General Divination confusion

[Banjoman42]

So I have some general questions on the usefulness of the divination school as a wizard. Almost every wizard guide I have seen as mentioned that divination is absolutely not to be banned, under any circumstance. But I can't see how it would be just as viable an option as enchantment (with the other school being evocation) to ban. Mind you, I'm not denying its usefulness, which I have seen across a number of playthroughs. Am I missing something? I can't see how banning it would make for a bad choice, especially considering there is almost always two of a class like cleric, psion, or even bard, with the a great access to divination, in the party.

Is it just that there are some ground breaking spells I am missing? Or do they just have a lot of usefulness?

[Hazrond]

from what i can tell, its because the divination spells give you the ability to prepare exactly for what you need by divining the enemies you are likely to face

[nedz]

Knowledge is Power.

It does depend on the game: for a Kick-in-the-door style game it's probably bannable, but for most other games it's one of the Wizard's most powerful features.

[torrasque666]

There's also the fact that according to specialization rules the Divination school cannot be banned.

A wizard can never give up divination to fulfill this requirement.

[nedz]

There's also the fact that according to specialization rules the Divination school cannot be banned.

Well that's a point. Does this apply in all cases though ? There are a couple of PrCs which require further banning, also Focussed Specialist ?

[torrasque666]

Well that's a point. Does this apply in all cases though ? There are a couple of PrCs which require further banning, also Focussed Specialist ?

At the very least, it still can't be banned for Focused Specialist as its still Specialization, which Divination cannot be dropped for.

I know that Incantrix can't drop Divination(it calls it out as safe, along with Abjuration) but I'm not aware of what other classes must ban schools.

[Blackhawk748]

I think its the fact that it has several fairly useful spells that you would probably always want to have. Honestly every Sorcerer ive made has Clairvoyance, no matter how much of a blaster they happen to be. Also i believe True Seeing is Divination and that spell is crazy useful.

[NNescio]

The main (fluff) reason why the designers forbid banning Divination is because Read Magic belongs to the divination school, a spell which every Wizard is supposed to be able to prepare and cast, even without access to spellbooks.

(Mechanically, I suspect that they underestimate the value of Divination [which is why Div Specialist get to ban less schools], so banning it would be considered 'gaming the system' to them.)

The way most of the guides are phrased, it is usually on the lines of "Don't ban Divination even if you can (manage to figure out a way to). It is too useful."

Divination is what makes a Wizard dominate encounters, as they are able to custom-tailor their spell selection according to the intel they get. It also provides some really useful buffs, and bypasses a lot of defenses (True Strike, True Seeing, etc).

[P.F.]

So I have some general questions on the usefulness of the divination school as a wizard. Almost every wizard guide I have seen as mentioned that divination is absolutely not to be banned, under any circumstance. But I can't see how it would be just as viable an option as enchantment (with the other school being evocation) to ban. Mind you, I'm not denying its usefulness, which I have seen across a number of playthroughs. Am I missing something? I can't see how banning it would make for a bad choice, especially considering there is almost always two of a class like cleric, psion, or even bard, with the a great access to divination, in the party.

Is it just that there are some ground breaking spells I am missing? Or do they just have a lot of usefulness?

You are not missing anything. The rule, as mentioned earlier, prohibits banning Divination. Because it was believed to be the weakest of any school of magic. In earlier editions it literally didn't count as a full school for specialization, so you had to select "both Divination and Necromancy." Even in 3.5, Divination was, like sociology, considered a less rigorous field of study, and requires only one opposition school instead of two.

If it was allowed as a prohibited school, those guides would probably still consider it an inferior choice, because you can't Scry-and-Die your way to Munchkin-land without it.

[Chronos]

Note that it's just necessary for someone to have divination spells, not necessarily you. A cleric can do a lot of divination, too, as could another wizard if there are multiple wizards in your party. One spellcaster in a party must have divinations, but having that, the rest can ignore it.

[Renen]

Note that it's just necessary for someone to have divination spells, not necessarily you. A cleric can do a lot of divination, too, as could another wizard if there are multiple wizards in your party. One spellcaster in a party must have divinations, but having that, the rest can ignore it.

The point is that its very useful. Sure, someone else might have it. But someone just as easily can make the party have no need for a fighter, because magic is superior.

[jedipotter]

Is it just that there are some ground breaking spells I am missing? Or do they just have a lot of usefulness?


Again, knowledge is Power.

I do love proving this often. So, I get asked to run games often. I run a fun game, or so say some. I like a fast paced, edge of your seat game. And that is what I run. Not everyone likes it, but then there are other DMs. Typically a player will make an ''unbeatable character'' in another game, and ''get bored''. Then they will come to me with the ''hey can you run a game that challenges my character'' . And I do....

...and this will lead to a fight against ''unknown monsters with unknown abilities''. And suddenly, the ''unbeatable character'' is not so great and really stumbles. Why? Well, they are used to free information that most other DM's hand out like candy. But in my game, a character has to learn things for themselves. And that is where divination is very important. I've seen tons of spellcaster types just ''lost'' as they could not figure something out. Sure, they could do 200 points of damage a round...if they could just figure out....how?

[P.F.]

Again, knowledge is Power ... a fight against ''unknown monsters with unknown abilities''. And suddenly, the ''unbeatable character'' is not so great and really stumbles. Why? Well, they are used to free information that most other DM's hand out like candy.

In my experience, divination spells are more often the source of this free candy.

[jedipotter]

In my experience, divination spells are more often the source of this free candy.

If a character has to cast/use a spell....it's not free.

The free candy I'm talking about is where the DM freely gives away game details and even mechanics. Like when the DM says ''your fire spell does not effect the monster as it has fire immunity'', just off hand.

[Crake]

In my experience, divination spells are more often the source of this free candy.

That and absurdly high knowledge checks


If a character has to cast/use a spell....it's not free.

The free candy I'm talking about is where the DM freely gives away game details and even mechanics. Like when the DM says ''your fire spell does not effect the monster as it has fire immunity'', just off hand.

I think it's a fair enough think to say, after someone just blasted an enemy with a fireball that "The monster seems unaffected". I'll agree that saying "it's immune to fire" is going too far though, cause it also could have been spell resistance. But in a similar situation with say, orb of fire, the only explaination would be immunity to fire.

[jedipotter]

I think it's a fair enough think to say, after someone just blasted an enemy with a fireball that "The monster seems unaffected". I'll agree that saying "it's immune to fire" is going too far though, cause it also could have been spell resistance. But in a similar situation with say, orb of fire, the only explaination would be immunity to fire.

A lot of DM's run very casual games. They just tell the players things. And it can quickly unbalance a game. When a player is given tons of ''free candy'' in the form of game information, they can use it to do all sorts of things in the game.

[Earthwalker]

I have often wondered what spells this ultimate wizards cast to get information and what questions they ask.

Say you are preparing your spells for the day. You are about to head into the temple of Quijibo. (look out Quijibo on the loose) and want inforamation what spells do you cast and what do you ask.

Say if you are lvl 1,
lvl 5
lvl 11
lvl 15.

I aren't saying its not possible just it doesnt happen in my games and I wonder what is asked / done.

[Crake]

I have often wondered what spells this ultimate wizards cast to get information and what questions they ask.

Say you are preparing your spells for the day. You are about to head into the temple of Quijibo. (look out Quijibo on the loose) and want inforamation what spells do you cast and what do you ask.

Say if you are lvl 1,
lvl 5
lvl 11
lvl 15.

I aren't saying its not possible just it doesnt happen in my games and I wonder what is asked / done.

It all depends on how long you have to prepare. At level 1, you're not going to be getting any decent information via divinations, but at level 5, you open up to clairaudience/clairvoyance, which can be used to scout, room by room, the layout of the place, what creatures are in there. At level 7, you can combine that with rapid spell to get it all done much faster, plus also include arcane eye, which allows you to scout with a moving scrying sensor. This is rather RAW ambiguous, but arcane eye says it can be summoned anywhere the caster can see, so you could for example, use clairaudience/clairvoyance, followed by an arcane eye to be able to scout past the initial scry.

Once you know the layout and the types of enemies you're going to be fighting, you can prepare against them. As an example, say you saw a cryohydra, you prepare fire spells and resist energy cold everyone before fighting it, rather than having to do that mid battle.

From there it just gets worse as more spells pop up into play, arcane sight through an arcane orb (level 7) allowing you to gauge the enemy's spellcasting ability, analyze dweomer to find out what buffs and magic items they have (level 11), and that's just off the top of my head.

That said, the higher level you get, the more likely the enemy will also begin to prepare against divinations, if they're capable of it. Wizards will have private sanctum at the very least, though i can't think of many site based anti-divinations that other classes would get access to. Things like a ring of nondetection might help on the boss of the area, making you underestimate the dungeon, assuming you fail the CL check (which, for equal CL is a 50/50)

[Earthwalker]

Helpful hints [snip]

So in the example you more check the place out but still go in with the spells you had, it just lets you know whats coming ahead.

Do people play where the wizard maps out whats ahead taking however long that takes and thenspend in game time resting and changing spell load out to then go into the dungeon ?

Is there any chance that the wizard checking out the dungeon magically will be spotted ?

[NNescio]

... That said, the higher level you get, the more likely the enemy will also begin to prepare against divinations, if they're capable of it. Wizards will have private sanctum at the very least, though i can't think of many site based anti-divinations that other classes would get access to. Things like a ring of nondetection might help on the boss of the area, making you underestimate the dungeon, assuming you fail the CL check (which, for equal CL is a 50/50)

Carry a lead sheet.

...okay, jokes aside, it's not very practical for PCs to use this tactic, but BBEGs can lead-line everything in their base to prevent most scrying spells. Divination still has its uses though.

(Plus, saying "no" to a player every time he wants to scry is just smacks of well, bad DMing.)

:belkar: Stop oppressing my culture, you ethnocentric bitch!

[Banjoman42]

The point is that its very useful. Sure, someone else might have it. But someone just as easily can make the party have no need for a fighter, because magic is superior.
But if you have two other casters with it, like a cleric or psion, I don't see why it is so necessary to have.

[Chronos]

Having two fighter-types (whether they're actual fighters, barbarian/warblade multiclasses, or DMM clerzillas) is more useful than having one, because it means that you can put a Wall of Muscles in two different places on the battlefield, and do twice as much damage to things the wizard has crippled, and so forth. Having two sources of divination magic, though, is redundant.

[Crake]

Carry a lead sheet.

...okay, jokes aside, it's not very practical for PCs to use this tactic, but BBEGs can lead-line everything in their base to prevent most scrying spells. Divination still has its uses though.

(Plus, saying "no" to a player every time he wants to scry is just smacks of well, bad DMing.)

:belkar: Stop oppressing my culture, you ethnocentric bitch!

that may stop scrying spells, yeah, but then it just involves some creative thinking, like an irresistible chain of eyes on a small, preferably flight capable occular persisted summon, along with invisibility and rary's telepathic bond, and get it to fly around the complex, allowing you to map it out. And if it gets caught, then just shift chain of eyes to one if it's assailants and let it de-summon. Not only will that stir the pot, which lets you get an idea of response times, and their general co-ordination, it will let you see who they report to, and if you're lucky, get to see what the main big boss gets up to. Combine that with the demand spell, which essentially lets you cast a long ranged suggestion, allowing you to somewhat direct the current target's actions, you could probably get him to touch the big boss. He might die for doing so, but that's not your problem, infighting is good for you after all, right?

[nedz]

A lot of DM's run very casual games. They just tell the players things. And it can quickly unbalance a game. When a player is given tons of ''free candy'' in the form of game information, they can use it to do all sorts of things in the game.

I agree, though as a player I complain if a DM gives something away. I have been known to change my actions to avoid even the appearance of meta-gaming. As a DM: it's not happening; spoils the game.

[Banjoman42]

Having two fighter-types (whether they're actual fighters, barbarian/warblade multiclasses, or DMM clerzillas) is more useful than having one, because it means that you can put a Wall of Muscles in two different places on the battlefield, and do twice as much damage to things the wizard has crippled, and so forth. Having two sources of divination magic, though, is redundant.
I agree. Divination has quite a number of uses but I wouldn't think twice about banning it (if I could), especially considering that I play with a fairly large group, so our other casters could handle divining.

[Renen]

I agree, though as a player I complain if a DM gives something away. I have been known to change my actions to avoid even the appearance of meta-gaming. As a DM: it's not happening; spoils the game.

Though I think saying something was not damaged by a fireball is fine... right?
Same as saying "your acid spell had no effect on the door you are trying to melt through"

[nedz]

Though I think saying something was not damaged by a fireball is fine... right?
Same as saying "your acid spell had no effect on the door you are trying to melt through"

Yes absolutely — provided they can see the effect: you can engage in indirect fire. Also Fireball is long range so you might not be able to tell at 800 feet if the enemy is in the woods, etc. I would give a skill check in marginal cases.

[Renen]

Well yeh. Assuming I can see the monster getting hit with a fireball, then it would be strange for dm NOT to tell me that the monster does NOT even smell crispy, let alone look burned.

[Troacctid]

I think it's a fair enough think to say, after someone just blasted an enemy with a fireball that "The monster seems unaffected". I'll agree that saying "it's immune to fire" is going too far though, cause it also could have been spell resistance. But in a similar situation with say, orb of fire, the only explaination would be immunity to fire.

Wouldn't you prompt your players to roll a caster level check to overcome spell resistance? They are entitled to one, after all, and it's kind of a dead giveaway.

True, it could still be spell immunity, but I actually prefer to make players roll a caster level check to overcome that, too, to conceal the fact that they're immune as opposed to just having a really high spell resistance.

[Renen]

I think we were thinking along the lines of "Cant be hurt by fire" because it might have such high fore resist, or outright immunity (Like fire elementals do, though who would throw a fireball at one)

[nedz]

I think we were thinking along the lines of "Cant be hurt by fire" because it might have such high fore resist, or outright immunity (Like fire elementals do, though who would throw a fireball at one)

I think I would pass some comment the first time someone Fireballed a Fire Elemental, and likely the second; but if they persisted ... :smallconfused:

I did have a situation where someone was (Empowered/Maximised) Fireballing some Half Dragon (White) Kobold Monk / Sorcerer / Enlightened Fist mooks, who were vulnerable to fire, and I didn't tell him about the vulnerability — but then it was a large fight (11 v 27) and most of them dodged (Evasion). There was also a lot of moving around (Hit and run tactics — both sides, large hall with several side chambers) and the Wizard was at the back. I did mention the evasion and he only ever affected one of the mooks at a time. I was trying not to encourage a poor tactic — though he kept it up anyway.

[jedipotter]

Do people play where the wizard maps out whats ahead taking however long that takes and thenspend in game time resting and changing spell load out to then go into the dungeon ?

Is there any chance that the wizard checking out the dungeon magically will be spotted ?

A couple of my players do that. Normally a day or two before the group will go in. Though they also use scrolls and magic items too.

Depending on the spell, and who and what they are checking out....there is always a chance they get detected.

[Psyren]

In Pathfinder you actually can choose Divination as a banned school. Of course "banned school" is a bit softer in PF anyway.

[Banjoman42]

I fail too see the divination spells that reveal a creatures abilities/immunities. The exception is contact other plane, but no thanks, I'd rather not become brain dead for 5 weeks just to find out how much acid resistance that one monster has. So why does everyone say divination=Knowledge=power? I thought that's what knowledge skills were for. Prying eyes and true seeing are all well and good, but clerics have true seeing at a lower level, and no one is stopping the rogue from just using a scroll of prying eyes at the front of every dungeon, instead of the wizard wasting a slot (and time when he could be preparing spells) on it.

[P.F.]

I fail too see the divination spells that reveal a creatures abilities/immunities. The exception is contact other plane, but no thanks, I'd rather not become brain dead for 5 weeks just to find out how much acid resistance that one monster has. So why does everyone say divination=Knowledge=power?

To get information apart from what can be learned merely by scrying, you are right about using Contact Other Plane. The intelligence check isn't a problem because it's just numbers; you should be able to get yur intelligence bonus up to +15. I don't recall ability checks auto-failing on a natural 1, but if your DM believes they do, you'll want a spell or item that allows you to re-roll it.

[Banjoman42]

To get information apart from what can be learned merely by scrying, you are right about using Contact Other Plane. The intelligence check isn't a problem because it's just numbers; you should be able to get yur intelligence bonus up to +15. I don't recall ability checks auto-failing on a natural 1, but if your DM believes they do, you'll want a spell or item that allows you to re-roll it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless you use things or races outside of core (which my GM doesn't allow most times), the max Intelligence is 34 at 20th level (5 from level, 5 from inherent bonuses, 6 from headband of intellect +6. That's not a +12 modifier, so you would fail on a roll of 3 or lower, which isn't too bad, but then you compound it with the fact that you can still receive wrong answers, or even false ones. Still, not horrible, but there are still much better ways to get information about monsters, like maxing out those knowledge skills. At lower levels, you won't have nearly as high a Int bonus, so knowledge skills would be much better. So, Divination does not=knowledge=power, but Knowledge (arcana)=Knowledge=power.
Edit: Max Int is 36, failing on roles of 1 and 2.

[torrasque666]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless you use things races outside of core (which my GM doesn't allow most times), the max Intelligence is 34 at 20th level (5 from level, 5 from inherent bonuses, 6 from headband of intellect +6. That's not a +12 modifier, so you would fail on a roll of 3 or lower, which isn't too bad, but then you compound it with the fact that you can still receive wrong answers, or even false ones. Still, not horrible, but there are still much better ways to get information about monsters, like maxing out those knowledge skills. At lower levels, you won't have nearly as high a Int bonus, so knowledge skills would be much better. So, Divination does not=knowledge=power, but Knowledge (arcana)=Knowledge=power.

36 actually. 18 base+2 race(grey elf, from the monster manual, still core.)+5(inherent)+5(levels)+6(enhancement)=36

[Vhaidara]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless you use things races outside of core (which my GM doesn't allow most times)

That is irrelevant when discussing general optimization is the difference.

Also, who said that Divination was the only Knowledge you used? You combine it with Knowledge skills. So you scry, find out what you're fighting, and use your obscene Knowledge skills to ID its weaknesses.

[Banjoman42]

That is irrelevant when discussing general optimization is the difference.

Also, who said that Divination was the only Knowledge you used? You combine it with Knowledge skills. So you scry, find out what you're fighting, and use your obscene Knowledge skills to ID its weaknesses.

Understood, but scry can be cast be nearly every other class. It's certainly useful, but not one of the wizards most powerful tools.

[Vhaidara]

Understood, but scry can be cast be nearly every other class. It's certainly useful, but not one of the wizards most powerful tools.

When optimizing a wizard, you don't want to be dependent on other, lesser beings. They will die, because they aren't wizards. You don't need them. You save the world on your own.

Again, it's the same thing with why it's irrelevant to general optimization that you GM doesn't allow stuff from outside of Core: A generally optimized wizard is the ultimate solo character. He doesn't use a party.

[Banjoman42]

When optimizing a wizard, you don't want to be dependent on other, lesser beings. They will die, because they aren't wizards. You don't need them. You save the world on your own.

Again, it's the same thing with why it's irrelevant to general optimization that you GM doesn't allow stuff from outside of Core: A generally optimized wizard is the ultimate solo character. He doesn't use a party.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Why not free up spell slots by having your bard or cleric use Scry and have more spell slots for your "Ultimate solo character"?

[Vhaidara]

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Why not free up spell slots by having your bard or cleric use Scry and have more spell slots for your "Ultimate solo character"?

Again, this is a modification that you would make because you have a party. Your wizard is weaker for the choice, but your party members are balancing out your weakness.

My point was that the General Optimization Wizard is designed as a solo character. You don't want to use the 100% General Optimization Wizard unless you are
A. A solo player
or
B. A **** (because you're doing everyone's job better than them and soloing the campaign)

[Psyren]

In my experience, actually playing an ultimate solo wizard at a table is a lot harder than simply writing about one. At best you just end up in an arms race with the GM, who lest we forget has wizards of his own, and at worse you screw up and get killed.

So the "optimal" strategy in practice is actually to play down and rely on your party members so the GM doesn't feel the need to ratchet the difficulty up on you, and occasionally use your T1 goodies to pull off a hail-mary win in the face of tough odds.