Wizards & their spell damage potential; Orbs of X et al.

[Deathcharge01]

Hello Playground,

I'm looking for your opinions based on experiences with damage dealing spells.

The Scenario:

We're all familiar with the line of level, 4 Orb of X spells that offer no save for damage or SR and tops out at 15d6(insert element) damage (max 90), but you get a fort save against an effect. Some members of my current group believe that the Orb's damage is game breaking. As a result, the DM introduced a reflex save for 1/2 damage against Orbs for game balance purposes. I've plainly called that bs and filled my Orb slots with empowered scorching rays. Now scorching ray is coming under scrutiny for being too OP. Meanwhile, the cleric is sitting across the table throwing around Flesh Ripper(10d8 untyped damage max 80, SR, ranged touch) and flying below the radar. I've pointed out that the Cleric has better damage potential with his DMM flesh rippers.

The Campaign:

We're currently at level 11, but handle CRs in the very late teens and early 20s with ease. At that CR, energy resistance is very common along with SR. My approach to this has been the spell Lower Spell resistance which has a very steep fort save to lower SR by 15. As such, SR is not an issue for anyone in the party. Our party consists of a Wiz/UM, Cleric, Warlock, Healer, a ToB abomination and a Necromancer.

I'm thinking of reverting to the God wizard(buff/disable/BFC). Anyways, what do you guys think? Pull no shots, speak plainly.

[Bloodgruve]

If a DM is worried about simple damage he's doing it wrong. Use other tactics and just shut down each of his encounters for a few sessions then ask him if he'll back off the damage spell nerfing. Your goal is to have the DM say "well, I guess I can't do anything, who's next on initiative?". My players love to do damage, love big hits and I'm happy with that. I hate when they use effective battlefield control though ;)

If he allows T1 classes in his game he's accepting the burden.

IMHO
Blood~

[Deathcharge01]

If a DM is worried about simple damage he's doing it wrong. Use other tactics and just shut down each of his encounters for a few sessions then ask him if he'll back off the damage spell nerfing. Your goal is to have the DM say "well, I guess I can't do anything, who's next on initiative?". My players love to do damage, love big hits and I'm happy with that. I hate when they use effective battlefield control though ;)

If he allows T1 classes in his game he's accepting the burden.

IMHO
Blood~

I'd admit, that's a brutally effective approach; but not the one I'm willing to embrace as my immediate response, thought I'm really contemplating it Re: the God wizard from my original post.

All of the guys in the group are RL friends, so I'd rather solve this with proper reason and help make everyone's gaming experience a better one. But they seem to be stuck in their way of thinking and have a habit of making questionable decisions in an effort to attempt to fix or balance. As a result I brought my concerns here to get other ideas and perspectives, some of which I may be able to put forward to them; hopefully it works out.

[KorbeltheReader]

Show him the math? Calculate the min, max, and average damage for all of the spells in question at current and max level. Then show those numbers with a successful reflex save. Then compare with average damage of the other party members, and if necessary the hp totals of creatures of your CR and a CR 2-3 levels higher.

What you should be able to show is that your blasting doesn't do significantly more damage per round than the other PCs, and does a lot less if reflex saves are added in.

[eggynack]

I'd admit, that's a brutally effective approach; but not the one I'm willing to embrace as my immediate response, thought I'm really contemplating it Re: the God wizard from my original post.

All of the guys in the group are RL friends, so I'd rather solve this with proper reason and help make everyone's gaming experience a better one. But they seem to be stuck in their way of thinking and have a habit of making questionable decisions in an effort to attempt to fix or balance. As a result I brought my concerns here to get other ideas and perspectives, some of which I may be able to put forward to them; hopefully it works out.
Then just say that the stuff you would be doing, were the nerf to exist, is significantly more powerful than the stuff you're doing now. The same logic that dictates that orbs should not be nerfed is the logic that should be used to convince folks it shouldn't be nerfed, after all. You just have to apply the logic in a different fashion, if a more complex fashion.

[Loxagn]

Korbel has a very good point. Blasting is underpowered as-is, no need to make it moreso. Although if this trend continues, a more vindictive player might simply start using Save-or-Dies instead. Cut out the middleman that is HP, just skip straight to the dying part.

[Trasilor]

I hate to say it...but I somewhat agree with the DM...barely.

First, Orb of X spells (except Acid) belong in Evocation - pure energy damage dealing is by definition evocation ( looking at you Orb of FORCE :smallannoyed: ). Also these are instantaneous conjuration - which by definition 'conjures' the thing then it stays...forever (or until it is put out). You could, in theory, create a giant flask full of acid...just find the right substance that it doesn't dissolve.

Ok...I am done ranting about Orb of X.

Adding a reflex save to orb of x is a bad fix.

First, orb of X is a 4th level spell that targets 1 bad guy. Yeah the damage is decent, but you only get one shot.

Second, you must actually hit something. Yeah, touch attack is easy but it still is an attack roll. So firing into melee has all the penalties associated with it (hitting your ally, -4 into combat, etc). So if the enemy is engaging in combat with allies, and you don't have point-blank / precise shot, Orb of X becomes dangerous. Note - if the DM insists on reflex saves, ask to no longer be required to roll attack rolls and retrain point blank/precise shot feats (assuming you took them).

Third, because it is 4th level it is harder to abuse with metamagic shenanigans (this becomes less so higher levels). A level or level 1 spell that does decent damage can easily be buffed like crazy with various metamagic feats and metamagic reducers (looking at you twin/maximized/empowered spell). Of course at 17+ your orb of X spells work very nice with metamagic. Of course you can cast Wish by now so doing a ton of damage is a bit underwhelming.

Talk to your DM. Find out what is really going on. You wanted to play a blaster/direct damage dealing arcane caster. If this guy is your friend, talk to him about how you can be shut down (or at least slowed down). Point out a weakness (yes I have done this with a DM who was flustered with a character I had). As a DM, sometimes I don't know all the powers/strengths of the players. I focus on big picture things. The player focuses on their character. They know them better than I do. Don't get into an 'arms race' - nobody wins.

Regarding Flesh Ripper (I assume from Book of Vile Darkness), how is the cleric getting by the Undead, Fiend prerequisite? Is your companion an undead fiend?

Personally, I think the other players are having an issue with you - not the DM.

[sleepyphoenixx]

If they freak out about an unmodified d6/level single target damage i doubt you'll have a lot of luck convincing them to back off. Unless you're using metamagic blaster spells are pretty much the least optimized/effective use of your spells.

You'll probably get less frustration by changing your playstyle to BFC, summoning or buffing, so i'd only start an argument about it if it's actually important to your enjoyment of the game.
Assuming those aren't next on the nerf-list once your DM sees you being somewhat effective with them.

[Callin]

Its an attack roll and as such if that rule stands then ALL Melee and Ranged attacks should receive a Ref for half as well. I roll to hit you. I hit. Just because its a spell does not mean its not as effective as getting hit with an arrow. Thats why they are WEAPON like spells. Can have Weapon Focus (Ray/Orb) and Weapon Specalization (Ray/Orb) tossed onto them.

Heck point him to a slightly optimized Orc Whirling Frenzy Lion/Wolf Totem 3 with knockdown feat, and Power Attack with a Greatsword. 2 attacks at +11 and 2d6+12 Damage. Then knockdown kicks in and thats another +11 to hit and 2d6+12 damage. Totaled up with average rolls is 54 damage. At lvl 3 and thats not even going FULL BORE on optimizing.

[Deathcharge01]

Show him the math? Calculate the min, max, and average damage for all of the spells in question at current and max level. Then show those numbers with a successful reflex save. Then compare with average damage of the other party members, and if necessary the hp totals of creatures of your CR and a CR 2-3 levels higher.

What you should be able to show is that your blasting doesn't do significantly more damage per round than the other PCs, and does a lot less if reflex saves are added in.

I did this, using Flesh Ripper as the example. The counter argument was that Flesh Ripper offer's SR and does 10 less damage than Orb of X. I pointed out that the damage is untpyed thus not subject to resistances, is a level 3 spell and SR is not an issue. The counter-counter was that orbs are super dangerous metamagicked, I said same for flesh ripper. It just kept going in circles.




Regarding Flesh Ripper (I assume from Book of Vile Darkness), how is the cleric getting by the Undead, Fiend prerequisite? Is your companion an undead fiend?

Personally, I think the other players are having an issue with you - not the DM.

Its an evil campaign, he's has all prerequisites met.

I thought about that, but it may be a bit of both as the DM publicly admits that he hates the Orb of X spell line, so there is some bias there.


If they freak out about an unmodified d6/level single target damage i doubt you'll have a lot of luck convincing them to back off. Unless you're using metamagic blaster spells are pretty much the least optimized/effective use of your spells.

You'll probably get less frustration by changing your playstyle to BFC, summoning or buffing, so i'd only start an argument about it if it's actually important to your enjoyment of the game.
Assuming those aren't next on the nerf-list once your DM sees you being somewhat effective with them.

I'm playing a Wizard that's very heavy on utility(Uncanny Forethought). I'm the everything guy, buffs, transport, BFC, Debuffs, damage etc. So I have a bit of everything, and very few damage spells, so I had to make my choices worthwhile. I suspect however I may abandon damaging foes all together and just keep a few spells learnt to defend myself should I be attacked by a PC (evil campaign), and focus on other things.

You may be wondering why the Cleric doesn't help out with the buffs etc. He's heavily committed to the DMM split ray, twin spell, etc build, and is almost all offensive.

[KorbeltheReader]

The cleric's DMM twinning fleshripper and you're the problem? :smallfrown:

If that's how the argument went, their minds are made up and no amount of evidence is going to change it. You're going to have to let go of damage, I'm afraid.

FWIW, I play a conjurer and made a point not to take a single proper hp damage spell just to make a point about blasting. Haven't missed it at all.