Incantatrix broken?

[keeper2161]

Form what I see Incantatrix from the player's guide to faerun isn't broken. The abilities that are trouble have a x/day thing attached. The instant metamagic feature is only 1/day at level 7 and 2/day at level 2. The only thing I see getting out of hand is metamagic spell trigger you could make a wand of persistent say wrathstrike but its wouldn't have that many charges and the cost would be enormous because it would be like making a wand of a 9th level spell or is it that the Incantatrix makes a level 2 wand of wrathstrike and then adds the persist onto it because the feature says they have to have the item creation feat too. Plus to recharge the wand wouldn't they need to cast a persisted wrathstrike on the wand and not just wrathstrike? Am I missing anything or do I have the wrong class because there is a Incantatrix in the magic of faerun I think.

[Zanos]

Metamagic effect is usable 3+int times per day and can be used to persist spells. If you pump spellcraft you can persist tons of spells per day, and it synergies amazingly well with Wizard's and their Int SAD, since both spellcraft and the uses per day are keyed off Int.

You also get four bonus metamagic feats over 10 levels, good class features basically all the time, and a blanket metamagic reduction as the capstone.

[Pluto!]

Free metamagic is the most powerful ability in the game. Incantatrix gets it.

[Gabrosin]

There are two serious breaks to Incantatrix. The first is at level 3 when you gain Metamagic Effect, which then lets you apply metamagic to an existing effect based on a Spellcraft check. Traditionally, this is how you get Persistent Spell onto the spells you cast: cast them normally at the start of your day, then apply Persistent Spell, using some method (item familiar, Guidance of the Avatar, +X to spellcraft magic items) to be able to consistently succeed on the check.

The second is the capstone ability that reduces all your metamagic costs by -1; when combined with other cost reducers, you can add a whole lot of metamagic to a low level spell to produce ridiculous effects.

In my eyes, the first one is the gamebreaker. It's not unreasonable to be able to use it 8-10 times per day, or more if you can get a +Int Tome. When you're able to persist that many spells, and combine that with tricks to keep them from getting dispelled, you can become ridiculous good.

It gets worse when you have more than one, because then you can both use the level 2 ability, Cooperative Effect, to persist spells on each other's behalf. Or you can take a non-persisting spellcaster (say a Druid) and now they get to run all day with persistent buffs too.

Stuff like Metamagic Spell Trigger and Instant Metamagic is just gravy. Not to mention the obvious: full caster progression and four bonus metamagic feats on the way up.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Metamagic Effect and Cooperative Metamagic at the 2nd and 3rd levels are the issue. They allow you to make a spellcraft check to add Persistent Spell to your buffs for no cost other than a use of that ability. Cooperative Metamagic can be used on your own spells outside of combat since the action economy system only exists during initiative. So that's two abilities, each of which are usable 3+Int/day, on probably a Wizard who's Int-SAD. Getting sixteen or more persistent buffs every day at level 8 is indeed broken. At level 8, this Wizard/Incantatrix has as many persistent spells as a DMM Cleric with twenty-six Night Sticks.

Making the Spellcraft check is trivial with Item Familiar (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/itemFamiliars.htm) skill investment, considering you can take ten on the checks. The DC to persist a 4th level spell is 48. At level 8 you'll have 11 ranks, +11 for invested ranks, +5 or more from Int, +2 synergy, +2 for a masterwork tool, for +31 already. You can dip Master Specialist for Skill Focus to make that +34, and you can easily upgrade a Competence bonus onto your Item Familiar to make up the remaining +4 so you can take ten and always succeed. That's Persistent Greater Invisibility, Swift Fly, Ray Deflection or Friendly Fire, Expeditious Retreat, Wraithstrike, Thunderlance, Alter Self (+9 natural armor), Shield, Magic Circle Against Evil, Death Armor, Fire Shield twice, Cloud of Knives five or more times, etc. Plus you can skip a few persistent spells to add Fell Drain and/or Fell Frighten to your Persistent Persistent Clouds of Knives and/or your Persistent Death Armor and Fire Shields, though you probably won't need those with Greater Invisibility.

At level 9 you can switch out Thunderlance for Draconic Polymorph: Cave Troll plus Draconic Might or Bite of the Wereboar or Werewolf and go ham. Your Wizard BAB won't matter with Str 42 and Wraithstrike, and your Wizard HP won't matter much with Greater Invisibility, +15 natural armor, Greater Luminous Armor, Magic Circle, Heart of Earth, and other buffs.

Yes, it's broken.

[keeper2161]

So has anyone checked out the other incantatrix from magic of faerun?

[Zanos]

So has anyone checked out the other incantatrix from magic of faerun?
Yeah, it's much more balanced but it still gets blanket metamagic cost reduction which can be problematic.

[Psyren]

So has anyone checked out the other incantatrix from magic of faerun?

I'm not sure why you would - MoF is 3.0 and was superseded by the PGtF one (which is 3.5.)

[ShurikVch]

Excuse me, but about the "persistent buffs": since when encounter not started with some sort of area dispell?

[Pluto!]

Excuse me, but about the "persistent buffs": since when encounter not started with some sort of area dispell?
So the Incantatrix would only have 13 Persistent buffs instead of 14?
(If the enemy has dispel magic. If the CL check succeeds)

[Gabrosin]

Excuse me, but about the "persistent buffs": since when encounter not started with some sort of area dispell?

Use the usual magic items to increase your caster level, making it less likely for the dispel magic to work. If it's the area version, it'll affect one spell at most, not a huge deal. If it's the targeted version, you can become immune to it with stuff like Ring of Counterspells, a Spellblade weapon, etc. If you know that your main path to losing an encounter is to get dispelled, then of course you protect against that.

[ShurikVch]

So the Incantatrix would only have 13 Persistent buffs instead of 14?
(If the enemy has dispel magic. If the CL check succeeds) Strongly depend on which exactly buff was dispelled. :smallwink:

[jiriku]

Casters who rely heavily on persisted spells usually also invest in spells, feats, and items that make their spells harder than normal to dispel. It's also fairly trivial to protect yourself from an area dispel by casting a low-value, long-duration spell on yourself at less than your normal caster level. This spell functions as a sort of ablative armor against an area effect, since it is always dispelled first.

[eggynack]

Excuse me, but about the "persistent buffs": since when encounter not started with some sort of area dispell?
A ring of counterspells, tuned to either dispel or greater dispel magic, works quite efficiently against that plan, and at a low price at that. A ring of spell-battle is more expensive, and limited in range, but it is also highly effective at this task, and often significantly better. Also, if your opponent has to waste actions and spells against your buffs, then that's pretty much the whole point right there. Extra rounds are the greatest thing ever for and against casters.

[Rubik]

Excuse me, but about the "persistent buffs": since when encounter not started with some sort of area dispell?Multiple castings of Magic Mouth at maximum CL nip that right in the bud, and a spellblade handily castrates the targeted version.

[keeper2161]

So as long as the class build didn't have a high int say a sorc or a dread necro or simply that the wizard didn't persist everything and instead used other metamagic feats like extend, incantatrix would be a very good class to finish out a build?

[Psyren]

Multiple castings of Magic Mouth at minimum CL nip that right in the bud, and a spellblade handily castrates the targeted version.

And since Spellblade is in the same bloody book...

[Gabrosin]

So as long as the class build didn't have a high int say a sorc or a dread necro or simply that the wizard didn't persist everything and instead used other metamagic feats like extend, incantatrix would be a very good class to finish out a build?

If you were playing in a world without Persistent Spell, then yes, Incantatrix loses some of its power. The capstone is still strong, but you pay for it by going the full ten levels. It would still be a very powerful choice because of the free feats and the less broken uses of the class abilities, and because you lose almost nothing in order to enter Incantatrix: some skill ranks you were going to have anyway, a feat you can outright buy if Complete Scoundrel is allowed, and the banning of a single school of magic, which is usually not a huge deal unless you're a specialist, and even then it's manageable.

[Gabrosin]

Multiple castings of Magic Mouth at minimum CL nip that right in the bud, and a spellblade handily castrates the targeted version.

Wait, how does this work? Area Dispel Magic starts with the highest CL and works its way down. Once they fail the check on all your real spells, what's the point of having a low-CL spell array beneath them?

[keeper2161]

I'm not saying no persist I'm saying just one or two. Like haste and wrathstrike or shield and wrathstrike. If wrathstrike is too powerful go magic weapon or something similar. D&D classes are only broken if you play them broken, Tainted scholar being the obvious exception.

[Kantolin]

Metamagic reducers with Persist, Quicken, Twin, probably Chain, and probably Maximize spell are almost certainly too powerful unless you're in a very high-optimization game or being extremely silly with your spell selections.

(Uh, and invisible spell is then separately wonky for an array of reasons)

If you are using metamagic reducers with most other metamagics, you certainly won't break anything. Widening things or enlarging things or even still/silent? Sure: It's a bump, but not a crazy one.

[Aegis013]

I'm not saying no persist I'm saying just one or two. Like haste and wrathstrike or shield and wrathstrike. If wrathstrike is too powerful go magic weapon or something similar. D&D classes are only broken if you play them broken, Tainted scholar being the obvious exception.

This falls under the same fallacious reasoning that a rule isn't bad because the DM can fix it. It's bad because the DM needed to fix it.
Just because a person doesn't play a class to its broken potential doesn't make it not broken.

[keeper2161]

But if the whatever build only has one metamagic reducer its not bad. And it doesn't matter how much a class can be broken, if you don't play it broken it won't be broken. So only persisting two spells and using other metamagic feats will make it very strong class but by then you are high enough level that you are fighting strong stuff. And if you use incantatrix with a gish build and purposefully avoid misusing it then it's not a problem. Again the only way a class is broken is you play it broken. Tainted scholar being again the exception.

EDIT: Aegis013 by your reasoning psychic warrior is a broken class because of the build king of smack. You don't have to play it broken.

[jiriku]

Wait, how does this work? Area Dispel Magic starts with the highest CL and works its way down. Once they fail the check on all your real spells, what's the point of having a low-CL spell array beneath them?

Whoop. Man, I wonder how many years we've been playing that wrong. :smalleek:

Rings of counterspelling are the way to go then.

[Urpriest]

You've also got the option to just choose a less broken class, though.

[keeper2161]

The reason I chose it was because of the metamagic bonus feats. I didn't really know what it could do yet till I started this thread.

[Gabrosin]

Whoop. Man, I wonder how many years we've been playing that wrong. :smalleek:

Rings of counterspelling are the way to go then.

You probably just had the idea backwards. A lot of buffs don't care about your CL (especially once you make them persistent). If you had the ability to cast a bunch of Magic Mouth spells or something similar at just one CL higher than the rest of your buffs, they would provide the sort of shield you're talking about, albeit not perfectly reliably. The odds are that if the opponent can knock out one of your spells on a high roll, give them 100 chances to make that high roll on a useless spell and hope they do so.

I suppose it could work at equal CL, depending on who got to choose the order in which the dispel checks are made.

[Psyren]

Wait, how does this work? Area Dispel Magic starts with the highest CL and works its way down. Once they fail the check on all your real spells, what's the point of having a low-CL spell array beneath them?

Good eye, but there's still the simple expedient of Battlemagic Perception and using your own Dispel to autosucceed at countering that one. Or blocking line of effect to the area dispel e.g. with Wings of Cover.

[Gabrosin]

But if the whatever build only has one metamagic reducer its not bad. And it doesn't matter how much a class can be broken, if you don't play it broken it won't be broken. So only persisting two spells and using other metamagic feats will make it very strong class but by then you are high enough level that you are fighting strong stuff. And if you use incantatrix with a gish build and purposefully avoid misusing it then it's not a problem. Again the only way a class is broken is you play it broken. Tainted scholar being again the exception.

EDIT: Aegis013 by your reasoning psychic warrior is a broken class because of the build king of smack. You don't have to play it broken.

The issue is that once you've taken the class, you're counting on just your personal restraint to stop you from breaking the game. And as soon as you start feeling like you're losing, the ultimate power you're holding back starts to look prettttty good. Would you really keep yourself from unleashing your full power if the alternative is a TPK?

If what you want is the bonus metamagic feats, I suggest you negotiate with your DM. As I mentioned earlier, if you forgo Persistent Spell the class is still great, but arguably not broken.

[Aegis013]

EDIT: Aegis013 by your reasoning psychic warrior is a broken class because of the build king of smack. You don't have to play it broken.

Not necessarily. Everybody has different opinions on what constitutes a broken or overpowered class. And if King of Smack is the optimization ceiling for Psychic Warrior, I wouldn't call it broken.

However, there is, in my experience on various forums, fairly wide spread agreement that Incantatrix is an extremely powerful class. One of the most powerful in the game.

But by your reasoning Tainted Scholar can't be an exception, because you just play it not brokenly.

[keeper2161]

Thats actually another reason why I like it. If for some reason my build is all of a sudden out powered by the rest of the party (akin to a level 1 rouge in party of fighters in combat) then I can increase it to match the rest of the party, I don't have to relay on the dm. I like persist its a nice gish feat. Persist follows the lines of my agrument. If persisting wrathstrike is ruining the fun for the rest of the party I would switch to something else. I also care about my other party members, being all power is boring

EDIT: Tainted Scholar is inherently broken because if you cast any spell your taint goes up. You can roll a will save but eventually you will fail, it increases whether you want it to or not. incantatrix is not the same

[dextercorvia]

Re:Area Dispels

Arcanist Gloves (MIC) are cheap. Blow a couple dozen 1st level slots over the course of a week casting copies of Magic Aura (which lasts days per level) all at a CL 2 higher than normal for you. If an area dispel is capable of getting one of your buffs, chances are it will pick off one of them. Also, Magic Aura hides your auras, which makes it less likely you get hit with a targeted Dispel.

[Aegis013]

EDIT: Tainted Scholar is inherently broken because if you cast any spell your taint goes up. You can roll a will save but eventually you will fail, it increases whether you want it to or not. incantatrix is not the same

Then don't cast spells! BAM, not broken, right?

[Gabrosin]

Re:Area Dispels

Arcanist Gloves (MIC) are cheap. Blow a couple dozen 1st level slots over the course of a week casting copies of Magic Aura (which lasts days per level) all at a CL 2 higher than normal for you. If an area dispel is capable of getting one of your buffs, chances are it will pick off one of them. Also, Magic Aura hides your auras, which makes it less likely you get hit with a targeted Dispel.

I don't follow. Nystul's Magic Aura only targets objects, which would get a separate roll for an area dispel from you, the person.

[keeper2161]

If you don't cast spells then no it's not broken, but thats irrelevant it's a spell casting class. If you didn't cast spells what would be the point of taking it? When using it it becomes broken inherently.

EDIT: The hole in my logic only exsists if you ignore the nature of Tainted Scholar.

[Vaynor]

I don't think it's that incantatrix is broken, it's that both wizard and incantatrix are overpowered classes. The incantatrix is definitely more powerful, but it's ability to break the game isn't much more than that of the wizard itself. Mostly because you're adding it to what is arguably the most offensively powerful class in the game. If you aren't going to break the game with h your wizard, you probably won't with the incantatrix. That said, I think it's rather silly to take the PrC since it is such a blatant power boost that the wizard simply doesn't need. The only reason you'd do so is to become excessively powerful which I can't see being fun for anyone else involved in the game unless the entire party is wizards and you're fighting gods.

[Aegis013]

If you don't cast spells then no it's not broken, but thats irrelevant it's a spell casting class. If you didn't cast spells what would be the point of taking it? When using it it becomes broken inherently.

EDIT: The hole in my logic only exsists if you ignore the nature of Tainted Scholar.

Just because you're not casting spells, it doesn't make the Tainted Scholar class itself any less broken.
Just because you're not persisting a dozen spells, it doesn't make the Incantatrix class itself any less broken.

[eggynack]

If you don't cast spells then no it's not broken, but thats irrelevant it's a spell casting class. If you didn't cast spells what would be the point of taking it? When using it it becomes broken inherently.

EDIT: The hole in my logic only exsists if you ignore the nature of Tainted Scholar.
No, the hole in your logic exists due to the nature of other prestige classes. The nature of incantatrix is that it allows you to freely apply metamagic. The nature of planar shepherd is that it allows you to be anything from a druid+ to a 10:1 god of destruction. The nature of beholder mage is also that you break the action economy to hell. The nature of hathran is that you can work off of your whole list spontaneously. To ignore the nature of these classes is as illogical as ignoring the nature of tainted scholar, and all of these classes are quite broken. Either that, or none of them are, based on the idea that you can always use them inefficiently. Even a planar shepherd using dal quor can spend all of his time casting detect poison at everything.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Incantatrix is not-broken IF you don't intentionally put any additional bonuses toward Spellcraft beyond normal skill ranks, your Int bonus, and an inevitable synergy bonus.

An alternative to this would be to house rule its abilities to not be able to create a metamagic-modified spell that you wouldn't have been able to cast applying the metamagic feat(s) normally. So you would need to be able to cast 7th level spells to persist a 1st level spell with it, and you would need to be able to cast 8th level spells to persist 2nd level spells with it, etc.

[keeper2161]

So does the brokeness lay with class or the user?

[Aegis013]

So does the brokeness lay with class or the user?

That is the question isn't it? It's a matter of philosophy, so there can be no right or wrong answer, I think.

[keeper2161]

I can agree with that. I think what dms should consider is to play it by ear, if it causes to many problems ask the player to re-roll their character or simply just ban it if talking doesn't work.

[eggynack]

So does the brokeness lay with class or the user?
Yes. An unbroken class with a willing and capable user cannot bring forth any such terror, and a broken class with an unwilling or incapable user is similarly not going to collapse the system around him. Of course, these things don't exist as absolutes. Both of these things are factors, and you need not have a class like the incantatrix to bring a game to its knees, nor a veritable saint to avert disaster. Class and player go hand in hand.

[Aegis013]

It can also depend on the nature/culture of the game the DM is trying to cultivate. Preemptive bans of certain material can work well for that, though typically I'm not a fan of blanket bans (X Y or Z book is out) without reasonable explanation.

[keeper2161]

Well I think my DM will be satisfied by all this so I'm happy. Hopefully what was talked about here can be used in other areas of D&D too.

[DeAnno]

As a final note, even Persist Spell shenanigans aren't that bad in high level play, as you now have this valuable buff stack to defend which you can't replace until tomorrow if it's dispelled. This necessitates further investment in stuff like Disjunction paranoia and CL buffing, really.

[Zanos]

As a final note, even Persist Spell shenanigans aren't that bad in high level play, as you now have this valuable buff stack to defend which you can't replace until tomorrow if it's dispelled. This necessitates further investment in stuff like Disjunction paranoia and CL buffing, really.

It's fairly easy to block LEoF in high level play. At some point you're just playing contingency chess.

[eggynack]

It's fairly easy to block LEoF in high level play. At some point you're just playing contingency chess.
I think you may mean line of effect, or something. Honestly not all that sure. Pretty sure you don't mean lost empires of faerun though.

[INoKnowNames]

Brief Question for the Returning Newbie with the Massive Mouth! Could an Incheesetrix Swiftblade use Imbune Familier with Spell like Ability and have the familiar cast Haste on himself, while he makes that haste persistent with his Cooperative Metamagic or Metamagic Affect ability, then absorb it into himself at the casting to make it an Ex, non-dispellable ability for the day?

[Zanos]

I think you may mean line of effect, or something. Honestly not all that sure. Pretty sure you don't mean lost empires of faerun though.
Is that not your DM's book of choice to throw at you?

[dextercorvia]

I don't follow. Nystul's Magic Aura only targets objects, which would get a separate roll for an area dispel from you, the person.

Woops, did the 3e version target creatures? I remember something of the sort. I suppose you have to use Endure Elements instead.

[Pluto!]

W/r/t the Magic of Faerun Incantatrix, it's less gamebreaking, which is good. It's still very strong even compared to straight Wizard, which is bad, but less overwhelmingly so.

You might also be interested in Mage of the Arcane Order or War Wizard of Cormyr, which get bonus metamagic feats without all the broken.

[Story]

Wait, how does this work? Area Dispel Magic starts with the highest CL and works its way down. Once they fail the check on all your real spells, what's the point of having a low-CL spell array beneath them?

Typically, you'll have a large number of CL boosters available, so you can just use an extra one to put Magic Mouth at +1 CL compared to all your other buffs.

Also, Dispel doesn't work at high op anyway, because dispel checks are capped but CLs are not, and CLs are very, very easy to boost. In order to even have a chance of dispelling an optimized Wizard, you'll need to invest in a very specific build (Inquisition Domain, Dispelling Cord, Io7FV, etc.).

[DeAnno]

Also, Dispel doesn't work at high op anyway, because dispel checks are capped but CLs are not, and CLs are very, very easy to boost. In order to even have a chance of dispelling an optimized Wizard, you'll need to invest in a very specific build (Inquisition Domain, Dispelling Cord, Io7FV, etc.).

Eh, by the time Greater Dispel is getting inadequate (for anything except Chaining it on a person's items, at least) the Disjunction Wars have begun anyway. In my experience at the table large buff stacks require a lot of effort to maintain safely (they also have a nasty habit of dropping if you get killed and Revivified or something.)

[ShurikVch]

Use the usual magic items to increase your caster level, making it less likely for the dispel magic to work. We are speaking about Spell Trigger items, right? If yes, then it's not your CL, it's CL of the Item's creator. Yes, you can craft your one items, but:
1) Go ahead, burn all your feats on item creation
2) Items with abnormally high CL will cost you an arm and leg to create (and big fat chunk of XP. And expire only after what, 5 uses?)


A ring of counterspells, tuned to either dispel or greater dispel magic, works quite efficiently against that plan, and at a low price at that. A ring of spell-battle is more expensive, and limited in range, but it is also highly effective at this task, and often significantly better. Also, if your opponent has to waste actions and spells against your buffs, then that's pretty much the whole point right there. Extra rounds are the greatest thing ever for and against casters. Otiluke's Dispelling Screen (http://dndtools.eu/spells/complete-arcane--55/otilukes-dispelling-screen--441/), Wall of Dispel Magic (http://dndtools.eu/spells/spell-compendium--86/wall-of-dispel-magic--4737/), Steal Spell Effect, Spellshatter - counterspell that! :smalltongue:
Also, his action economy vs your action economy
And, say, dragon may stomp you even without any of his magic

Also, rogue with wand of Tenacious Dispelling (http://dndtools.eu/spells/complete-mage--58/tenacious-dispelling--772/) will have +10 to dispell after the 5th cast, and +20 after the 10th

[eggynack]

Otiluke's Dispelling Screen (http://dndtools.eu/spells/complete-arcane--55/otilukes-dispelling-screen--441/), Wall of Dispel Magic (http://dndtools.eu/spells/spell-compendium--86/wall-of-dispel-magic--4737/), Steal Spell Effect, Spellshatter - counterspell that! :smalltongue:
The screen doesn't really do much, because it's completely visible, the wall has the issue that it can apparently be cast through, steal spell effect is really narrow, requiring that you hit a fully buffed wizard with a sneak attack, and I'm not all that sure what spell shatter is.


Also, his action economy vs your action economy
It's not really his action economy versus mine, because I spent all of my actions before combat. That's why persist is awesome in the first place. The opponent, presumably lacking cheaply persisted buffs, needs to cast his buffs in combat, losing rounds, dispel my buffs, losing rounds, or ignore the buffs, thus giving me buffs.

And, say, dragon may stomp you even without any of his magic
Depends on the dragon, and depends on the caster. I'd give higher odds to a wizard fully decked out with persisted spells than to most other characters out there in this fight though.

Also, rogue with wand of Tenacious Dispelling (http://dndtools.eu/spells/complete-mage--58/tenacious-dispelling--772/) will have +10 to dispell after the 5th cast, and +20 after the 10th.
If you've attempted to dispel this wizard five times and survived, the wizard is doing something very wrong.

[Story]

If you've attempted to dispel this wizard five times and survived, the wizard is doing something very wrong.

As far as I can tell, the bonus caps at +2 anyway.

[eggynack]

As far as I can tell, the bonus caps at +2 anyway.
That is also true. The big thing to keep in mind here, I think, is that there are a bunch of ways to dispel someone, but (greater) dispel magic is by far the most popular. They show up on just about every list out there, and they're quite possibly just the best options where this is concerned. Obviously a ring of counterspells keyed to dispel magic isn't going to save the wizard's bacon in every single eventuality, but it pulls a lot of weight.

[Rubik]

That is also true. The big thing to keep in mind here, I think, is that there are a bunch of ways to dispel someone, but (greater) dispel magic is by far the most popular. They show up on just about every list out there, and they're quite possibly just the best options where this is concerned. Obviously a ring of counterspells keyed to dispel magic isn't going to save the wizard's bacon in every single eventuality, but it pulls a lot of weight.A spellblade would be a better option, especially since Greater Dispel Magic really is quite popular as a debuff. For bonus points, add it to a poison ring so you basically have the exact same thing as the ring of counterspells with Greater Dispel Magic stored in it, only better.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Before MDJ an Incantatrix is pretty hard to dispel. They have many ways of increasing their CL (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1054346), including persisting Suffer the Flesh then healing the ability damage. They can negate/counter targeted effects with various items and spells, as stated. They can be quite hard to target, from something as simple as Persistent Greater (Superior) Invisibility to pumping their hide/move silently with spells and picking up darkstalker. And lastly, they're still wizards with access to contingencies and immediate actions. In the mid levels I only see a dedicated dispeller or a psion getting rid of their buffs, and even then they'll probably have better things to do. But as long as they fulfill some sort of metagame resource draining purpose for the DM they'll do it...

[eggynack]

A spellblade would be a much cheaper option, especially since Greater Dispel Magic really is quite popular as a debuff. For bonus points, add it to a poison ring so you basically have the exact same thing as the ring of counterspells with Greater Dispel Magic stored in it, only better, and for cheaper.
It's a solid item, but I don't like the fact that it doesn't do anything against the area mode, and the fact that you can swap the ring from dispel to greater dispel when the latter becomes the norm is neat as well. Also, not really sure what you mean by cheaper, unless you're referring to the cost of tossing spells in. The ring goes for 4,000 GP, which appears to be 2,000 GP less than the spellblade.

[ShurikVch]

The screen doesn't really do much, because it's completely visible, the wall has the issue that it can apparently be cast through, steal spell effect is really narrow, requiring that you hit a fully buffed wizard with a sneak attack, and I'm not all that sure what spell shatter is. Screen may be visible, but still there, wall can dispell persisted buffs, sneak attack still possible, and spellshatter is ACF "dispell-on-smite"



It's not really his action economy versus mine, because I spent all of my actions before combat. That's why persist is awesome in the first place. The opponent, presumably lacking cheaply persisted buffs, needs to cast his buffs in combat, losing rounds, dispel my buffs, losing rounds, or ignore the buffs, thus giving me buffs. Yes, it is. If your buffs dispelled, you are squishy hairless monkey, so you must spend your actions to re-buff or stay away from combat


Depends on the dragon, and depends on the caster. I'd give higher odds to a wizard fully decked out with persisted spells than to most other characters out there in this fight though. At 8th level? :smallconfused: There are CR-appropriate dragons who can chew through any sane build fully buffed


If you've attempted to dispel this wizard five times and survived, the wizard is doing something very wrong. If rogue is 9 levels higher than wizard? We are speaking about hide/MS rank 19 + Dex mod. It's stronger than Invisibility. Wizard wouldn't see him even if rogue just walk in and stab wizard to the gut

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

At 8th level? :smallconfused: There are CR-appropriate dragons who can chew through any sane build fully buffedSuch as? I can only think of the Steel Dragon, one of the most under-CR'd monsters in the game, and that's just because it has better casting than the wizard at CR = ECL.
If rogue is 9 levels higher than wizard? We are speaking about hide/MS rank 19 + Dex mod. It's stronger than Invisibility. Wizard wouldn't see him even if rogue just walk in and stab wizard to the gutEven if you could snipe with a targeted spell it dings you for -20 to the check. Also, why is the rogue 9 levels higher again?

[eggynack]

Screen may be visible, but still there, wall can dispell persisted buffs, sneak attack still possible, and spellshatter is ACF "dispell-on-smite"
Screen being there is mostly irrelevant if the wizard never goes through it, and the same is true of the wall. Sneak attack may or may not be possible, depending on how the wizard is put together. After all, some of those long term buffs may be heart of X's. As for spellshatter, it requires that you hit the wizard in the face. As with sneak attack, a big problem with this plan is that the wizard could easily be running something like persistent greater mirror image, making melee attacks pretty unlikely to hit. Also, as always, abrupt jaunt.



Yes, it is. If your buffs dispelled, you are squishy hairless monkey, so you must spend your actions to re-buff or stay away from combat
Or you can do that thing that wizards do, which is casting spells. They're pretty good at it, on occasion.

At 8th level? :smallconfused: There are CR-appropriate dragons who can chew through any sane build fully buffed
I'm not sure why you're so sure of that, or why you think this is necessarily a sane build. Our noble wizard does have casting on his side, after all. I suppose someone with greater wizard acumen than I could run up against one.


If rogue is 9 levels higher than wizard? We are speaking about hide/MS rank 19 + Dex mod. It's stronger than Invisibility. Wizard wouldn't see him even if rogue just walk in and stab wizard to the gut

That's not really the situation you presented, or anything like it. Kinda has nothing to do with persistent spells, actually. Has a lot more to do with the fact that this encounter is ridiculously over CR'd. Still, wizards have some passive defenses that could cause the rogue's attack to be ineffective, and they're decently equipped to break through darkstalker if they want. Mindsight is reasonably accessible, after all.

[Rubik]

It's a solid item, but I don't like the fact that it doesn't do anything against the area mode, and the fact that you can swap the ring from dispel to greater dispel when the latter becomes the norm is neat as well. Also, not really sure what you mean by cheaper, unless you're referring to the cost of tossing spells in. The ring goes for 4,000 GP, which appears to be 2,000 GP less than the spellblade."Cheaper"? I don't know what you're talking about. :smallamused: