Scribe Scroll for a fighter bonus feat. 1st level feat gets Precocious Apprentice for Acid Arrow, Human Bonus Feat for Acidic Splatter, then Fighter feat for Point Blank Shot. Stat weights: INT/DEX/CON/Whatever. Take a familiar you think is cute.

Job: You shoot things with your damage to close out after everyone is disabled. You can still pick up a couple of God spells with your mundane feats.

Spells you like: Sleep, Lesser Orb of Acid, Melf's Acid Arrow, etc.

Human Focused Conjurer 1. Ban Evocation, Necromancy, and Enchantment. Take the ACF to trade Scribe Scroll for a fighter bonus feat. 1st level feat picks up Spell Focus(Conjuration), human feat nicks Empowered Summoning, and your fight bonus feat is... Surprise: Improved Initiative. Stats: INT/STR/CON/Whatever. Trade familiar for Rapid Summoning, or take a familiar you think is ugly.

Job: You summon the beatsticks. Then you kill people disabled by spells via scythe.

Equipment: A scythe. Proficiency be damned.

Spells you like: Summon Monster line. Standard God wizard spells(Grease, Sleep, Color Spray, et all).

Gnome Focused Illusionist 1. Ban Evocation, Necromancy, and Abjuration. Take the ACF to trade Scribe Scroll for a fighter bonus feat. 1st level feat picked up Spell Focus(Illusion), and your fighter bonus feat is Improved Initiative. Stats: INT/CON/Whatever. Take a familiar you hate and whom hates you.

Job: You stop people from being useful. Generally via Color Spray. However, you could also use Charm Person if you want friends, and can kill via Power Word: Pain.

Spells you like: Charm Person, Color Spray, and Power Word: Pain.

I've laid out four wizards that would do fairly well in every encounter, in my opinion. They get better as levels advance, can all cast as often as Sorcerers of equal level, and some even have things to do when very low on spells.

In my opinion, they don't really need a specific and specially made dungeon just for them.

The only problem I think will be encountered: You can't really reliably deal with traps until level 2. So you just gotta summon a dude and have him walk into junk until its safe.

[Fouredged Sword]

Traps are easily dealt with by having a party member be really hard to kill.

I suggest Trollblooded warforged using martial wizard to get the toughness prereq. Unless that trap deals fire or acid damage, you ignore it. A lot of low level traps just deal normal damage, or at most 1d4 or so fire/acid damage. Buy a few potions of healing to solve that issue. You are also immune to fatuige, so laugh at the drawback from trollblooded.

[killem2]

I have been thinking this over for a while, and if we are allowing splat books, in terms of the big three, clerics, druids, and wizards I would prefer if I had a choice as a player to have four druids over four wizards.

When you factor in greenbound summoning, and the sheer amounts of spells per day a druid can get, there isn't much they can't deal with.

It's all really a moot point anyway, because clerics, druids, and wizards are all hitting the critical mass for ass kickery, very early on, and all would do very well to upset a Dungeon / Game Master's dreams very quickly.

[albeaver89]

It's all really a moot point anyway, because clerics, druids, and wizards are all hitting the critical mass for ass kickery, very early on, and all would do very well to upset a Dungeon / Game Master's dreams very quickly.

I dunno given that the DM can create his own classes, feats, and spells for his creatures, I think the DM should always have the upperhand.

[albeaver89]

Traps are easily dealt with by having a party member be really hard to kill.

I suggest Trollblooded warforged using martial wizard to get the toughness prereq. Unless that trap deals fire or acid damage, you ignore it. A lot of low level traps just deal normal damage, or at most 1d4 or so fire/acid damage. Buy a few potions of healing to solve that issue. You are also immune to fatuige, so laugh at the drawback from trollblooded.

Uhh, not to burst a bubble but as a DM I'd rule you can't be a machine with heritage...Just seems stupid.

"I'm a robot with troll blood derpa-der"

[Fouredged Sword]

Got built with living troll components along side all that wood and metal.

[Story]

Traps are easily dealt with by having a party member be really hard to kill.

I suggest Trollblooded warforged using martial wizard to get the toughness prereq. Unless that trap deals fire or acid damage, you ignore it. A lot of low level traps just deal normal damage, or at most 1d4 or so fire/acid damage. Buy a few potions of healing to solve that issue. You are also immune to fatuige, so laugh at the drawback from trollblooded.

Sadly Toughness isn't a fighter bonus feat. I suggested a build using a similar idea though.

[hemming]

Traps are easily dealt with by having a party member be really hard to kill.

I suggest Trollblooded warforged using martial wizard to get the toughness prereq. Unless that trap deals fire or acid damage, you ignore it. A lot of low level traps just deal normal damage, or at most 1d4 or so fire/acid damage. Buy a few potions of healing to solve that issue. You are also immune to fatuige, so laugh at the drawback from trollblooded.

Core only scenarios interest me much more - it is too easy to optimize to overcome any challenge by using all source materials and meta-game optimizing the party

Hyberbole but: "I'm a level one wizard, that is also an adult red dragon"

[Story]

There's a difference between metagaming and spending a couple feats on survivability that anyone could take.

Then again in a core only environment, the standard party has a large chance of dieing at level 1 too.

[Harrow]

Just a reminder, the OP also specified starting at level 3, not level 1. Things have already become a lot less swingy for a 'Standard' party by level 3, but I think a 4 Wizard party starting with an extra feat, 2nd level spells, a few more hitpoints, and a lot more gold would do very well, even in a Core Only environment and without buying animals to use in place of Fighters.

[Zombulian]

Just a reminder, the OP also specified starting at level 3, not level 1. Things have already become a lot less swingy for a 'Standard' party by level 3, but I think a 4 Wizard party starting with an extra feat, 2nd level spells, a few more hitpoints, and a lot more gold would do very well, even in a Core Only environment and without buying animals to use in place of Fighters.

Oh I completely missed that. Yeah they'll do fine.

[SinsI]

Woah! Woah! Woah! You are moving the goalposts big time here. If the party of all wizards is not better than a standard 4 person party, there is no reason to handicap them by making them work harder than bog standard party. If the party of all wizards IS better than standard 4 person party, this line of reasoning is justified, but your entire argument in the thread is invalidated.

Wizards get far, far bigger boost out of wealth than any other character, essentially paying for near-unlimited extra class abilities.
Every Ring of Wizardry, every Pearl of Power, every Ioun Stone, every Metamagic Rod, every Riding Dog, every wand, every scroll - all of them provide extreme increase to their survivability, power and versatility. That's why if we are trying to judge viability of a full-wizard party, we must be as strict as possible with their wealth.

As an alternative, give all your wizards two feats: Vow of Powerty and Eidetic Spellcaster (maybe even for free). For spells with costly material components, replace them with XP at the usual (1XP:50 Gold) ratio.
Try to judge their performance after that...

[eggynack]

Wizards get far, far bigger boost out of wealth than any other character, essentially paying for near-unlimited extra class abilities.
Every Ring of Wizardry, every Pearl of Power, every Ioun Stone, every Metamagic Rod, every Riding Dog, every wand, every scroll - all of them provide extreme increase to their survivability, power and versatility. That's why if we are trying to judge viability of a full-wizard party, we must be as strict as possible with their wealth.
That's utterly ridiculous. If you would judge a four fighter, or fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard party by one wealth standard, then you must judge the four wizard party by the exact same wealth standard. So, if you would be a strict as possible with the wealth of those two parties, then sure, be as strict as possible here. If you would not be that strict, do not be that strict here. Assessing how a team of wizards compares to a varied team, and then adjusting for the fact that wizards are awesome, makes no sense at all. If wizards get a greater boost from wealth (I'm actually doubtful, given that items grant fighters, y'know, flight and other things necessary for functioning), that's just a thing they get to do.

[Zombulian]

This conversation is so weird. People are arguing that an all Wizard party isn't good, but that at the same time Wizards should be nerfed in this scenario because they're too good? Pick a side.

[SinsI]

The problem is that Wizard only has to pay Spell x minimum Caster level * 50 gold to use Fly in one of his slots (and effect scales with his caster level), while Fighter needs to pay Spell x Caster*360 gp for one daily use of it at minimal efficiency.
So a group of fighters would need at least 7 times more wealth to get worse effect than wizard does.

If you really want to hold them to the same Wealth standard:
Four totemists/Incarnates/Crusaders/unarmed Swordsages with Vows of Poverty
and
Four wizards with Vows of Poverty and Eidetic Spellcaster.

[eggynack]

The problem is that Wizard only has to pay Spell x minimum Caster level * 50 gold to use Fly in one of his slots (and effect scales with his caster level), while Fighter needs to pay Spell x Caster*360 gp for one daily use of it at minimal efficiency.
So a group of fighters would need at least 7 times more wealth to get worse effect than wizard does.

If you really want to hold them to the same Wealth standard:
Four totemists/Incarnates/Crusaders/unarmed Swordsages with Vows of Poverty
and
Four wizards with Vows of Poverty and Eidetic Spellcaster.
No, I want to hold them to the same wealth standard, but for a standard game, without forcing feats on folks. That's the challenge. If a wizard has to pay less to fly, well, good for him. That's the whole point. That's why a team of four wizards is good at stuff. If you think that a team of four wizards would work fine, then why would you argue against that idea? If you think that they wouldn't work fine, then there's obviously some flaw to the class that compensates for their efficient use of wealth. Either way, same frigging standard of wealth. This isn't party of four against party of four nerfed wizards. It's party of four against a party of four wizards.

[Gnaeus]

The problem is that Wizard only has to pay Spell x minimum Caster level * 50 gold to use Fly in one of his slots (and effect scales with his caster level), while Fighter needs to pay Spell x Caster*360 gp for one daily use of it at minimal efficiency.
So a group of fighters would need at least 7 times more wealth to get worse effect than wizard does.
.

Then I guess a group of fighters would be worse than a group of wizards, which is pretty much our point exactly. The very point is that wizards are better able to handle challenges by level 3. Part of that betterness is their arguably superior use of WBL. If team fighter or team balanced party gets a wealth break, team wizard gets the exact same wealth break. Anything else is admitting that team wizard is superior from the start and needs a nerf just to be on the same playing field as the balanced party, or in other words, that team wizard, in a same game environment, is more survivable than the balanced party.

[SinsI]

My problem with a team of 4 wizards is that whenever something comes up that they are ill prepared to deal with, the answer in this thread is "let's throw money at it".

So while a standard party uses Fighter instead of Riding Dog, Rogue to deal with traps and prevent being Ambushed and Cleric to deal with Attribute Damage and Poisons and Healing, 4 wizard party seems to spend their wealth not on improving their strong points that make them so good, but on covering their numerous weak points.
But normally they won't have that much wealth to cover all bases!

[Zombulian]

My problem with a team of 4 wizards is that whenever something comes that that they are ill prepared to deal with, the answer in this thread is "let's throw wealth at it".

So while a standard party uses Fighter instead of Riding Dog, Rogue to deal with traps and prevent being Ambushed and Cleric to deal with Attribute Damage and Poisons, 4 wizard party seems to spend their wealth not on improving their strong points that make them so good, but on covering their numerous weak points.
But normally they won't have that much wealth to cover all bases!

Okay you're being silly. "We are spending our wealth intelligently by covering our weak spots." Is not something to be chastised.

[Gnaeus]

My problem with a team of 4 wizards is that whenever something comes that that they are ill prepared to deal with, the answer in this thread is "let's throw wealth at it".

So while a standard party uses Fighter instead of Riding Dog, Rogue to deal with traps and prevent being Ambushed and Cleric to deal with Attribute Damage and Poisons and Healing, 4 wizard party seems to spend their wealth not on improving their strong points that make them so good, but on covering their numerous weak points.
But normally they won't have that much wealth to cover all bases!

They will have the same wealth as any other party. They have some things that they will want to spend more on, like scrolls and wands. Other things, like weapons and armor and flight items, they will spend less on. They can do many things at reduced cost, which is part of the joy of being a caster.

Why would a group of 4 wizards NOT spend their wealth covering their weak points? Not to do so would be foolish in the extreme. They have I Win buttons for most encounters, of course they will spend their money dealing with traps and other things they are not naturally well equipped to handle. Which party doesn't do that? I mean, they all have intelligence scores of 14-20, they will act rational.

[Fouredged Sword]

The issue is that in a party of 4 diverse classes, you have classes that are spending tons of wealth just to be be useful, like a fighter, and classes that spend wealth on the class features of wizards, like rogues, to be useful.

The wizards don't need to spend a ton of wealth on magic weapons and armor, nor do they spend tons of wealth on access to spells.

They are free to spend their wealth on utility and covering their weak points because in a standard party they would be giving their wealth to other characters to bring them up in power. In a standard 4 person party, the fighter need wealth the most, and the rogue a close second.

[eggynack]

My problem with a team of 4 wizards is that whenever something comes up that they are ill prepared to deal with, the answer in this thread is "let's throw money at it".
No, the answer in this thread is, "Let's throw money at it, until we reach the same wealth limit as would be placed on a standard party of four." If we are overreaching the normal amount of wealth that would be granted to any other party, then just say so, but placing arbitrary wealth restrictions on one of the groups is ridiculous. The thing is, the things that a fighter does are cheap. That's why fighters are bad. The things that a wizard does are insanely expensive. That's why wizards are good. If fighters could do everything that a wizard can do by paying 100 GP, fighters would not be bad. The wizards would normally have this much wealth to cover their bases, because we are presumably working off of wealth by level. No more, no less. You're complicating things needlessly.

[Fouredged Sword]

You know, I wonder if anyone ever decided to break down the classes by the value of their class features in GP.

A wizard gets X scrolls of various levels per day.

A fighter gets mostly feats and bonuses to attack.

I think we could determine a cost/level gold system. It would be a horrid idea in actual play, but an interesting idea for a thought experiment.

[Crustypeanut]

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Magicka-Zombie-Driver-HD-and-More-Now-Have-Steam-Trading-Cards-2.jpg?1371796651

Gonna go with yes

MAGICKA FTW!

I've actually tried running a 'circle of eight' group through the PC game Temple of elemental Evil.. but that game is woefully lacking in many important spells (not to mention its buggy as all hell), so I had a hard time getting far like that.

[SinsI]

Why would a group of 4 wizards NOT spend their wealth covering their weak points? Not to do so would be foolish in the extreme. They have I Win buttons for most encounters, of course they will spend their money dealing with traps and other things they are not naturally well equipped to handle. Which party doesn't do that? I mean, they all have intelligence scores of 14-20, they will act rational.

Because "I Win" buttons are situational, and you may want to spend your wealth on getting more of those "I Win" buttons to cover other types of encounters instead of spending them on things that only reduce your weaknesses?

What do you do against, say, a dungeon filled with Poison Needle dart traps, with some strategically laid out ambushes by Crossbow-armed skeletons? Or against some Drow warriors that use equipment like nets or alchemist's fire?

[dascarletm]

Here's a thought, since level three would probably be the hardest this is what we should do:

Get four posters willing to roll up a wizard make a wizard for this hypothetical party.

Get a DM willing to run either an undisclosed level three adventure, or make one.

Run the adventure without the players knowing which one it is or any info until they get in game.

See how well they do.

For a control, if feeling rather ambitious, make a standard party and do the same.

Compare notes on how the parties did.

To be thorough of course you'd need to do this in replicate, but who has time for that...

[hemming]

There's a difference between metagaming and spending a couple feats on survivability that anyone could take.

Then again in a core only environment, the standard party has a large chance of dieing at level 1 too.

Oh yeah - my argument isn't that wizards have less chance of survival in a core only setting than a standard party (wizards do just fine)

My argument is that if you are throwing on crazy powerful templates from source material then you kind of remove the "wizard" question altogether - pretty sure a party of level 3 commoner experts w/ troll blooded warforged tossed on top would do pretty well

[Gnaeus]

Because "I Win" buttons are situational, and you may want to spend your wealth on getting more of those "I Win" buttons to cover other types of encounters instead of spending them on things that only reduce your weaknesses?

And you will. But a party of 4 focused specialists with 14 int will have 16 level 2 spells, 20 level 1 spells. If you assume a 6 encounter day, which will be pretty darn ambitious for a typical party of 4, you are already running with 2 second and 3 first level spells for every encounter, with a few left over. Throw in a couple hundred gp for situational scrolls per character (made with scribe scroll, so 12 gp per level 1 scroll, 75 gp per level 2) and you should have any conceivable set of encounters more than covered. Everything else is disposable income to be used filling holes.

And some spells can serve for multiple encounters. If your "tank" wizard starts out the day with Protection From Arrows, Mage Armor, and Alter Self: Lizard Man, he should be able to walk through most of those encounters you listed with little or no other resource expenditure.


What do you do against, say, a dungeon filled with Poison Needle dart traps,

What does a standard party do? Its rogue probably has a search around +10. He will fail his search about half the time. He will fail his disable around half the time. The cleric probably isn't packing more than one restoration, so probably, standard party is screwed.

Team wizard can always blast everything with acid from a reserve feat, or test likely trap areas with summons. A level Wand of summon monster 1 at caster level 1 or 2 will handle this better than the rogue.

But wait: Sepia Snake Sigils are the same CR as the Poison Needle Darts. Search DC 28, so rogue is SOL. Wizards with detect magic (and 4 wizards have a lot of detect magics) find it automatically. Erase kills it. In a dungeon filled with these, team wizard has a real advantage.


with some strategically laid out ambushes by Crossbow-armed skeletons?

4 wizards + 4 familiars with alertness are at least as likely to spot these ambushes as the standard party. Then, this encounter is trivial to solve. Skeletons are mindless, so Silent Image (a wall) stops the problem. Summon monster (anything to stand next to skeleton) probably stops the problem. They will use well under their allotted 2 level 2, 3 level 1 spells per encounter here.

Even better. Command Undead. Now I Haz a Skele with a x-bow!!!


Or against some Drow warriors that use equipment like nets or alchemist's fire?

Blow the heck out of them with orbs? Trap them with Web? Block their ranged attacks with an obscuring mist while you summon attackers? Resist energy and laugh at their fire attacks?

So far you haven't given a scenario that team wizard will not do at least as well in. The only one of these that I "threw money at" was the trap encounter, the wand of SM I is a good investment that will be a likely purchase. And I pointed out that we would actually do better than team normal if I simply picked a different trap of the same CR. It isn't that team wizard is unbeatable. It is certainly possible to beat them. It is even possible that there may be corner cases where team normal is a little bit better. But they will be far less common than the cases where team wizard has a real advantage, and most of these corner cases will be solvable by the standard Tier 1 answer. Withdraw and rememorize spells. With as many spells as we have, we can even leave some slots blank for this purpose.

[Marnath]

Here's a thought, since level three would probably be the hardest this is what we should do:

Get four posters willing to roll up a wizard make a wizard for this hypothetical party.

Get a DM willing to run either an undisclosed level three adventure, or make one.

Run the adventure without the players knowing which one it is or any info until they get in game.

See how well they do.

For a control, if feeling rather ambitious, make a standard party and do the same.

Compare notes on how the parties did.

To be thorough of course you'd need to do this in replicate, but who has time for that...

This is already a thing people are doing. Did you miss the link? O.o

[Fouredged Sword]

Well, we are starting at level 1, but that is the level range we where talking about at the time.

Also, traps. A ECL 3 wizard party is expected to handle 4 CR 3 traps before they run out of ability to deal with it before resting. Not a dungeon full of traps, 4. They can set them off with summons and walk on past or point a tower shield in the direction the trap originates from and walk past if the trap resets.

After 13 traps of CR=ECl they level.

[hemming]

Well, we are starting at level 1, but that is the level range we where talking about at the time.

Also, traps. A ECL 3 wizard party is expected to handle 4 CR 3 traps before they run out of ability to deal with it before resting. Not a dungeon full of traps, 4. They can set them off with summons and walk on past or point a tower shield in the direction the trap originates from and walk past if the trap resets.

After 13 traps of CR=ECl they level.

Source please! Using the random dungeon generation from DMG for a third level party should give you the number of traps a 3rd level party is expected to beat - right?

[Fouredged Sword]

A CR3 trap is a CR3 encounter. A party of level 3 is expected to be able to face 4 CR3 encounters a day.

[hemming]

A CR3 trap is a CR3 encounter. A party of level 3 is expected to be able to face 4 CR3 encounters a day.

Source it myself then (DMG p49)

Though I do not see where it states that traps should follow the guidelines for monster encounters (text seems pretty repeatedly explicit about what type of encounters they are referring to)

I concede: The randomly rolled dungeons do tend to be a little bit of a "trap-a-palooza" but the random trap CR for level 3 PCs varies btwn 1-3 (only about 28% are CR3)

[dascarletm]

This is already a thing people are doing. Did you miss the link? O.o

I DID! thanks for pointing that out.

[eggynack]

Because "I Win" buttons are situational, and you may want to spend your wealth on getting more of those "I Win" buttons to cover other types of encounters instead of spending them on things that only reduce your weaknesses?

What do you do against, say, a dungeon filled with Poison Needle dart traps, with some strategically laid out ambushes by Crossbow-armed skeletons? Or against some Drow warriors that use equipment like nets or alchemist's fire?
How about you just let team wizard spend their gold as they desire, and then, if the team presented is incapable of handling a particular challenge, we'll assess where the gold expenditure went wrong. Creating restrictions on how gold can be spent that don't exist within the game makes no sense. Besides, wizards usually operate better when they have a number of versatile spells, instead of a massive number of situational spells. Otherwise you prepare stuff like "Instantly destroy beholder," and you come across an aboleth, and you're presumably screwed. Saying that the wizards are spending their gold poorly is logical, though perhaps your specific argument is wrong. Saying that they can't spend their gold in this way is illogical.

[Harrow]

Source please! Using the random dungeon generation from DMG for a third level party should give you the number of traps a 3rd level party is expected to beat - right?

That's how many traps they're expected to beat in an entire adventure, not before resting.

[SinsI]

What does a standard party do? Its rogue probably has a search around +10. He will fail his search about half the time. He will fail his disable around half the time. The cleric probably isn't packing more than one restoration, so probably, standard party is screwed.
6 Ranks, +2 Elf, +2 Masterwork Item is already +10. + whatever Int he has.
And looking for traps is something that allows you to take 20. So Rogue easily finds every single trap out there.
Once the party knows what trap it is, the Fighter can walk out in front and risk that Fort 12 save with his high AC - his Fort is probably +6 or better. Plus he has all that armor and shield - he will fail to defend himself from maybe something like 1 in 10 such traps. A single Lesser Restoration from the cleric is more than enough for a normal party.



Team wizard can always blast everything with acid from a reserve feat, or test likely trap areas with summons. A level Wand of summon monster 1 at caster level 1 or 2 will handle this better than the rogue.
How many of those can you use, and how long do they last? Your characters better have some extensive Knowledge: Dungeons and Architecture, or you are gonna waste your short lived summons!

You find a treasure chest that might have valuable things in it. But it might be trapped. Do you blast it with acid?



But wait: Sepia Snake Sigils are the same CR as the Poison Needle Darts. Search DC 28, so rogue is SOL. Wizards with detect magic (and 4 wizards have a lot of detect magics) find it automatically. Erase kills it. In a dungeon filled with these, team wizard has a real advantage.
Detect magic only detects the strength and location of each aura. Sepia Snake Sigil gives off Faint Aura, just as any other spell of level 3 and below.
What exactly you Erase - a Sepia Snake Sigil, or one of a myriad Arcane Marks on dungeon walls, or a spell trigger that actually prevents a trap from being sprung (so by Erasing it you activate the trap)?

Oh, and Sepia Snake Sigils Trap are CR4. Poison Needle Trap is CR 1.


4 wizards + 4 familiars with alertness are at least as likely to spot these ambushes as the standard party. Then, this encounter is trivial to solve. Skeletons are mindless, so Silent Image (a wall) stops the problem. Summon monster (anything to stand next to skeleton) probably stops the problem. They will use well under their allotted 2 level 2, 3 level 1 spells per encounter here.
What if Skeletons act first, and make a pincushion out of 1 or 2 of your wizards - they get Improved Initiative?
Command Undead (2nd level slot) targets only a single enemy. How many 1/3 or 1/2 CR Skeletons do you face in a CR 3 encounter?

[killem2]

I will say, I do not allow combinations of WBL. That I do not believe was ever the intention of WBL.

A party of 6 players, just starting out, could afford some really nasty stuff, if they got to combine their wealth.




I dunno given that the DM can create his own classes, feats, and spells for his creatures, I think the DM should always have the upperhand.

And I completely agree, but a DM should also not be metagaming either. While I pose challenges for my players, I would not create silver bullets either. The OP, I don't believe is insinuating an arms race though.

[eggynack]

I will say, I do not allow combinations of WBL. That I do not believe was ever the intention of WBL.

Seems fair as long as the same restriction would be enforced for the diverse party, which it presumably would be.

[Story]

Of the 14 CR1 traps listed in the DMG, only 5 require trapfinding to find. It's rather convenient that they're all poison needle traps and not say, poison dart traps.

Incidentally, poison needle traps use injury poison, meaning that giving everyone Shape Soulmeld: Astral Vambraces as suggested earlier is enough for complete immunity.

Also, expecting a fighter to tank with their fort save is silly. At this level, the difference in saves is probably only +2 anyway.

[killem2]

Seems fair as long as the same restriction would be enforced for the diverse party, which it presumably would be.

Well, I always treated and thought WBL was suppose to be the wealth of that one person from their for lack of better word, adventuring job.

[eggynack]

Well, I always treated and thought WBL was suppose to be the wealth of that one person from their for lack of better word, adventuring job.
Maybe when you're starting out, but you can presumably do whatever you want with your wealth once it's not just what you managed to pick up before you started the game. So, if we're doing this from level three on, then I think the level three assessment would assume uncombined wealth, while the level four assessment would assume unrestricted wealth.

[Bonzai]

Traps are something easily dealt with by a wizard party, though it can be a little resource heavy. Mage hand, summons, detect magic, wands of detect traps, etc... If the party is cautious there should be no problems.

[dascarletm]

And looking for traps is something that allows you to take 20.

You can't take 20 on a check that has penalty for failure, and if it doesn't the time it takes is 20x as long.


Traps are something easily dealt with by a wizard party, though it can be a little resource heavy. Mage hand, summons, detect magic, wands of detect traps, etc... If the party is cautious there should be no problems.

This is viable at higher levels, yes.

Summons last typically 1round/level. (18seconds at level 3). This will only help for a very small volume of time.

Detect magic will see magical traps, for 1min per level, while concentrating

wands of detect traps could be useful, but I'd want to spend my limited money at low levels on something else.

Mage hand only casts on a single target, so I assume you take a 5 lb anything and bring it with you to hit traps 30ft in front of you. Some traps may or may not be set off by such a thing, but it is a good strategy since you only need to cast it once per trap (assuming no combat or concentration breaking stuff happens in the meantime).

I don't see it as being no problem, but doable.

[hemming]

That's how many traps they're expected to beat in an entire adventure, not before resting.

I've used randomly rolled dungeons before and they do have a much higher distribution of traps than a 'normal' dungeon (including published adventures/dungeons) - so I will admit that it is probably not a fair standard to go by

Counting up encounters makes a difference as well

I normally wouldn't count a trap as an encounter...but I could be in the wrong here. I haven't found a real answer in RAW

[SinsI]

You can't take 20 on a check that has penalty for failure, and if it doesn't the time it takes is 20x as long.

The penalty is for disabling traps (if you fail by 5 or more), not for searching.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0035.html

[Gnaeus]

6 Ranks, +2 Elf, +2 Masterwork Item is already +10. + whatever Int he has.
And looking for traps is something that allows you to take 20. So Rogue easily finds every single trap out there.

Cool. Take your time. You take 2 minutes every 10 feet of the dungeon. Since there is obviously no time constraint or wandering monsters, we will just rest at will, and walk into every encounter with 36 spells ready to go.



Once the party knows what trap it is, the Fighter can walk out in front and risk that Fort 12 save with his high AC - his Fort is probably +6 or better. Plus he has all that armor and shield - he will fail to defend himself from maybe something like 1 in 10 such traps. A single Lesser Restoration from the cleric is more than enough for a normal party.

The poison dart trap you mentioned has a +15 to hit, so his AC is pretty much junk. My hypothetical tank with Alter self: Lizard man, Protection from arrows, and Mage armor has an AC similar to the tank, but the poison dart trap can only injure him if it crits. At a DC 10 even my wizard has a good chance of saving. So the single lesser restoration from a scroll lasts longer than your cleric.



How many of those can you use, and how long do they last? Your characters better have some extensive Knowledge: Dungeons and Architecture, or you are gonna waste your short lived summons!

50 from a wand, + what we carry in memory. They last long enough to walk down a corridor, which is plenty long. Depending on circumstances, a couple of castings of or scrolls of mount may work better. They last hours, should set off almost any trap, and they have HP and stats enough to walk through several of those poison dart traps.


You find a treasure chest that might have valuable things in it. But it might be trapped. Do you blast it with acid?

A Celestial Monkey opens it. Sets off the trap, which has a manual reset. Then we evaluate whether we want to Knock it, wrap it up for later, leave it with an Alarm spell to see if someone comes for it, sunder it, blast it, or something else.



Detect magic only detects the strength and location of each aura. Sepia Snake Sigil gives off Faint Aura, just as any other spell of level 1-3.
What exactly you Erase - a Sepia Snake Sigil, or one of a myriad Arcane Marks on dungeon walls, or a spell trigger that actually prevents a trap from being sprung (so by Erasing it you activate the trap)?

The myriad arcane marks will add massively to the encounter CR.


Oh, and Sepia Snake Sigils Trap are CR4. Poison Needle Trap is CR 1.

Poison Dart trap, which you specified, is CR 4. Even if we are stupid, and set off all the poison needle traps by hand, which we will not do, we will still only fail half the time, and so the average poison needle trap will do about 1 point of con damage. That means that every 3 of these, we will need to use a single scroll, if we are stupid and like setting off traps with our faces.


What if Skeletons act first, and make a pincushion out of 1 or 2 of your wizards - they get Improved Initiative?

Pretty much the EXACT same thing team normal does if the skeletons act first, and make a pincushion out of your rogue and wizard. Neutralize the encounter (like with a single silent image). Heal the dropped party members with a wand of CLW, and move on.


Command Undead (2nd level slot) targets only a single enemy. How many 1/3 or 1/2 CR Skeletons do you face in a CR 3 encounter?

4-6. If they are standing out in the open like good little dorks ready for us to blow them away. But in your scenario, they were lurking in ambush, which will up their CR, so probably only 2-4. So they would have to get pretty lucky to drop a single wizard before we neutralize them. And if our tank is walking around with Protection from Arrows (lasts 3 hours and also ends your poison dart traps) then the encounter is 0 threat as 3 people withdraw and one guy tanks them with a sling.

But wait. A Troll Skeleton is also a CR 3 encounter, which we trivially end with one no save spell and make into our slave, thereby probably finishing multiple encounters with a single spell. He has improved initiative also, and is very likely to own the diverse party. Again, just because there may be some encounters where a party with a rogue or cleric may be better, there are also many encounters where team wizard will just be better. And we have lots of options for the encounters that do not play to strengths.

[DrDeth]

Traps are something easily dealt with by a wizard party, though it can be a little resource heavy. Mage hand, summons, detect magic, wands of detect traps, etc... If the party is cautious there should be no problems.

If the traps are magic, yes. And if you can go around.

[dascarletm]

The penalty is for disabling traps (if you fail by 5 or more), not for searching.
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0035.html

you still have the problem that

It takes a full-round action to search a 5-foot-by-5-foot area or a volume of goods 5 feet on a side.

Spending 2 minutes on every door or chest is fine, but if the trap is in a hallway......

[Hurnn]

The only reason the theoretical 4 wizard party is even close to being equal to a standard party is because of the restrictions placed on it in the beginning. 4 wizards breeze through 4 ecl appropriate encounters a day. let them buy things like dogs and mounts and its game over. The only way a party could be more powerful is 1 cleric 1 wizard 1 druid and a 2nd wizard or druid.

On a side note I think 3 wizards and a sorcerer would be slightly better off because the Sorcerer is the default party face and the wizards then don't have to waste stat points on Cha, and even though he loses 1-2 spells per day at that level because he can't specialize he makes up for it with some on demand flexibility.

[hemming]

If hirelings were widely allowed then it really changes the equation - if you allowed the arms and equipment guide everyone could hire an ogre for 4 gp/day

[SinsI]

The poison dart trap you mentioned has a +15 to hit, so his AC is pretty much junk.
You mix Poison Dart (CR1, Atk +8) and Poisoned Dart (CR4, Atk +15)


A Celestial Monkey opens it. Sets off the trap, which has a manual reset. Then we evaluate whether we want to Knock it, wrap it up for later, leave it with an Alarm spell to see if someone comes for it, sunder it, blast it, or something else.
Sets of the trap. You say goodbye to most of the treasure from this dungeon. How much did you spend on those wands, again?


The myriad arcane marks will add massively to the encounter CR.
Why? They are cantrips with no costly components. If the dungeon has even a single caster (and someone did create all those magical traps), he can put as many as he wishes and it is all included in his own CR, just like any other spell he casts for free.

And very often the best trap trigger is "Manual, by a well-hidden Tucker's kobold".
All those wizard tricks don't work that well on such a trigger...

[Story]

You mix Poison Dart (CR1, Atk +8) and Poisoned Dart (CR4, Atk +15)

True, but you didn't respond to any of the other points, or any of my points. And I did look it up.

[Gnaeus]

You mix Poison Dart (CR1, Atk +8) and Poisoned Dart (CR4, Atk +15)

Cool. Now my wiz with protection from arrows is totally immune. Also, since you need to fail 2 easy saves to take any damage, it isn't much of a threat.



Sets of the trap. You say goodbye to most of the treasure from this dungeon.

We haven't mentioned a single trap that would do so much as break a potion bottle, let alone " destroy all treasure in the dungeon".


How much did you spend on those wands, again?

Probably 1500 gp, unless I could find one partially charged. In other words much less than you spent on your elf rogue, who is way less useful in many encounters.



Why? They are cantrips with no costly components. If the dungeon has even a single caster (and someone did create all those magical traps), he can put as many as he wishes and it is all included in his own CR, just like any other spell he casts for free.

Because that isn't how CR works. If the caster is contributing to this encounter, it is like an encounter with multiple creatures. Now, instead of a CR 4 trap, it is a CR 4 trap + a CR 5 wizard for a CR 7 encounter. Since I am level 3, it would be a CR + 3-4 encounter, fully justifying a huge expenditure of resources.


And very often the best trap trigger is "Manual, by a well-hidden Tucker's kobold".
All those wizard tricks don't work that well on such a trigger...

Neither does rogue searching, since the kobold can spring traps from more than 10 feet away, or spring it the moment the rogue steps within 10 feet and begins taking 20.

[hemming]

Because that isn't how CR works. If the caster is contributing to this encounter, it is like an encounter with multiple creatures. Now, instead of a CR 4 trap, it is a CR 4 trap + a CR 5 wizard for a CR 7 encounter. Since I am level 3, it would be a CR + 3-4 encounter, fully justifying a huge expenditure of resources.


You don't add the CR of the PC or NPC that created a trap to the CR of a trap

SensI - if all traps were free and included in the CR of their creator, then all traps would be CR0 (they were all created by someone)

[eggynack]

You don't add the CR of the PC or NPC that created a trap to the CR of a trap.
Perhaps. You might increase the CR of the trap anyway though, just because it's a more complicated trap.

[Gnaeus]

You don't add the CR of the PC or NPC that created a trap to the CR of a trap

Not normally, no. But if the NPC was actively casting OTHER spells that made the trap more difficult to detect, as in his case, you would either treat those encounters as combining (as you would if the NPC cast bulls strength on an ogre then sent it out to fight) or as a difficulty enhancement to the difficulty of the encounter.

[hemming]

Not normally, no. But if the NPC was actively casting OTHER spells that made the trap more difficult to detect, as in his case, you would either treat those encounters as combining (as you would if the NPC cast bulls strength on an ogre then sent it out to fight) or as a difficulty enhancement to the difficulty of the encounter.

That's fair - I misunderstood the issue

Edited w/ more RAW - per p75 of DMG, it looks like you would add the spell level to CR

[Gnaeus]

That's fair - I misunderstood the issue

Edited w/ more RAW - per p75 of DMG, it looks like you would add the spell level to CR

Unless you considered them multiple traps, in which case they would have separate CRs. Or a circumstantial modification to the difficulty of the encounter, as on P 39. I reject his proposition that you can take a CR 4 magical trap, surround it with 100 arcane marks to make it undetectable to detect magic, and still call it a CR 4 trap. Its no different than having a monster under circumstances giving it concealment. It is also a custom modification to a standard encounter, and as such not terribly appropriate to this discussion. It would be like putting in a bunch of orc rangers with favored enemy arcanist and the mageslayer line. If he is specifically modifying encounters to make them more difficult to the party of wizards he is trying to challenge, that doesn't say much as to how they survive standard encounters for a 4 person party.

[eggynack]

Aren't cantrips usually counted as having a spell level of a half? So, a CR 4 trap with 100 arcane marks around it would have a CR of... 54? Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

[hemming]

Aren't cantrips usually counted as having a spell level of a half? So, a CR 4 trap with 100 arcane marks around it would have a CR of... 54? Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Yeah - whether you choose to treat them as separate traps or add the spell level to the CR of one trap the results should be the same (both are valid) That doesn't make sense - totally different results but both valid methods

-Appealing to an ECL adjustment might make more sense in this case (do we think it actually merits a CR54?) but some adjustment is called for

I recuse myself from this thread as I can't stay on topic

[SinsI]

And why, exactly, do you want to add Arcane Mark to that exact trap and not to one of its neighbors?

Arcane marks can be a cheap way to provide permanent light in the Dungeon, or serve some other purpose (warning, directions, etc.) - they might've even been left by another adventuring party to mark areas already visited in a labyrinth.
Normal party would be very glad to receive extra XP for defeating a trap just because dungeon's creator choose such a cheap way to provide illumination!

Traps have an official way of being detected - use of Search Skill. Just because some Wizards think that they can cheat using cantrips doesn't mean that it in any way contributes to the CR of the actual trap (or that those cantrips should serve as a substitute for Rogue). Wizards don't know how traps work, Clerics get their Find Trap spell for a reason (despite having Detect Magic themselves). Or are you going to use Arcane Disciple on that, too?
And how exactly do you know that you have to cast Erase to disarm that trap? That's player's knowledge (or something a Rogue can tell once he identifies the trap), not common knowledge among High Academia. Maybe one type of arcane trigger should be Erased - but Erasing another type will cause the whole trap to activate instantly (and, say, crush your party of wanna-be adventurers wizards like a bug).
Or maybe those arcane triggers are shielded from the sides using lead, so you can only Detect their Magic while being in the direct zone there they are triggered. They detect intruders in a cone - and give out any aura in that same cone, so once you are there it is already too late.

Both Detect Magic and Arcane Sight are going to give lots and lots of False Positive (and maybe even False Negative) readings, as you don't know how to distinguish between common Magic Mushroom emanations, rune graffiti (Arcane Mark) and types of spell triggers.

Use of Detect Magic or Arcane Sight should provide circumstantial bonus to the searcher's Search skill, at most.

[Endarire]

I assume if I can cast a spell, I know its full writeup. Arcane mark (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/arcaneMark.htm) specifically mentions erase (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/erase.htm) removing it. A typical Wizard can cast both spells.

[SinsI]

If that "trap" was Arcane Mark, and you've managed to properly identify it with Spellcraft after casting a Detect Magic on it (DC 20 ) - no problem, as that spell is a cantrip.

But the trap is Sepia Snake Sigil, and you don't automatically have that spell - so you are not guaranteed to know how to disable that trap. You also have no chance to identify it with Spellcraft before it activates, as you only see its effect afterwards. And there will definitely be other types of magical traps that auto-activate their payload as soon as somebody Dispels or tries to Erase their spell trigger.

Plus the text that hides Sepia Snake will probably be masked as clue to some nearby puzzle, indistinguishable from other - harmless - magical writings that are going to be abundant in the dungeon.

[Samalpetey]

All the arcane marks would add to the situation would be that one of the four wizards would need to pass a spellcraft check to find the conjuration aura

[SinsI]

All the arcane marks would add to the situation would be that one of the four wizards would need to pass a spellcraft check to find the conjuration aura

Don't mix player's knowledge (that there are Sepia Sigil traps) and character's knowledge (not a Rogue and not under influence of Find Traps spell = no information on magical traps.)
And as I've mentioned - a lot of spell triggers might be visible only from within the area that actually triggers them.
Summoning monsters are not a panacea either - there are delayed activation traps, so while your monster passes through safely, you are affected by the trap.

Hell, even if players try to cheat using physics (http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=43), I'd rule that all their efforts are still equivalent to a +2 circumstantial bonus - and to nothing more. Sure, they are directing the characters to turn every stone - but characters aren't as precise as players are - if they fail a Search check, they accidentally skip the tiny area that contained the actual trigger.

[Story]

How about getting a wand of Amenuensis to cast on anything before reading it? Admittedly, that's more useful for Explosive Runes than SSS since the snake will still get you at range.

[eggynack]

Don't mix player's knowledge (that there are Sepia Sigil traps) and character's knowledge (not a Rogue and not under influence of Find Traps spell = no information on magical traps.)
I dunno why my character, who has studied magic for his entire life, would know significantly less about magic than I do. Seems illogical.

[SinsI]

I dunno why my character, who has studied magic for his entire life, would know significantly less about magic than I do. Seems illogical.

Because there is no Internet in D&D, and even making a simple copy of a book is prohibitively expensive. There are also numerous state and personal secrets - anything that can be used as a magic weapon of mass destruction is not going to be given out lightly to just anyone.
Any spell you encounter can also easily be an original creation. With no wide-spread sharing of magical knowledge, there are bound to be numerous different variants of the same spell.

While your characters might know magic, he might not know about magic traps.

Hell, characters in D&D have to spend their extremely limited skill points on Knowledge just to get a tiny bit of insight on some monster - insight that you, as a player, can easily get from any Monster Manual!

[eggynack]

Because there is no Internet in D&D, and even making a simple copy of a book is prohibitively expensive. There are also numerous state and personal secrets - anything that can be used as a magic weapon of mass destruction is not going to be given out lightly to just anyone.
It might surprise you to learn that people managed to learn things before the internet existed, especially when they were highly intelligent and motivated to learn things about that exact field. These wizards have presumably spent a decent chunk of their lives learning exactly this sort of information.


Hell, characters in D&D have to spend their extremely limited skill points on Knowledge just to get a tiny bit of insight on some monster - insight that you, as a player, can easily get from any Monster Manual!
Perhaps, but this is knowledge (arcana) and spellcraft. There's no way that these wizards aren't maxing both of those things out.

[SinsI]

It might surprise you to learn that people managed to learn things before the internet existed, especially when they were highly intelligent and motivated to learn things about that exact field. These wizards have presumably spent a decent chunk of their lives learning exactly this sort of information.
It really only picked up after invention of printing press. Your character is probably limited to something like 10 books that his master had.

As for what they were doing with those huge chunks of their lives? It takes a (1000 gold + a week) per spell level to research a spell; if it is not viable it automatically fails; otherwise you still need to pass a DC 10 + spell level check (and your Spellcraft, even if maxed is not that great). Now, how long do they have to earn the money for even a single 1st level spell using their Profession skills during their non-adventuring downtime? Add the times needed for item and scroll crafting...


Perhaps, but this is knowledge (arcana) and spellcraft. There's no way that these wizards aren't maxing both of those things out.
No, this is knowledge about traps and ways to hide them, exclusive to rogues (and Gods) - not something taught in Academia.

[Story]

Because there is no Internet in D&D, and even making a simple copy of a book is prohibitively expensive.

Only for spellbooks. Everything else is crazy easy to produce and disseminate. Remember this isn't like real life medieval times. Magic is a thing.


It really only picked up after invention of printing press. Your character is probably limited to something like 10 books that his master had.

It takes 6 seconds to read and memorize a book. It takes a cantrip to duplicate one. There's no real reason why a Wizard with Teleport and downtime for research shouldn't eventually know basically everything there is to know that is publicly available.

And at higher levels, once you start chatting with outsiders and buzzing around the planes, it's more a question of knowing everything that isn't actively being hidden by Vecna.

[eggynack]

As for what they were doing with those huge chunks of their lives? It takes a (1000 gold + a week) per spell level to research a spell; if it is not viable it automatically fails; otherwise you still need to pass a DC 10 + spell level check (and your Spellcraft, even if maxed is not that great). Now, how long do they have to earn the money for even a single 1st level spell using their Profession skills during their non-adventuring downtime? Add the times needed for item and scroll crafting...
Why are they spending all of their time on the spell research rules? The wizard spell list is plenty broad enough to accommodate our noble wizard army, especially when spell research rules are silly, and rely primarily on fiat. Someone can certainly use them in their own games, but I don't think we should touch fiat requiring things in this neutral terrain.


No, this is knowledge about traps and ways to hide them, exclusive to rogues (and Gods) - not something taught in Academia.
Not really. Sepia snake sigil is just a spell. No mechanism, no complication, just a spell. That means that our noble wizard would know stuff about it.

[Marnath]

Why does it matter? If any of the wizards die they will find a naked prisoner with wizard levels 1d4 rooms deeper into the dungeon who just so happens to be able to use the old wizard's spellbook and gear.:smallamused:

[SinsI]

Why are they spending all of their time on the spell research rules? The wizard spell list is plenty broad enough to accommodate our noble wizard army, especially when spell research rules are silly, and rely primarily on fiat. Someone can certainly use them in their own games, but I don't think we should touch fiat requiring things in this neutral terrain.

Not really. Sepia snake sigil is just a spell. No mechanism, no complication, just a spell. That means that our noble wizard would know stuff about it.
Not all wizards have access to every single spell in the "wizard spell list" out there. Most of them have never even heard of "sepia snake sigil".


Only for spellbooks. Everything else is crazy easy to produce and disseminate. Remember this isn't like real life medieval times. Magic is a thing.



It takes 6 seconds to read and memorize a book. It takes a cantrip to duplicate one. There's no real reason why a Wizard with Teleport and downtime for research shouldn't eventually know basically everything there is to know that is publicly available.

And at higher levels, once you start chatting with outsiders and buzzing around the planes, it's more a question of knowing everything that isn't actively being hidden by Vecna.

Can you give any source for that? My quick googling gives a variant rules (http://fizzygoo.com/Dnd/Variant/RoleBooks.html) about books - and it is anything but "6 seconds to read and memorize a book".

And to copy it using magic you need to use aforementioned Amanuensis - not a Cantrip, but a lvl 3 spell, that only copies 250 words per minute, with 2500 words per caster level. (and without copying illustrations).
With 64000 words per median novel, that's 3*50*64000/2500 = 3840 gold to copy a book using magic - without any illustrations, and without accounting for the parchment/paper cost!

Just the paper/parchment for a single book comes down to hundreds of gold!

[eggynack]

Not all wizards have access to every single spell in the "wizard spell list" out there. Most of them have never even heard of "sepia snake sigil".
I don't know why either of these things would be true. There could easily be spell indexes, cataloging the various available spells and their levels, just as exists in our world. I mean, if we're still assuming 3rd level here, that means about a +12 or +13 to spellcraft, which in the latter case means that he'd automatically identify a sepia snake sigil that's in place by taking 10.


Can you give any source for that? My quick googling gives a variant rules (http://fizzygoo.com/Dnd/Variant/RoleBooks.html) about books - and it is anything but "6 seconds to read and memorize a book".
I'm pretty sure he's referring to scholar's touch (RoD, 167), which is a first level spell that lets you do this.

And to copy it using magic you need to use aforementioned Amanuensis - not a Cantrip, but a lvl 3 spell, that only copies 250 words per minute, with 2500 words per caster level. (and without copying illustrations).
It's a cantrip in the spell compendium.

[Story]

I'm pretty sure he's referring to scholar's touch (RoD, 167), which is a first level spell that lets you do this.


Plus Autohypnosis skill if you want to memorize it and not just read it. But usually reading it is enough anyway.

[SinsI]

I don't know why either of these things would be true. There could easily be spell indexes, cataloging the various available spells and their levels, just as exists in our world. I mean, if we're still assuming 3rd level here, that means about a +12 or +13 to spellcraft, which in the latter case means that he'd automatically identify a sepia snake sigil that's in place by taking 10.
Because that would require that every wizard that created a new spell would send a helpful description of it to allsuch indexes - be they in an enemy country or anywhere else. With all the troubles of trying to travel around in a world with Random Encounters abound just to deliver that description.

One would think that if you want to trap your books against intruders with Sepia's Sigil, you won't exactly publicize it to the whole world.



I'm pretty sure he's referring to scholar's touch (RoD, 167), which is a first level spell that lets you do this.
That's "read through", not "memorize". You barely remember anything afterwards.


It's a cantrip in the spell compendium.
Oh, so it is 6 times cheaper. 600 gold for the spell and 200 gold for the paper to copy an ordinary novel.
Not exactly "easily affordable" either.

[eggynack]

Because that would require that every wizard that created a new spell would send a helpful description of it to such indexes. One would think that if you want to trap your books against intruders with Sepia's Sigil, you won't exactly publicize it to the whole world.
The thing I said, where you automatically identify the spell, seems somewhat relevant.


That's "read through", not "memorize". You barely remember anything afterwards.
I tend not to immediately forget a book I read entirely. I'd figure that our noble high intelligence wizard would forget even less. However, if you really have a problem with that, I guess he could just spend 30 seconds, and a few castings, and read the book five times.

[SinsI]

The thing I said, where you automatically identify the spell, seems somewhat relevant.
That's Spellcraft check DC 20 + spell level, no retries - so no "take 10" - and you are only able to identify it after seeing the spell effect (arguably, only after triggering it).

[eggynack]

That's Spellcraft check DC 20 + spell level, no retries - so no "take 10".
It doesn't look like that's a thing for taking 10. Also, you have four separate wizards, and you could probably even use some aid another.

[SinsI]

It doesn't look like that's a thing for taking 10. Also, you have four separate wizards, and you could probably even use some aid another.
You have to see the effect of the spell that is already in place to identify it. The effect is a snake flying into your face, attacking you. How do you "Aid Another" in such a situation?


I tend not to immediately forget a book I read entirely. I'd figure that our noble high intelligence wizard would forget even less. However, if you really have a problem with that, I guess he could just spend 30 seconds, and a few castings, and read the book five times.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12158517&postcount=5

[eggynack]

You have to see the effect of the spell that is already in place to identify it. The effect is a snake flying into your face, attacking you. How do you "Aid Another" in such a situation?
The effect of the spell could easily be the words on the page, for that is what the spell creates.


http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12158517&postcount=5
That's a fair interpretation, I suppose, though you're still reading the entire book. I think you're underestimating how much people remember from reading stuff.

[georgie_leech]

That's a fair interpretation, I suppose, though you're still reading the entire book. I think you're underestimating how much people remember from reading stuff.

It varies from person to person; some people have near eidetic memory, while I've literally seen someone forget what they read not five minutes before.

Either way, we're getting rather far afield from the original point. Wizards (and Sorcerers, and any other Polymorpher) will learn about other creatures, probably through reading if they've never directly seen the creature before. It's a Knowledge check to determine what they remember; they don't automatically remember everything they've ever read, but they don't forget it all either. The alternative is that anyone that makes a successful knowledge check looks at a never before seen creature and immediately deduces its name, type, subtypes, abilities, etc. from the way it walks or something.

[Tysis]

That's Spellcraft check DC 20 + spell level, no retries - so no "take 10" - and you are only able to identify it after seeing the spell effect (arguably, only after triggering it).

If we let our conjurer make this check he has +6 from skill ranks +5 from intelligence, +2 because SSS is conjuration, +2 from 5 ranks in knowledge arcana, +6 from the other wizards using aid another(who have at least +11 to spell craft so they can always aid another) and another +6 from their familiars(i'm assuming the conjurer has abrupt jaunt and no familiar)

So our lvl 3 conjurer has +27 to this spellcraft check

The only thing in question is whether or not being able to see the writing counts as in effect,as its definitely in place.

SSS needs at least 25 characters and arcane mark can have no more than 6, so at the very least the wizards know that it isnt an arcane mark.

[SinsI]

The effect of the spell could easily be the words on the page, for that is what the spell creates.

"The hidden sigil cannot be detected by normal observation, and detect magic reveals only that the entire text is magical."

[eggynack]

"The hidden sigil cannot be detected by normal observation, and detect magic reveals only that the entire text is magical."
Seeing the fact that the text is magical seems like you're seeing the effects of the spell.

[NotAnAardvark]

There seems to be a fundamental disconnect here in the argument:

-A full wizard party is not broken and a standard party would do better

-A full wizard party requires one to design a campaign that intentionally starves them of resources and puts them up against foes with bloated CRs, meta-game knowledge or specific niche designs to be as unfriendly to spellcasters as possible in order to keep them in check

It seems people are arguing both at the same time and they're irreconcilable. Which is it?

[Zombulian]

There seems to be a fundamental disconnect here in the argument:

-A full wizard party is not broken and a standard party would do better

-A full wizard party requires one to design a campaign that intentionally starves them of resources and puts them up against foes with bloated CRs, meta-game knowledge or specific niche designs to be as unfriendly to spellcasters as possible in order to keep them in check

It seems people are arguing both at the same time and they're irreconcilable. Which is it?

Yeah I'll be honest I don't know what side he's on so I'm having trouble arguing.

[SinsI]

A full wizard party is imbalanced.
Some situations are a walk in a park for them,
for other situations they have no way of handling them at all, instead having to rely on wealth and "creative" interpretation of rules in attempt to substitute their spells for missing essential party abilities like healing, status removal, Find Traps/Disable Device, Spot skill or simply not having enough HP.

[Marnath]

Oh, so it is 6 times cheaper. 600 gold for the spell and 200 gold for the paper to copy an ordinary novel.
Not exactly "easily affordable" either.

A wizard knows all cantrips except his banned schools, so it's free.

[SinsI]

A wizard knows all cantrips except his banned schools, so it's free.

If he is willing to waste his daily castings on it, just paper/parchment alone costs a fortune. BTW, at 4 cantrips/day a level 1 wizard would need a week just to copy one book; even the best wizard can only copy one book in a little bit more than 4 hours.

And I was considering the cost of a book copied by hiring an NPC wizard (which turned out 2-3 times more expensive than same copy created by a professional scribe) - even though it is missing things like binding and illustrations.

[Hurnn]

There seems to be a fundamental disconnect here in the argument:

-A full wizard party is not broken and a standard party would do better

-A full wizard party requires one to design a campaign that intentionally starves them of resources and puts them up against foes with bloated CRs, meta-game knowledge or specific niche designs to be as unfriendly to spellcasters as possible in order to keep them in check

It seems people are arguing both at the same time and they're irreconcilable. Which is it?

The latter, the people arguing the former fooling themselves.

If the wizards can use their WBL freely they bypass all the weakness they have, and will make a mockery out of almost any encounter.

[HolyCouncilMagi]

I'd say the wizard party is both viable and superior, though only by a small amount at such low levels. I'd certainly prefer a professional martial adept to some undersized mount who happens to not suck at biting and the occasional trip, though even this massive upgrade in quality isn't worth losing a wizard ally over. Likewise, wands aren't free, and having something less clumsy and more versatile than simple "summon walks into trap" to overcome potentially more than half-assed wards against my entry into a domain is lovely. I might very well wish I had abandoned a fellow practitioner of the arcane arts when my summon triggers an Alarm with any number of methods utilized to suppress its magic aura.

And hey, no accounting for taste, but fake as it may be Clerics can do some exceptional things with their lesser almost-magic. I will admit that on occasion they may have displayed an ability or two my own accomplished colleagues would perhaps have a modicum of trouble replecating.

Also, it's important to note that this isn't wizards versus fighters and rogues. While the wizard party is generally dedicating approximately two members to fulfilling the necessary applications of outside classes, leaving two wizards left to invoke the true power of the arcane arts. And given that the standard party also has its own wizard, this significantly diminishes (though doesn't negate) the all-wizard party's overall advantage.

So, yes. All-wizard is viable and mostly superior, but the gap is not large and I would sorely miss the niceties of the balanced party, particularly the Cleric. Note that most of my issues diminish or cease to exist as levels are gained.

[SinsI]

The latter, the people arguing the former fooling themselves.

If the wizards can use their WBL freely they bypass all the weakness they have, and will make a mockery out of almost any encounter.

Make such a party. With detailed explanations of their WBL allocation and all their prepared spell slots.

And we'll throw 4 CR3 encounters at them in 1 day, and see how well can they prepare for challenges ahead of time to "bypass all the weakness they have" without knowing what's actually in store for them.

[Endarire]

A 4 Wizard party, if well coordinated, can probably handle one day of 4 CR encounters of equal level. Mind you, this may include use of partially charged wands.

[SinsI]

If they know what they'll face - no doubt, as evidenced by numerous examples in this thread. But in real games they have to prepare their spells and allocate WBL before they know anything about the future challenges. That's why to test their viability you have to first set up your wizards and their abilities, and only after that present them with challenges.

[hemming]

I'd say the wizard party is both viable and superior, though only by a small amount at such low levels. I'd certainly prefer a professional martial adept to some undersized mount who happens to not suck at biting and the occasional trip, though even this massive upgrade in quality isn't worth losing a wizard ally over. Likewise, wands aren't free, and having something less clumsy and more versatile than simple "summon walks into trap" to overcome potentially more than half-assed wards against my entry into a domain is lovely. I might very well wish I had abandoned a fellow practitioner of the arcane arts when my summon triggers an Alarm with any number of methods utilized to suppress its magic aura.

And hey, no accounting for taste, but fake as it may be Clerics can do some exceptional things with their lesser almost-magic. I will admit that on occasion they may have displayed an ability or two my own accomplished colleagues would perhaps have a modicum of trouble replecating.

Also, it's important to note that this isn't wizards versus fighters and rogues. While the wizard party is generally dedicating approximately two members to fulfilling the necessary applications of outside classes, leaving two wizards left to invoke the true power of the arcane arts. And given that the standard party also has its own wizard, this significantly diminishes (though doesn't negate) the all-wizard party's overall advantage.

So, yes. All-wizard is viable and mostly superior, but the gap is not large and I would sorely miss the niceties of the balanced party, particularly the Cleric. Note that most of my issues diminish or cease to exist as levels are gained.

Since this one is right on topic - I un-recuse my from this thread for one final comment: +1 to the above

-My original point in bringing up the randomly rolled dungeons was to find an impartial standard (not an intentionally anti-wizard standard) to go by

-I don't normally count traps the party encounters outside of combat toward the expected daily ECL (if other people do this, fine). A trap that is a component of a combat encounter is different and should be adjusted for.

-At levels 1-3 it is questionable to me if the all wizard party is better prepared to deal with a variety of challenges but is likely still viable; level 4 and above, no longer a concern

[HolyCouncilMagi]

Make such a party. With detailed explanations of their WBL allocation and all their prepared spell slots.

And we'll throw 4 CR3 encounters at them in 1 day, and see how well can they prepare for challenges ahead of time to "bypass all the weakness they have" without knowing what's actually in store for them.

Of course, in order for such a challenge to have any meaning whatsoever, we'd either need the challenges made independently of any knowledge of how the wizards are being built or, better yet, a group of challenges that's well-established as a good challenge for a normal party of that level. Yet in actuality none of these methods will really produce satisfactory results unless we spend tedious amounts of time ensuring both groups are at the same "optimization level". Which lends itself to wonder if we can ever really make such results accurate enough to be applicably worth anything.

Trying to prove something conclusively is much harder than the people involved in this debate are making it out to be.

[SinsI]

No, all that's required of that challenge is that it should be suitable for a standard 4-man party (Melee, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard) - even if it is tailor-made against that specific 4-Wizard build.

[Marnath]

No, all that's required of that challenge is that it should be suitable for a standard 4-man party (Melee, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard) - even if it is tailor-made against that specific 4-Wizard build.

Umm no, that is not how fair comparisons work. It's sort of the opposite of the right way to test this.

[SinsI]

Umm no, that is not how fair comparisons work. It's sort of the opposite of the right way to test this.

Let's say it like this: standard 4-man party with each character optimizing only for his own role has no weak points; you can throw any challenge of proper CR at them, and they should overcome it without too big a drain on their resources. You can't tailor-make a challenge that would put them at a disadvantage. If you can make such a challenge for a 4-wizard party, they are automatically not as viable as a standard party.

[DrDeth]

There seems to be a fundamental disconnect here in the argument:

-A full wizard party is not broken and a standard party would do better

-A full wizard party requires one to design a campaign that intentionally starves them of resources and puts them up against foes with bloated CRs, meta-game knowledge or specific niche designs to be as unfriendly to spellcasters as possible in order to keep them in check

It seems people are arguing both at the same time and they're irreconcilable. Which is it?

Obviously a standard party would do better. But a all wizard party could work. As well as all cleric, and perhaps even all druid.

All wizard party will have to use spells to get tanks, spells to find traps and has very limited healing- and afaik no way to cast Restore spells, and heal many other conditions. They also will have issues in a dungeon full of deadly and complex Gygaxian traps. Some encounters will be quite easy, however. Altho it would take a lot of diversity and game expertise to put together such a party, they'd likely do far better than a all Fighter, all Monk or all Rogue party (well, unless the rogues were heavy into UMD, and even so...).

It'd be a interesting challenge.

The main issue would be four encounters a day. They'd have to blow a lot of cash on scrolls, etc. Mind you, I am talking normal mid-levels here. Low levels, certainly there'd be problems, and at the highest levels, the Wizards would make just about every encounter trivial.

Right now we're trying an all spellcaster party, with LA's (which is a bit of a nerf for spellcaster) but the druid pets are the tanks. No significant traps, yet.

I have seen a all Paladin party in action, and it's scary good. (No real way to get past traps other than just taking it on the chin, but boy, those guys had iron chins)

[Vogonjeltz]

The latter, the people arguing the former fooling themselves.

If the wizards can use their WBL freely they bypass all the weakness they have, and will make a mockery out of almost any encounter.

How do they use wbl to have not a d4 HD?

Because they still die from getting pushed off a house.

[BrokenChord]

Let's say it like this: standard 4-man party with each character optimizing only for his own role has no weak points; you can throw any challenge of proper CR at them, and they should overcome it without too big a drain on their resources. You can't tailor-make a challenge that would put them at a disadvantage. If you can make such a challenge for a 4-wizard party, they are automatically not as viable as a standard party.

The big problem here is that you're simply wrong that a standard party could handle any CR-appropriate challenge ever with minimal resource drain. To put it in your words, you *can* tailor-make encounters that screw them.

By your logic, the second we make an encounter that hits the weaknesses of the standard party they become less viable than the wizards. The wizards don't have to be perfect to be viable. If your definition of "viable" is "has no weaknesses ever" then I don't even know what your "viable" standard party is made out of, because every party has weaknesses.

... And quite frankly, I think wizards can minimize whatever weaknesses they do have much better than the standard party can.

[SinsI]

No, every class has weaknesses (except for clerics. 4 clerics are better than any standard party) and their strong points, but it is not so for the parties.

The standard party is designed so that strong points of one cover the weak points of others (and boost strong points of others).
4 low level wizards are far more limited, as they can only cover their weaknesses with their wealth.

[BrokenChord]

No, every class has weaknesses (except for clerics. 4 clerics are better than any standard party) and their strong points, but it is not so for the parties.

The standard party is designed so that strong points of one cover the weak points of others (and boost strong points of others).
4 low level wizards are far more limited, as they can only cover their weaknesses with their wealth.

... You're really not getting how many weaknesses are covered by having more spells, are you? Anybody who has ever seen a wizard go nova knows it's something to crap your pants about. And you want to face four wizards going nova four times a day? They have the spells to make that a feasible plan, and nothing is stopping them from holding onto their slots for challenges that don't need them. They are no more wealth-dependent than a standard party.

And standard parties do in fact have weak points. Unless you're optimizing so hard that anything CR-appropriate isn't even worth considering anymore, but then the wizards would be optimized just as hard.

... Also, your definition of "fair" seems a bit misguided.

[Story]

Also, it is possible for Wizards to get near unlimited healing even at level 1. I already posted a build to do so.

[Hurnn]

Make such a party. With detailed explanations of their WBL allocation and all their prepared spell slots.

And we'll throw 4 CR3 encounters at them in 1 day, and see how well can they prepare for challenges ahead of time to "bypass all the weakness they have" without knowing what's actually in store for them.

Thats fine you do the same for a "standard party" I'm pretty sure we can tailor encounters that will make them dead on the first of 4, that fits your definition of a fair trial right....

[Rakoa]

I think SinsI is fighting a losing battle here, and trying to turn the tide with a ridiculous definition of "fair". Wizards have access to lots of gamechangers, more than enough to turn the tide in their favour in such a comparison.

[Vogonjeltz]

Also, it is possible for Wizards to get near unlimited healing even at level 1. I already posted a build to do so.

I don't think healing is the problem, it's the fragile Hit Die. A d4 won't soak much of anything, and is still vulnerable to being one-shot till even mid levels.

[ryu]

I don't think healing is the problem, it's the fragile Hit Die. A d4 won't soak much of anything, and is still vulnerable to being one-shot till even mid levels.

Oh so you want a build with more durability at level 1? Okay. Focused specialist conjuration abrupt jaunting necropolitan elves with fairy mysteries initiate. Bang. seventeen HP at level one plus the defense of abrupt jaunt and undead immunties. Not durable enough? Okay we can also get some DR/magic on this if you want.

[SinsI]

Oh so you want a build with more durability at level 1? Okay. Focused specialist conjuration abrupt jaunting necropolitan elves with fairy mysteries initiate. Bang. seventeen HP at level one plus the defense of abrupt jaunt and undead immunties. Not durable enough? Okay we can also get some DR/magic on this if you want.
You can't start as necropolitan unless the party starts at lvl 4. (You'd start as lvl 2, with 2400 gp leftover gold and XP half way to lvl 3).

[Story]

Actually you can do Necropolitan at level 3, meaning it is within the parameters of this thread's challenge.

Of course, that won't work for level 1. For level 1, I think you're best bet if giving everyone some combination of Astral Vambraces and Abrupt Jaunt.

Edit: Oh, I guess you're referring to the WBL issue. If you go strictly by WBL and require the 3k fee, then it's true you can't do it starting at level 3.

[SinsI]

You might, but you'd need some additional source of gold (300 gp). OK, I suppose you can sell your spellbook.

[ryu]

You might, but you'd need some additional source of gold (300 gp). OK, I suppose you can sell your spellbook.

Totally viable. Every cantrip you don't want is worth a lot of money at these levels, and the only cost to replace the spells you want at this level is time taking the whole transaction into account.

[TuggyNE]

Necropolitan at 3 is just dubious enough it's not worth arguing over, IMO. It's also not really necessary; just having a gray elf wizard with FMI easily gets to 24 HP at level 3, which compares favorably to a 14 Con Fighter with 27 HP, given the former's superior offenses and defenses (that's, what, 8 "no you can't hit me" uses/day?).

[ryu]

Still totally doable though. That's why I didn't simply drop the argument when selling the spellbooks came up. That's just a good money making strategy early game.

[Vogonjeltz]

Oh so you want a build with more durability at level 1? Okay. Focused specialist conjuration abrupt jaunting necropolitan elves with fairy mysteries initiate. Bang. seventeen HP at level one plus the defense of abrupt jaunt and undead immunties. Not durable enough? Okay we can also get some DR/magic on this if you want.

I'd prefer a build that isn't limited to level 4+ (you lose 3 levels from the necropolitan ritual, can't hit 0 XP or dies), as far as I can tell the conjuror ACF does nothing for HP.

What is fairy mysteries and what book is it from?

[ryu]

I'd prefer a build that isn't limited to level 4+ (you lose 3 levels from the necropolitan ritual, can't hit 0 XP or dies), as far as I can tell the conjuror ACF does nothing for HP.

What is fairy mysteries and what book is it from?

Fairy mysteries initiate makes int your hp stat instead of con. It's dragon material, but still counts. As for the abrupt jaunt instant speed teleporation that can be done interrupting declared enemy actions is actually better than HP. I just added the HP on for added ability to stifle early mage squishy arguments completely.

[Vogonjeltz]

Fairy mysteries initiate makes int your hp stat instead of con. It's dragon material, but still counts. As for the abrupt jaunt instant speed teleporation that can be done interrupting declared enemy actions is actually better than HP. I just added the HP on for added ability to stifle early mage squishy arguments completely.

How is that useful vs a ranged attack? The conjuror jaunts and the attacker just redirects to attack them in the new location.

Fairy mysteries requires a partner. That's problematic seeing as we are looking at a walking corpse.

[eggynack]

How is that useful vs a ranged attack? The conjuror jaunts and the attacker just redirects to attack them in the new location.
The abrupt jaunt can technically happen while the arrow is in mid-air. The interaction is kinda weird though. Some folks rule that you can only avoid the arrow if you abrupt jaunt to cover. Either way, it's not like defenses have to be perfectly universally applicable.


Fairy mysteries requires a partner. That's problematic seeing as we are looking at a walking corpse.
You can FMI before necro'ing.

[Vogonjeltz]

The abrupt jaunt can technically happen while the arrow is in mid-air. The interaction is kinda weird though. Some folks rule that you can only avoid the arrow if you abrupt jaunt to cover. Either way, it's not like defenses have to be perfectly universally applicable.


You can FMI before necro'ing.

Can you cite the rule for that? I can't seem to find anything that states attacks miss.

[Doc_Maynot]

You can FMI before necro'ing.

Or seeing as the discussion is about a party of four wizards, they could all just be Initiates, couldn't they? I mean they'd have that weird morning they all try to drink away... But still.

[ryu]

Plus how do you know there aren't any fey who are into that/are into being paid for the service? It doesn't even technically have to involve actual intercourse. You could spend the required time twerking if you wanted to.

Edit: Pretty sure the partner has to be a fey. Also they don't have to go that far with it.

[Vogonjeltz]

Or seeing as the discussion is about a party of four wizards, they could all just be Initiates, couldn't they? I mean they'd have that weird morning they all try to drink away... But still.

Only if they are all elves. Which wouldn't really be representative.

Ryu, probably because fey look down on mortals. So there's none who would. anywhere. Especially in hypothetical examples.

[eggynack]

Can you cite the rule for that? I can't seem to find anything that states attacks miss.
The rule for what? Your opponent shoots you, and while the arrow is in midair, you teleport 10 feet from where the arrow was going to hit. Thus, the arrow misses. Some have proposed that the arrow might just turn around in midair to hit the wizard, which is plausible as the arrow is targeting you instead of the square, but cover should mitigate that. You're teleporting after the opponent shoots the bow, not before, and you can do that because immediate actions can occur any time you want.

[Vogonjeltz]

The rule for what? Your opponent shoots you, and while the arrow is in midair, you teleport 10 feet from where the arrow was going to hit. Thus, the arrow misses. Some have proposed that the arrow might just turn around in midair to hit the wizard, which is plausible as the arrow is targeting you instead of the square, but cover should mitigate that. You're teleporting after the opponent shoots the bow, not before, and you can do that because immediate actions can occur any time you want.

You claimed the arrow would miss. I want to see a rule saying that, otherwise it still hits.

[eggynack]

You claimed the arrow would miss. I want to see a rule saying that, otherwise it still hits.
There isn't really some rule for it. There's just physics, which dictates that an arrow in motion doesn't suddenly alter its course in mid-air unless directed in such a fashion by magic. And physics, incidentally, is RAW. If you're on the prime material, anyway.

[ryu]

Only if they are all elves. Which wouldn't really be representative.

Ryu, probably because fey look down on mortals. So there's none who would. anywhere. Especially in hypothetical examples.

Who said anything about being mortal? Undead baby. Also it doesn't even have to go far. It could literally be taking turns with a simple massage.

Edit: Eggy is right. There is a specific rule stating that unless the rules say otherwise physics applies.

[Doc_Maynot]

Plus how do you know there aren't any fey who are into that/are into being paid for the service? It doesn't even technically have to involve actual intercourse. You could spend the required time twerking if you wanted to.

Edit: Pretty sure the partner has to be a fey. Also they don't have to go that far with it.

The feat uses the wording, "You and a partner with the Faerie Mysteries Initiate feat" while the feat itself is rather restrictive to elves, tallfellow halflings, and anyone from Celene, the Greyhawk setting's Elf Kingdom.

[Vogonjeltz]

There isn't really some rule for it. There's just physics, which dictates that an arrow in motion doesn't suddenly alter its course in mid-air unless directed in such a fashion by magic. And physics, incidentally, is RAW. If you're on the prime material, anyway.

So there's no rule, it's just what you want. Got it.


Who said anything about being mortal? Undead baby. Also it doesn't even have to go far. It could literally be taking turns with a simple massage.

Edit: Eggy is right. There is a specific rule stating that unless the rules say otherwise physics applies.

I looked it up, it uses the phrase "exuberant sensual act". That's no casual massage. Eew. By raw it totally goes that far.

And the ability doesn't say it makes attacks miss, so it doesn't.

[ryu]

The feat uses the wording, "You and a partner with the Faerie Mysteries Initiate feat" while the feat itself is rather restrictive to elves, tallfellow halflings, and anyone from Celene, the Greyhawk setting's Elf Kingdom.

Wait wait wait wait wait... wait. Faeries aren't allowed to learn the mysteries of the faerie mysteries initiates? I do believe we have dysfunctional raw or at least dysfunctional fluff.

There are many exuberant sensual acts. If they wanted to limit it to a specific one they would've done so. It's not like D&D has never tackled the subject matter directly before.

[eggynack]

So there's no rule, it's just what you want. Got it.

No, it's physics. Physics is a rule of the game. In particular, if an arrow were shot at someone in our world, and then that person were to teleport away with the arrow mid-flight, then the arrow would miss. As such is the nature of physics, so is it also the nature of the game.

[Doc_Maynot]

Exuberant: filled with or characterized by a lively energy and excitement
Sensual: relating to or consisting in the gratification of the senses or the indulgence of appetite

By definition, it could be an eating binge.

[ryu]

Exuberant: filled with or characterized by a lively energy and excitement
Sensual: relating to or consisting in the gratification of the senses or the indulgence of appetite

By definition, it could be an eating binge.

I like this interpretation. It's a glorious mental image.

[Doc_Maynot]

Wait wait wait wait wait... wait. Faeries aren't allowed to learn the mysteries of the faerie mysteries initiates? I do believe we have dysfunctional raw or at least dysfunctional fluff.

The Faerie in the title refers to the "Faerie Kingdom" of Celene, which is an elven nation in the Greyhawk setting.

[ryu]

The Faerie in the title refers to the "Faerie Kingdom" of Celene, which is an elven nation in the Greyhawk setting.

Okay so it's not straight up dysfunctional. It's just a nonsensical naming scheme. Got it.

[Story]

I'd prefer a build that isn't limited to level 4+ (you lose 3 levels from the necropolitan ritual, can't hit 0 XP or dies)

I just checked again and you're right. For some weird reason, it says that being left with 0xp kills you, not just negatives. Guess you can't do it at level 3 by RAW then after all.

Edit: On second thought you can do it, because losing the level sets the XP halfway. So you can do it at level 3 and it will leave you at level 2 with 1000xp. So it's actually better than I used to think.



Plus how do you know there aren't any fey who are into that/are into being paid for the service?

How would you like free qualification for Lich Loved?

[Vogonjeltz]

No, it's physics. Physics is a rule of the game. In particular, if an arrow were shot at someone in our world, and then that person were to teleport away with the arrow mid-flight, then the arrow would miss. As such is the nature of physics, so is it also the nature of the game.

And it is also physics that if one sped up as quickly as time stop they would die instantly from hitting air molecules, or detonate them destroying the planet. Oops, I guess the game ignores physics all the time.

The ability doesn't do what you want it to.

[olentu]

No, it's physics. Physics is a rule of the game. In particular, if an arrow were shot at someone in our world, and then that person were to teleport away with the arrow mid-flight, then the arrow would miss. As such is the nature of physics, so is it also the nature of the game.

Isn't the answer that, when you make an attack, if the attack roll meets or exceeds the targets AC then you hit and deal damage.

[eggynack]

And it is also physics that if one sped up as quickly as time stop they would die instantly from hitting air molecules, or detonate them destroying the planet. Oops, I guess the game ignores physics all the time.

The ability doesn't do what you want it to.
No, that's magic. Magic does what magic wants to do. Arrows are not magic, unless you make them magic, and then they would have to be the kind of magic that can turn an arrow around in mid-air. Bows do not say that arrows can turn around in mid-air, so they don't. I guess archery doesn't do what you want it to.

Edit:
Isn't the answer that, when you make an attack, if the attack roll meets or exceeds the targets AC then you hit and deal damage.
The issue is that you're changing the conditions of the attack in mid-air, such that it no longer works. It's pretty simple for melee, because you can just move such that you are no longer a legal target of the attack, as you are too far away, though it's more complicated for archery. The cover thing was my proposed solution, as that would also make you an illegal target for the attack, though that seems to have been ignored somewhat.

[BrokenChord]

You know, I'm impressed. It's page 8 9 of a thread other than the Dysfunctional Rules thread and still mostly on topic (at least we're discussing a feat related to the wizard party becoming more durable).

On-topic, I think an all CASTER party is the best thing ever, but just wizards have some flaws. I love magic, but a single list, even as large a list as the wizards have, is too restricted at this level and can't really cover all its bases. It's viable, I suppose, by the presented definitions, but since I don't really find the standard party viable anyway I can't really say I like these guys' chances either.

[Story]

But then what happens if the target of a charge teleports?

The amusing part is that by RAW, the charger continues moving straight towards the target, even if there's difficult terrain in the way, just as long as there's a clear path from the target's new location to the starting point of the charge.

[Vogonjeltz]

You know, I'm impressed. It's page 8 9 of a thread other than the Dysfunctional Rules thread and still mostly on topic (at least we're discussing a feat related to the wizard party becoming more durable).

On-topic, I think an all CASTER party is the best thing ever, but just wizards have some flaws. I love magic, but a single list, even as large a list as the wizards have, is too restricted at this level and can't really cover all its bases. It's viable, I suppose, by the presented definitions, but since I don't really find the standard party viable anyway I can't really say I like these guys' chances either.

Oh don't get me wrong, I love the idea, I just think their likely attrition rate will be very high.

[olentu]

Edit:
The issue is that you're changing the conditions of the attack in mid-air, such that it no longer works. It's pretty simple for melee, because you can just move such that you are no longer a legal target of the attack, as you are too far away, though it's more complicated for archery. The cover thing was my proposed solution, as that would also make you an illegal target for the attack, though that seems to have been ignored somewhat.

I don't see why it would matter. Either the attack has been rolled or it has not.

[eggynack]

I don't see why it would matter. Either the attack has been rolled or it has not.
I don't even know how the mechanics of that would work. How can you even be hit by the sword when you're ten feet beyond its reach? When do you even roll the attack roll, by the way? That might change things somewhat. Logically, as the attack roll incorporates armor class, it must occur as the weapon in question actually hits you. Thus, it may follow that that's too late for the jaunt. From there, it follows that you can actually jaunt before the attack roll, but after the attack, and thus be rid of the attack roll completely by becoming an illegal target. That solution would mean that you can't make sure that the attack roll would hit before dodging, but it may be the way to resolve this.

[olentu]

I don't even know how the mechanics of that would work. How can you even be hit by the sword when you're ten feet beyond its reach? When do you even roll the attack roll, by the way? That might change things somewhat. Logically, as the attack roll incorporates armor class, it must occur as the weapon in question actually hits you. Thus, it may follow that that's too late for the jaunt. From there, it follows that you can actually jaunt before the attack roll, but after the attack, and thus be rid of the attack roll completely by becoming an illegal target. That solution would mean that you can't make sure that the attack roll would hit before dodging, but it may be the way to resolve this.

Eh, I don't know how the official fluff of that interaction works either since as far as I know no official fluff for that specific use of that ability has been produced. But that's fluff.

As for when the attack is rolled, that is an interesting question. From a quick glance at the PHB it would seem that the attack roll represents an attempt to strike an opponent, which would seem to mean that until the attack roll is made the character has not yet actually attempted to strike an opponent.

But without something more concrete, however, I suppose this comes down to individual DM method of description. Some DMs describe the action such that the attempt to attack someone comes before the attack roll is made. Other DMs roll the attack and then describe what has happened. There are, of course, more variations but that would seem to be the main divide.