How well is the game holding up at high levels? [Archive]

MrStabby

2015-03-30, 11:38 AM

That's an interesting concept, just leaving the high slots for increasing spell power.

This would certainly add to the temptation to multiclass.

In my experience 9th level spells are a problem and a couple of 8th level spells. 7th and below are situationaly very strong (and using them in those situations may make them seem overpowered but it is really the right tool for the job).

The plan I am investigating is simply allowing high level wizards only the spells from their school (so they still have a decent amount of power but not the current "answer to everything" that people currently complain about.

Clerics will be similar but will be domain focussed (so light will get access to any high level fire/radiant spells, life will get healing and resurrection spells and so on).

Bards and druid may be a tougher call to fix - unless there is a strong theme to take advantage of.

Realistically no one seems to have any problem between levels 5 and about 16. Below 5 Moon Druid, Monk and Paladin are regarded as a bit too strong (and low level ranger very weak) and above 16 full casters start to pull away.

I think as long as you stick in that zone the game is very well balanced in terms of power. Plot hooks however to tend to make casters a bit more central from about level 12 (religious quests, quests for arcane lore, deactivate the device of doom etc. and less focusses on smash Ogre into little pieces). In part this may just be our DMs wanting to generate some use for knowledge skills.

Fwiffo86

2015-03-30, 01:11 PM

How do you play Rise of Tiamat then :smalleek:

The titular enemy is immune to spells of 6th level or lower

I think the simple solution here is to realize that the casters can't just spell something into non-existence. They will need the martials to effect the damage. Personally, I think that is the way it really should be.

Another possible solution (sort of coinciding with the School/Domain suggestion: which I like tremendously) is to make any spell of 6 or higher require effort to find/unlock/research/etc. Since they are not "mainstream" spells, they should be special (kind of like feats maybe).

Rad Mage

2015-03-30, 01:19 PM

How do you play Rise of Tiamat then :smalleek:

The titular enemy is immune to spells of 6th level or lower

IIRC actually fighting the titular enemy means you did something wrong. I'm pretty sure that your supposed to stop the summoning before Tiamat makes it through.

Mara

2015-03-30, 01:32 PM

Anyone else notice the lack of actual game experiences in this thread?

I remember there being some, but they have since disappeared.

Yrnes

2015-03-30, 02:01 PM

Mara

2015-03-30, 02:08 PM

Yrnes

2015-03-30, 02:13 PM

Mara

2015-03-30, 02:30 PM

Yes to both, although admittedly the players generally do not improvise much. Not because they lack the creativity, but generally just because whacking something with a weapon is the more practical choice.

We aren't combat heavy though. Maybe 2 - 3 fights a session, with more focus on the story (we probably do more skill checks than attack rolls). That tends to balance things out enough for us.
I have a theory that grid combat can limit creativity. I have two basic reasons for this.

1) As GM/DM, if I place interesting terrain and features in a room, I have great trouble representing that on a grid.

2) As a player I have found myself falling into the trap of only visualizing or remembering what is displayed on the grid.

Also if improved actions don't do much, then that could also discourage players. Like if the level 20 fighter couldn't kick 3 barrels of oil on an enemy and throw an alchemist fire. If a DM makes such an action take 4 turns, then the players will obviously just smack the enemy because for some odd reason their characters action economy only improved for the attack action.

ChubbyRain

2015-03-30, 02:32 PM

Simple solution. Don't allow any spells above level 5. Don't have them exist. The casters still get their spells slots to use, but don't actually have any spells of 6 or higher available/learned/known.

Wasn't there a good e6 conversion for 5e that did this? I recall it looking nice. Casters still pulled ahead due to level 4 and 5 spells but it really wasn't as bad and had casters closer to the same playing field.

Maybe it was 3rd level spells with 4th level coming on very late?

Yrnes

2015-03-30, 02:51 PM

I have a theory that grid combat can limit creativity. I have two basic reasons for this.

1) As GM/DM, if I place interesting terrain and features in a room, I have great trouble representing that on a grid.

2) As a player I have found myself falling into the trap of only visualizing or remembering what is displayed on the grid.

Also if improved actions don't do much, then that could also discourage players. Like if the level 20 fighter couldn't kick 3 barrels of oil on an enemy and throw an alchemist fire. If a DM makes such an action take 4 turns, then the players will obviously just smack the enemy because for some odd reason their characters action economy only improved for the attack action.

Devil's advocate though - improvised actions apply to all the players, so there's no reason a level 20 wizard couldn't kick 3 barrels of oil on an enemy and follow up with a fire bolt. If you're forcing a player to take improvised actions to add diversity to their class roll, that's a limitation of the system, not the player. I agree that these kinds of actions are fun and add to the spirit of the game, but they don't do anything to make a player feel unique - the only thing required to kick a barrel is a pair of legs and a skill check, which every player has the option to do.

As far as the grid goes that's just a personal preference. I like TotM combat, but most people I've met prefer a mat for tactical sense. I will absolutely agree with you though, as soon as the grid is on the table players approach their options based off what they see on the grid as opposed to asking questions about the environment. I make a note to point out terrain features or things in the area before combat for just that reason.

ChubbyRain

2015-03-30, 02:58 PM

As far as grid versus TotM goes... Check out 13th age battle system that deals with ranges in close, near, far away. It somewhat mixes both styles and works pretty well.

I've seen it used on a grid even, the grid was there so the DM could draw landmarks and stuff but we still used close, bear by, and far away. It has been a while so you might need to check to see if any rules have been updated on this.

Mara

2015-03-30, 04:00 PM

Devil's advocate though - improvised actions apply to all the players, so there's no reason a level 20 wizard couldn't kick 3 barrels of oil on an enemy and follow up with a fire bolt. If you're forcing a player to take improvised actions to add diversity to their class roll, that's a limitation of the system, not the player. I agree that these kinds of actions are fun and add to the spirit of the game, but they don't do anything to make a player feel unique - the only thing required to kick a barrel is a pair of legs and a skill check, which every player has the option to do.

Well the fighter can attack 4 time a round, the wizard can't. Casting a cantrip plus doing all that other stuff is not something I would allow (since the cantrip eats up their action). I would allow creative spell use, but that is different.

In 5e the rules are an abstraction. Heavy reliance on the improvised action is expected. There is also about halve a dozen maneuvers in the DMG hidden from players should the DM need guidance on how to handle that. If this game was more like Pathfinder, where the rules simulate what is happening, then I would agree with you that dependence on the improvised action is a limitation of the system. Since that is not the case, I more see it as a strength of the 5e skill system in that it uses fuzzy guidelines to turn complicated actions into simple checks.

The downside is that playing RAW 5e is an even more hilarious concept than playing Pathfinder RAW. RAW in 5e depends heavily on the DM making things up.

Mara

2015-03-30, 04:02 PM

Oscredwin

2015-03-30, 04:35 PM

Kicking over the barrel and then throwing alchemist's fire on it are two "attack" type actions. Fighters, barbarians, paladins, rangers, thief rogues, monks, valor bards and thirsty blade pact warlocks can do it. There are 2 full casters on that list, but they are two of the weakest full casters in the game. Having improvisation take attacks instead of actions (a resource that martials have more of) really helps here.

MadBear

2015-03-30, 05:24 PM

Well my group just hit level 10, and haven't had any problems yet. As a paladin, I feel like a Bad Mama Jama, who gets to decide who and what dies next in any given round.

The bard is reliably helping make the rest of us feel awesome, the cleric is putting up good AOE damage, and the monk is a lock down machine. I don't see any of this changing as we gain more levels.

ChubbyRain

2015-03-30, 09:22 PM

I'm talking about instead of a map/grid/whatever, the DM and players just use words. 5e is set up really well for allowing that.

Not as much as 13th age, 5e wants to be TotM but it really isn't. 5e has way to much specific targeting to be a good TotM rule set. Sure it can be used for that, I've ran 4e games with TotM, but that doesn't mean it was made for it.

Using words like "close", "engaged", "near by", and "far away" work much better because they aren't as specific and the DM doesn't have to make so many judgement calls.

Gwendol

2015-03-31, 03:04 AM

Devil's advocate though - improvised actions apply to all the players, so there's no reason a level 20 wizard couldn't kick 3 barrels of oil on an enemy and follow up with a fire bolt. If you're forcing a player to take improvised actions to add diversity to their class roll, that's a limitation of the system, not the player. I agree that these kinds of actions are fun and add to the spirit of the game, but they don't do anything to make a player feel unique - the only thing required to kick a barrel is a pair of legs and a skill check, which every player has the option to do.

That's not true. Or at least not all barrel kicking PCs are created equal. Fighters and rogues have class abilities (extra attacks, bonus actions) that allow them to do more in a round that anyone else. Barbarians can have advantage on all strength checks, etc. To not taking advantage of this is knowingly gimping oneself.
A fighter can shove an enemy prone, and attack with advantage for the rest of the round. A rogue can kick a barrel of oil onto an enemy and follow up with lighting it on fire, but AFAIK that will be a challenge for a wizard.

Strill

2015-03-31, 06:24 AM

What sucks is this starts around level 8, almost exactly where it started to do it in 3.5.

Casters may have been nerfed but that didn't hurt them enough to not still be gods umong men.

Although spell slots are low, having the number they do and the 3e sorcerer's type casting stacked with it really allow you to prepare a different number of spells that you might need and then choose the ones you do need throughout the day. Cantrips do good damage too.

It may not seem like it to those that haven't played high level but it is very similar to 3e. You just can't stack buffs/deBuffs low you used to, outside of that casters play pretty much the same as they did in 3e/4e.

Noncasters get to be damage dealers (strikers) just fine, but then again so does everyone else.

Agreed. IMO Battlemaster fighters should unlock some exceptionally powerful maneuvers at higher levels, and get more dice as well.

Yrnes

2015-03-31, 08:04 AM

That's not true. Or at least not all barrel kicking PCs are created equal. Fighters and rogues have class abilities (extra attacks, bonus actions) that allow them to do more in a round that anyone else. Barbarians can have advantage on all strength checks, etc. To not taking advantage of this is knowingly gimping oneself.
A fighter can shove an enemy prone, and attack with advantage for the rest of the round. A rogue can kick a barrel of oil onto an enemy and follow up with lighting it on fire, but AFAIK that will be a challenge for a wizard.

Well to be fair I think you're disputing the semantics of my argument, not the spirit of it. My point being that any improvised action is something available to all characters, regardless of class. I'll concede classes with hefty Strength and Dexterity scores with multiple attacks per round will certainly do some things more efficiently, but that doesn't change the fact that a wizard still couldn't at least try.

In the end, if the problem people have with martial classes is "I don't have enough options on my turn," asking them to rely on improvised actions is a crutch. I'll say in the same breath I love when my players do this sort of thing, that kind of outside-the-box thinking livens up a game, but they're not always the most practical answers.

holygroundj

2015-03-31, 08:06 AM

Gwendol

2015-03-31, 08:18 AM

In the end, if the problem people have with martial classes is "I don't have enough options on my turn," asking them to rely on improvised actions is a crutch. I'll say in the same breath I love when my players do this sort of thing, that kind of outside-the-box thinking livens up a game, but they're not always the most practical answers.

I am fully behind the idea that everyone should improv, don't get me wrong. In the case of especially the rogue, fighter, and barbarian (and perhaps the bard), it looks like improvised actions are actually built into the class what with abilities like remarkable athlete, deft hands, etc. So, I'd say that no, it's not a crutch, it's a feature.

MrStabby

2015-03-31, 08:23 AM

druid91

2015-03-31, 09:40 AM

I think the simple solution here is to realize that the casters can't just spell something into non-existence. They will need the martials to effect the damage. Personally, I think that is the way it really should be.

I'm going to have to say this is nonsense.

D&D is a team game. And this edition more so than past ones has gone back to the roots of PC death being a common thing. Which is one reason why I'm pretty sure they made char-gen so simple.

The point isn't that a fighter should be completely and utterly able to match a wizard all the way up to level 20. The point is that a fighter should do his job. Which is, surprisingly enough, killing things without needing to expend spell-slots. Fun fact, Wizards are helpful at low levels, but at least in play so far, I've been outshined pretty consistently. And I'm a level HIGHER than the rest of the party.

There's a pretty simple pattern. Non-Magical sorts excel in the early to middle parts of the game. While casters excel from middle to late game. The party fighter is killing two enemies almost every time he swings his sword, I'm lucky if I kill one with a spell. And I can't just magic missile or witchbolt EVERYTHING. Because I've got 2-3 shots at most. So I've got to judge whether or not I want to spend those now.

Is playing a wizard fun? Hell yeah. But, a lot of people severely overestimate how hard they are to kill. Honestly, the only reason I haven't died so far is what my teammates call 'Serial Cowardice'. Namely staying WELL AWAY from anything dangerous and hurling spells at it from a distance.

Mara

2015-03-31, 10:01 AM

I am fully behind the idea that everyone should improv, don't get me wrong. In the case of especially the rogue, fighter, and barbarian (and perhaps the bard), it looks like improvised actions are actually built into the class what with abilities like remarkable athlete, deft hands, etc. So, I'd say that no, it's not a crutch, it's a feature.

You get into the pathfinder problem of "if there is a feat/ability for it then that means no one else can do it". I believe that route of spelling out what improvised actions X, Y, and Z can take just nerfs martials into the ground.

You can notice the devs care. Battlemasters have tons of maneuvers but they all include landing an attack. Nothing says other characters could not do these maneuvers, they just wouldn't do them AND hit a foe with tons of bonus damage like the battlemaster.

Fwiffo86

2015-03-31, 10:48 AM

I'm going to have to say this is nonsense.

D&D is a team game. And this edition more so than past ones has gone back to the roots of PC death being a common thing. Which is one reason why I'm pretty sure they made char-gen so simple.

The point isn't that a fighter should be completely and utterly able to match a wizard all the way up to level 20. The point is that a fighter should do his job. Which is, surprisingly enough, killing things without needing to expend spell-slots. Fun fact, Wizards are helpful at low levels, but at least in play so far, I've been outshined pretty consistently. And I'm a level HIGHER than the rest of the party.

There's a pretty simple pattern. Non-Magical sorts excel in the early to middle parts of the game. While casters excel from middle to late game. The party fighter is killing two enemies almost every time he swings his sword, I'm lucky if I kill one with a spell. And I can't just magic missile or witchbolt EVERYTHING. Because I've got 2-3 shots at most. So I've got to judge whether or not I want to spend those now.

Is playing a wizard fun? Hell yeah. But, a lot of people severely overestimate how hard they are to kill. Honestly, the only reason I haven't died so far is what my teammates call 'Serial Cowardice'. Namely staying WELL AWAY from anything dangerous and hurling spells at it from a distance.

You actually are of the same mindset I am. We agree. Let the martials do the killing, its what they are designed for. Let the casters buff/debuff/swiss army knife when they can.

My reference to the "needed the Martials" comment stems from the fact that the target is immune to spells of 6th level or lower. It isn't meant to be an encounter you win with magic (if you fight it at all).

Ralanr

2015-03-31, 10:49 AM

Granted we're only level 9 right now, which is hardly high level, but we have a druid and a lore bard in our party.

What I love most about the druid is the sheer versatility of his spells. However, the paladin is king of damage, and as a totem barbarian, I am having so much fun wading into the forefront and soaking 10+hits and still being at half health. Our rogue can also be deadly with sneak attack.

no one is outshining anyone. We are having great fun, and on both sides of the roll/role play spectrum.

I just haven't seen an issue yet.

My last session involved my groups druid using a single lightning bolt in a particular area for most of the fight while the rest of the party ended up spreading out to deal with other threats (We realized this was a bad idea since the group paladin almost died when dealing with a Bulette (CR 5) alone while the druid was doing the lightning bolt, the barbarian (Me) across the map grappling a...red ooze thing with mouths (Character reasons as to why I did it. As a player I had a decent understanding that this was a BAD idea. Still worked), the rogue fighting a carrion crawler with the help of the halfling wizard, the same wizard than ran over to the Bullette to help deal with it.)

We're all around 5-6 by the way. The druid still did the most damage rounded up, but she didn't really outshine everyone. We were focused on eliminating threats and keeping allies alive (Though we probably should have worked as a team earlier).

We're all having a blast and being useful in our own ways (Except the paladin. But that's just bad luck and poor teamwork together since no one was with him/her when the bulette attacked (I can't spell at all :smallbiggrin: )). My only complaint was lack of damage, but that's just because I'm sword and board with no feats and the eldrich knight has a stupid magic item for his level (We all do, but his is useful to his class).

Maxilian

2015-03-31, 11:20 AM

Anyone else notice the lack of actual game experiences in this thread?

I remember there being some, but they have since disappeared.

Sadly DND is not a game that you can play whenever you want, i have only reach lvl 5 (almost lvl 6) -Cleric- and in another group as a lvl 2 Ranger so in most cases, is not just the lack of time that don't let us (as soon as i get over lvl 10 i will post here)

druid91

2015-03-31, 11:20 AM

You actually are of the same mindset I am. We agree. Let the martials do the killing, its what they are designed for. Let the casters buff/debuff/swiss army knife when they can.

My reference to the "needed the Martials" comment stems from the fact that the target is immune to spells of 6th level or lower. It isn't meant to be an encounter you win with magic (if you fight it at all).

You misunderstand. I said kill without using spell slots. There's no reason a fighter can't keep swinging their sword, so they have staying power that a wizard simply doesn't have. Sure, cantrips are a thing but for the most part they aren't nearly as strong as a fighter swinging their sword. Martials are allowed to keep going long after the casters have expended the bulk of their usefulness. As well as being significantly less squishy than casters.

What does this mean? Martials are built to take risks and keep going. While Casters are built to get things done. A caster is limited in how much they can do, but what they do, is generally gamechanging.

The thing that made casters so overpowering in 3.5, namely the 15 minute workday strategy, isn't possible in 5th.

silveralen

2015-03-31, 01:28 PM

I've had one reach 16 and one reach 18 and didn't have any problems. Everyone felt useful and enjoyed themselves, no one was struggling or getting overshadowed.

Magic Myrmidon

2015-03-31, 02:40 PM

The thing that made casters so overpowering in 3.5, namely the 15 minute workday strategy, isn't possible in 5th.

Not really sure about this. Things are based on short rests and long rests, not encounters or scenes or whatever. 15 minute workdays are still totally doable.

Mara

2015-03-31, 02:52 PM

I've had one reach 16 and one reach 18 and didn't have any problems. Everyone felt useful and enjoyed themselves, no one was struggling or getting overshadowed.

Obviously you were just playing the game wrong :smalltongue:

druid91

2015-03-31, 02:54 PM

Not really sure about this. Things are based on short rests and long rests, not encounters or scenes or whatever. 15 minute workdays are still totally doable.

Short rests are only 30 minutes to an hour or so, and while they help, they don't completely restore your spells. Their enough to get one or two big spells back before you go on to fight the boss.

Long rests do restore your spells, but they can only be taken once every 24 hours. So sure, you can sleep for 8 hours 15 minutes after taking a long rest. But it won't do you any good.

silveralen

2015-03-31, 03:00 PM

Obviously you were just playing the game wrong :smalltongue:

Yeah, going in with the correct mentality for the class we chose and not picking a class that didn't offer us the sort of abilities we wanted was probably the wrong way to go about it :smallwink:

In case anyone was interested, the parties were:

lvl 16, 4 people: fighter/rogue (me), cleric/paladin, ranger, and wizard.

lvl 18, 3-4 people: paladin (me), rogue, and warlock with a druid/barbarian who sometimes was there sometimes wasn't.

Said druid/barbarian came closest to not being satisfied, but their expectation seemed to be "do everything a fighter could do, with lvl 9 spells". They came around eventually though.

Magic Myrmidon

2015-03-31, 03:18 PM

Short rests are only 30 minutes to an hour or so, and while they help, they don't completely restore your spells. Their enough to get one or two big spells back before you go on to fight the boss.

Long rests do restore your spells, but they can only be taken once every 24 hours. So sure, you can sleep for 8 hours 15 minutes after taking a long rest. But it won't do you any good.

Ah, I see. I guess this helps, but really, it just makes the break between encounters even longer. Just spend 2 days in town before going back out, instead of 8 hours.

Yes, yes, there should be time constraints or whatever, but that's the DMs job, and it's often easier said than done.

druid91

2015-03-31, 03:30 PM

Ah, I see. I guess this helps, but really, it just makes the break between encounters even longer. Just spend 2 days in town before going back out, instead of 8 hours.

Yes, yes, there should be time constraints or whatever, but that's the DMs job, and it's often easier said than done.

Not really, my DM has gotten by just with occasional "So you're really gonna sleep here? In the dungeon? Well, hope someone keeps watch..."

DM12

2015-03-31, 03:34 PM

Magic Myrmidon

2015-03-31, 04:02 PM

Not really, my DM has gotten by just with occasional "So you're really gonna sleep here? In the dungeon? Well, hope someone keeps watch..."

Oh, just sleep in the dungeon? Sure, yeah, not a good idea. I was thinking that the party would go to the dungeon, kill stuff in an encounter, then go back to town. Then come back.

silveralen

2015-03-31, 04:22 PM

Devil's advocate though - improvised actions apply to all the players, so there's no reason a level 20 wizard couldn't kick 3 barrels of oil on an enemy and follow up with a fire bolt. If you're forcing a player to take improvised actions to add diversity to their class roll, that's a limitation of the system, not the player. I agree that these kinds of actions are fun and add to the spirit of the game, but they don't do anything to make a player feel unique - the only thing required to kick a barrel is a pair of legs and a skill check, which every player has the option to do.

This is one thing people continue to gloss over that bothers me. The PHB clearly uses attacks as a measure of how many unique skill usages you can make per turn. In order to shove four people, you need four attacks.

1. This means that wizard isn't casting firebolt same turn

2. He is using at minimum his entire turn to shove the barrels, and could easily take multiple turns depending on why 3 barrels is specified.

3. Fighter can perform the same action in a third of the time by level 11, a fourth of the time by lvl 20. That means either kick+attacks in the same round or kick them all in one go depending again on situation.

People misunderstanding how the skill check system is supposed to work in combat does cause problems because wizards are bad at using it comparatively.

Is "hmm... all listed examples of using skill in combat seem to take up an attack. I guess that is probably the norm for measuring how long they take" really a huge leap in logic? It shouldn't be.

SharkForce

2015-03-31, 05:13 PM

only shoving and grappling are defined as an attack action (likely because they are attacks. many other skill uses are defined differently (typically just as an action). for example, hiding. or picking someone's pocket. or disarming a trap. or examining a suspected illusion. or treating someone's wounds. some are also non-actions (typically perception, though some uses of perception may require an action also). most DMs i've played with rule that a knowledge check is typically also a non-action. some might require multiple rounds (most persuasion checks). some will be part of other things (in fact, some of the earlier ones listed earlier are not so much an action as they are part of some other declared action which uses up a regular action, such as "interact with object"). for example, climbing or jumping or tumbling will be part of your movement.

that said, in the specific example i'd say shoving a barrel is probably an attack action (since shoving a person is) though of course said action will only move it one square (i'd allow "grappling" a barrel to move it further).

so really, in the use of many (i would argue most) skills, the number of attacks you can make is irrelevant. only certain specific skill uses (most of which are basically attacks themselves) are attack actions.

Sullivan

2015-03-31, 05:47 PM

I DM'ed a game where we switched from 2e toon to 5e. The 5e's are all 12th level and it works fine, the only thing I noticed is that you'll have to up the stakes a lot to make encounter more deadly, but the mechanics work about the same. Well maybe I saw people filling their roles more around 12th. wizards were more blasty, fighter could go toe to toe with bigger monsters for longer, but ultimately the same.

and for the other topic thats come up on this thread. I use a grid, but I talk to every new player about how there skills are to be thought about as weapons too and the whole point behind having a dm is because you can always "do that" as long as it plays in with the character and the situation, and even then, they should always try and sell the idea. I try to get all my players to be like a toned down Patrick Rothfuss from PAX 2015.

one story I have is the rouge when down and crit S@!ted his first death save, so the cleric wanted to run up and cast spare the dying on him. we was idk 3 square short or something, so I said that if he passed an athletics check he would make it. That turned in to "So I juke the prince of hell, hook slide past the elemental, and save my buddy." it was the most rewarding 17 he'd rolled in a while.

Icewraith

2015-03-31, 05:52 PM

Oh, just sleep in the dungeon? Sure, yeah, not a good idea. I was thinking that the party would go to the dungeon, kill stuff in an encounter, then go back to town. Then come back.

Leomund's Tiny Hut.

If you leave a dungeon after clearing out half of it, the monsters either move out and take their treasure with them or collapse the entrance you used and fortify the other ones. And/or attack the town once you guys have rested and gone back to clear out the rest of the dungeon. And/or send runners to nearby monsters for reinforcements.

silveralen

2015-03-31, 08:20 PM

Leomund's Tiny Hut.

If you leave a dungeon after clearing out half of it, the monsters either move out and take their treasure with them or collapse the entrance you used and fortify the other ones. And/or attack the town once you guys have rested and gone back to clear out the rest of the dungeon. And/or send runners to nearby monsters for reinforcements.

If you are all asleep in a hut, can't they do most of that anyways? Unless the dungeon has exactly one entrance you wedge the hut into.

Really, anything you just described can happen regardless of the party's exact location if they give the enemy a full 8-24 hours to do as they will (depending when their last long rest was).

RulesJD

2015-04-01, 03:47 AM

Wizards at high levels are not that bad.

Creative wizards at high levels completely outshine their competition.

A wizard with a few days of downtime and sufficient gold is immune to TPKs. All they have to do is cast Clone + Demiplane. Add in the Wish -> Simulcrum trick and it gets worse. Magic Jar makes it even more laughable considering the Simulcrum can do it without penalty. A high level creative wizard will simply photocopy, or just straight up steal, your character.

Malifice

2015-04-01, 07:07 AM

Not really sure about this. Things are based on short rests and long rests, not encounters or scenes or whatever. 15 minute workdays are still totally doable.

If the DM allows them.

In any game where the DM allows long rests after every encounter, your spellcasters (who can drop their highest level spells at will) are going to shine. Although most martials can get some pretty impressive nova damage as well (action surge or paladin divine smites).

When you stick to the 2-3 encounters per short rest and 2-3 short rests per long rest, it balances fine.

Sometimes the single encounter per long rest happens. Sometimes its a meat grinder with many encounters per long rest. The first favors casters, the second favors martials.

Its the DM's job to keep them few and far between so the players dont necessarily know if another encounter is coming (or if they will get a chance to rest). Its a metagame DM consideration in 5th edition, that takes some mastery to find the sweet spot.

Yrnes

2015-04-01, 08:41 AM

This is one thing people continue to gloss over that bothers me. The PHB clearly uses attacks as a measure of how many unique skill usages you can make per turn. In order to shove four people, you need four attacks.

1. This means that wizard isn't casting firebolt same turn

2. He is using at minimum his entire turn to shove the barrels, and could easily take multiple turns depending on why 3 barrels is specified.

3. Fighter can perform the same action in a third of the time by level 11, a fourth of the time by lvl 20. That means either kick+attacks in the same round or kick them all in one go depending again on situation.

People misunderstanding how the skill check system is supposed to work in combat does cause problems because wizards are bad at using it comparatively.

Is "hmm... all listed examples of using skill in combat seem to take up an attack. I guess that is probably the norm for measuring how long they take" really a huge leap in logic? It shouldn't be.

Except that the wizard wouldn't bother, because why would he? He's too busy telling the laws of physics to shut up and sit down. The fighter has to do something like this to do anything outside the range of swinging his sword to have diversity of combat actions.

I really like 5e because the feats are mostly martial oriented, which gives those classes some variety in what they do each round. But you can't tell me a 7th level fighter and a 7th level wizard have an equal range of options when their turn comes up. They just don't. I'm certainly the last person to wave a banner around for 4th edition, but at least martial classes did have a pocketful of options to choose from when it was their turn without needing to innovate.

Again, in the same breath, I want to remind you I love improvised actions. They're the heart and soul of the combat game. But they're largely subjective and not every group plays the same way. I think it was mentioned that something like 5 out of 40 class combinations don't have some dip into spellcasting or similar options - don't you think this is intentional towards this aspect?

Mara

2015-04-01, 10:24 AM

Warlocks have less options than wizards, but I don't see anyone complaining about the lack meaningful warlock options.

Perhaps quantity of options should not be the only metric you judge a class by? This game balances asymmetrical mechanics. That makes accurately comparing across class lines very difficult. Even if one person prefers one class over another that could just be a consequence of personal preference.

charcoalninja

2015-04-01, 10:52 AM

Warlocks have less options than wizards, but I don't see anyone complaining about the lack meaningful warlock options.

Perhaps quantity of options should not the only metric you judge a class by? This game balances asymmetrical mechanics. That makes accurately comparing across class lines very difficult. Even if one person prefers one class over another that could just be a consequence of personal preference.

The difference is that Warlock actually grows into having high level options that specifically Fighter doesn't have. Earlier in the thread an example of stunting for a 20th level character was to throw 3 barrels of oil at something and that's been generally accepted as appropriate and somehow remarkable for a character to be able to do. Does anyone here honestly think that sort of thing is something that a 20th level character should be doing with their time? Do you really expect the resulting explosion from those barrels to approach ANYTHING close to what a 5th or even a 4th level spell is going to do within that same time? People often talk about barrels or oil, or alchemists fire or caltrops or whatnot for the muggles but do you really feel that any of that crap is of consequence against an ancient dragon that can reduce armies to ash? Are you going to use caltrops to stop Orcus the Demon Prince of death while you're jumping between the ribs of a dead god in a twisting vortex of chaos in the Abyss? What are you going to do to Dagon in the unfathomable depths as he summons horrors beyond measure to break reality? Garrote him with kelp?

I find it ridiculous and frustrating that non-casters are forced to live in low level land forever and are seldom given powers befiting the stage they are expect to play on. Yes mathimatically you can deal damage to Demogorgon the Demon Prince in his fortress of evil. Assuming he hasn't melted your flesh, or isn't sending a fleshwarped mountain against you, or just straight out driving you insane. At level 20 you're fighting icons of evil and soul devouring Balors. Baseline D&D stunting works fine a low levels where DMs have the reality lens to allow them to adjudicate the result. But once your 20th Fighter, who is as strong as physically possible wants to throw a tree through a Pit Fiend to pin him to the ground, eyebrows start raising and people start saying that can't happen, meanwhile my Cleric Buddy just summoned an army of Angels and has been shredding the battlefield with a level 5 Spirit Guardians for 10d8 damage a round while being completely immune to attack because of Sanctuary and using the Dodge action each round (as an example of an explosion of tactical options used together to great effect from just one caster).

I know there are some people with amazing DMs that let them do wonderful things, but based on my experience that is certainly not the norm with this sort of thing. 5e really needs a stunting guideline given out to DMs and players alike so they have a frame of reference for what is and is not possible.

Mara

2015-04-01, 11:32 AM

charcoalninja

2015-04-01, 12:22 PM

Honestly this is all I have left to say:

"Perhaps quantity of options should not the only metric you judge a class by? This game balances asymmetrical mechanics. That makes accurately comparing across class lines very difficult. Even if one person prefers one class over another that could just be a consequence of personal preference."

Just because the classes are not the same does not mean there is an issue.

EDIT: Your DM running the skill system poorly also does not mean there is an issue. There are outlines in the DMG.

Can you give me what the guidelines in the DMG say regarding the ability to impale a Pit Fiend with a tree to hold it in place? What do I roll, what damage does it do, at what level do I need to do it?

Or really anyone for that matter.

Galen

2015-04-01, 12:49 PM

Can you give me what the guidelines in the DMG say regarding the ability to impale a Pit Fiend with a tree to hold it in place? What do I roll, what damage does it do, at what level do I need to do it?

Or really anyone for that matter.

Seems straightforward. You make a grapple check, which is an athletics check. If you can convince the DM that using a tree provides advantageous circumstances, the DM may let you have an advantage on that.

holygroundj

2015-04-01, 01:07 PM

All of the examples of the skill system show how much it's up to the DM, so asking for concrete answers of the skill system is specious to me.

The player states what he wants to do, the DM decides how the skill system governs the action (see the response above) and then uses dice to mediate the outcome.

SharkForce

2015-04-01, 01:14 PM

Galen

2015-04-01, 01:16 PM

guidelines have to provide direction. a vague "oh, just do whatever you think is right" is not a guideline.
I dunno, there seems to be plenty of direction in the PHB and DMG. Having read through those, I feel fairly confident I can reasonably adjudicate any action my PCs would try.

Mara

2015-04-01, 01:24 PM

Can you give me what the guidelines in the DMG say regarding the ability to impale a Pit Fiend with a tree to hold it in place? What do I roll, what damage does it do, at what level do I need to do it?

Or really anyone for that matter.
AFB, but

That should be a strength(athletics) check for both picking up the tree and pin/grabbling the pit-fiend. I would have it be one roll apposed by the Pitfiends dex(acrobatics) or strength(athletics). I would also have it auto fail if the PCs check was less that 25 because I consider that to be a very hard feat (DC 30 if the tree is very large and not pointed at the impaling end). The Tree itself would do several d10s in damage as outlined by the hazard damage table suggestions. Since I am away from book, I could not give you my exact estimate at this time.

I would have all that be one attack and consume your free use object action. For a level 20 fighter that would leave 3 more attacks you could do. The DC would also scale depending on your strength score. Athletics only lets you lift more than normal. The lower your normal, the more athletic skill you would need to pull this off.

EDIT: Consequently if your strength was really high, then the auto-fail DC would decrease.
EDIT2: If you noticed. A high level barbarian or fighter is practically guaranteed to be able to pull this off if they invest all their actions for a turn into it.

Fwiffo86

2015-04-01, 01:34 PM

Can you give me what the guidelines in the DMG say regarding the ability to impale a Pit Fiend with a tree to hold it in place? What do I roll, what damage does it do, at what level do I need to do it?

Or really anyone for that matter.

Question 1. Can your character actually "lift" the tree with sufficient strength to throw it with force?

Question 2. Did your character make a successful attack roll using a non-proficient weapon?

Alternate option with the same problem:

Question 1. Does your telekinesis spell allow you to lift the tree with sufficient strength to throw it with force?

Question 2. Did your character make a successful spell attack roll using a tree?

The issue here is that you drastically want there to be no options (or weak ones) so you can argue that the casters have supremacy when the reality is they don't. What they have is a series of tools that work in extremely specific fashions. Spells are not mutable. They do exactly what they say they do. (yes, I know many of them are intentionally vague, but that doesn't change what their actual function is, just how its represented). Spells and actions cannot be layered together (see previous multi-buff builds) to accomplish near god-like base numbers.

Sometimes, players bite off more than they actually can chew. Situations where there is no good option available to them, and they have to make due with less efficient ones. Stating that martials have weaker options at higher levels is an invalid argument when you take into consideration that it is no-longer a game about using magic to solve every problem. In my opinion, magic was never meant to be the solution to all situations. Many spells that would be used to supersede mundane actions are flawed and a terrible idea (see Knock vs. Picking a lock) and rightly so.

I readily concede that summoning "an" angel to fight for you is an impressive feat of magic, it isn't actually needed at the level it becomes available. Speaking from experience with our run through of Throne of Bloodstone (level 20 characters), the martials in our game vastly out performed the summoned angel. It turned out to be a colossal waste of spell resources and time, given one martial dropped 3 demons to the angel's 1.

When you let go of the long held belief that casters hold supremacy, and take a look at how the classes actually perform in a game as opposed to theorycrafting math, you may find as I did, that the game is balanced fantastically at all levels. There are outriders of course (every game has exploits), but over all, its a fantastic edition.

charcoalninja

2015-04-01, 01:55 PM

AFB, but

That should be a strength(athletics) check for both picking up the tree and pin/grabbling the pit-fiend. I would have it be one roll apposed by the Pitfiends dex(acrobatics) or strength(athletics). I would also have it auto fail if the PCs check was less that 25 because I consider that to be a very hard feat (DC 30 if the tree is very large and not pointed at the impaling end). The Tree itself would do several d10s in damage as outlined by the hazard damage table suggestions. Since I am away from book, I could not give you my exact estimate at this time.

I would have all that be one attack and consume your free use object action. For a level 20 fighter that would leave 3 more attacks you could do. The DC would also scale depending on your strength score. Athletics only lets you lift more than normal. The lower your normal, the more athletic skill you would need to pull this off.

EDIT: Consequently if your strength was really high, then the auto-fail DC would decrease.
EDIT2: If you noticed. A high level barbarian or fighter is practically guaranteed to be able to pull this off if they invest all their actions for a turn into it.

I like that quite a bit. I'm very impressed by what you've pulled up here. Several d10s of damage is comparable to one of their attacks, a reasonable athletics check (assuming you can lift a tree that size), mechanics that favour Strong characters, gives the PC the status effect they were going for (restrained), and allows them to be suitably epic.

Well done.

Rush

2015-04-01, 02:02 PM

The highest level I've played for longer than one session was 7th level, and even then things were kinda shaky. Martial characters really need feats to be dynamic, so not playing by that optional rule really limits them to running up and swinging. Spellcasters certainly pull ahead in available options, as mentioned before.

Well my group just hit level 10, and haven't had any problems yet. As a paladin, I feel like a Bad Mama Jama, who gets to decide who and what dies next in any given round.

The bard is reliably helping make the rest of us feel awesome, the cleric is putting up good AOE damage, and the monk is a lock down machine. I don't see any of this changing as we gain more levels.

My last session involved my groups druid using a single lightning bolt in a particular area for most of the fight while the rest of the party ended up spreading out to deal with other threats (We realized this was a bad idea since the group paladin almost died when dealing with a Bulette (CR 5) alone while the druid was doing the lightning bolt, the barbarian (Me) across the map grappling a...red ooze thing with mouths (Character reasons as to why I did it. As a player I had a decent understanding that this was a BAD idea. Still worked), the rogue fighting a carrion crawler with the help of the halfling wizard, the same wizard than ran over to the Bullette to help deal with it.)

We're all around 5-6 by the way. The druid still did the most damage rounded up, but she didn't really outshine everyone. We were focused on eliminating threats and keeping allies alive (Though we probably should have worked as a team earlier).

We're all having a blast and being useful in our own ways (Except the paladin. But that's just bad luck and poor teamwork together since no one was with him/her when the bulette attacked (I can't spell at all :smallbiggrin: )). My only complaint was lack of damage, but that's just because I'm sword and board with no feats and the eldrich knight has a stupid magic item for his level (We all do, but his is useful to his class).

I've had one reach 16 and one reach 18 and didn't have any problems. Everyone felt useful and enjoyed themselves, no one was struggling or getting overshadowed.

Yeah, going in with the correct mentality for the class we chose and not picking a class that didn't offer us the sort of abilities we wanted was probably the wrong way to go about it :smallwink:

In case anyone was interested, the parties were:

lvl 16, 4 people: fighter/rogue (me), cleric/paladin, ranger, and wizard.

lvl 18, 3-4 people: paladin (me), rogue, and warlock with a druid/barbarian who sometimes was there sometimes wasn't.

Said druid/barbarian came closest to not being satisfied, but their expectation seemed to be "do everything a fighter could do, with lvl 9 spells". They came around eventually though.

Aggregated the replies in this thread that assess how the game holds up based on experience playing the game which, save for Yrnes's concerns and Silveralen's ambitious Rage Druid, appears to be pretty well. It's also worth noting that only one person in the thread has hit levels that we would actually consider high, and Silveralen asserts a balanced an enjoyable experience. I'd say it's worth remembering that most of the game is played around the low-mid level range mentioned here in the thread. My own party is just encroaching upon level 3, so no one's really come into their own yet, but I anticipate that once the casters figure out how to play their classes, they'll be able to ... well, to keep up, honestly. They're squishy little ****s whose spells regularly flounder.

Anyway, I'd personally be really interested to hear from more people who've played at high levels, whether by virtue of starting there or working there, and what their game experience is like. I don't know if my game will ever reach high levels, but it's possible and it's nice to hear what appears to be regular suggestion that the game's, well, just fun for everybody, wherever you play it on the level scale.

Icewraith

2015-04-01, 03:24 PM

If you are all asleep in a hut, can't they do most of that anyways? Unless the dungeon has exactly one entrance you wedge the hut into.

Really, anything you just described can happen regardless of the party's exact location if they give the enemy a full 8-24 hours to do as they will (depending when their last long rest was).

"Tiny Hut" actually creates a party-sized force bubble that can be opaque to an outside observer but transparent to anyone inside the bubble. You can still see and hear things going on outside the bubble, so you'll know if monsters are trying to move out or set up an ambush outside the bubble. It might allow you to make ranged attacks through the bubble as well, but AFB. I never said "don't post a watch".

Vogonjeltz

2015-04-01, 04:16 PM

Agreed. IMO Battlemaster fighters should unlock some exceptionally powerful maneuvers at higher levels, and get more dice as well.

You mean more dice then the more dice they already get from higher levels? And more powerful than the increases to the superiority die size? I also think Know Your Enemy is quite useful for leveraging those maneuvers as effectively as possible.

Is playing a wizard fun? Hell yeah. But, a lot of people severely overestimate how hard they are to kill. Honestly, the only reason I haven't died so far is what my teammates call 'Serial Cowardice'. Namely staying WELL AWAY from anything dangerous and hurling spells at it from a distance.

I can vouch for this in that as a Fighter I've definitely had to insert myself in between the Wizard and otherwise certain death several times now.

Leomund's Tiny Hut.

If you leave a dungeon after clearing out half of it, the monsters either move out and take their treasure with them or collapse the entrance you used and fortify the other ones. And/or attack the town once you guys have rested and gone back to clear out the rest of the dungeon. And/or send runners to nearby monsters for reinforcements.

So, what do you do when the monsters bury you alive in the tiny hut? You know, by collapsing the passageway around you, burying the hut in tons of rubble. I mean, the obvious answer is: Suffocate or Starve to death and resort to cannibalism and then suffocate, but there could be yet another horrible outcome for those who display that level of hubris.

I guess I don't get the attitude of those who seem to think that the world will not react to their actions. Would they do nothing if they went back to the home base and found the first room ransacked and the butler dead? It doesn't add up.

Are you going to use caltrops to stop Orcus the Demon Prince of death while you're jumping between the ribs of a dead god in a twisting vortex of chaos in the Abyss? What are you going to do to Dagon in the unfathomable depths as he summons horrors beyond measure to break reality? Garrote him with kelp?

Was anyone suggesting using caltrops or something like that? Although it doesn't appear that caltrops would be ineffective, so that actually seems like a good idea. And garroting a fish with seaweed also sounds awesome. Just don't try that on Cthulhu, I hear he eats 1d4 investigators per round.

Presumably in fighting a larger enemy the Fighter would tailor their attack to that enemy, perhaps clambering up them to gain advantage on attacks and to plant a sword between their shoulder blades, and the like. Maybe they lead the prince on a merry chase before tripping him into a well of holy energy using a large rope or whatever. Creativity is the 5e watchword.

Also sanctuary doesn't work with spirit guardians and spirit guardians and conjure celestial are also mutually exclusive. It would be more believable if your claimed example was in fact even possible.

charcoalninja

2015-04-01, 04:56 PM

You mean more dice then the more dice they already get from higher levels? And more powerful than the increases to the superiority die size? I also think Know Your Enemy is quite useful for leveraging those maneuvers as effectively as possible.

I can vouch for this in that as a Fighter I've definitely had to insert myself in between the Wizard and otherwise certain death several times now.

So, what do you do when the monsters bury you alive in the tiny hut? You know, by collapsing the passageway around you, burying the hut in tons of rubble. I mean, the obvious answer is: Suffocate or Starve to death and resort to cannibalism and then suffocate, but there could be yet another horrible outcome for those who display that level of hubris.

I guess I don't get the attitude of those who seem to think that the world will not react to their actions. Would they do nothing if they went back to the home base and found the first room ransacked and the butler dead? It doesn't add up.

Was anyone suggesting using caltrops or something like that? Although it doesn't appear that caltrops would be ineffective, so that actually seems like a good idea. And garroting a fish with seaweed also sounds awesome. Just don't try that on Cthulhu, I hear he eats 1d4 investigators per round.

Presumably in fighting a larger enemy the Fighter would tailor their attack to that enemy, perhaps clambering up them to gain advantage on attacks and to plant a sword between their shoulder blades, and the like. Maybe they lead the prince on a merry chase before tripping him into a well of holy energy using a large rope or whatever. Creativity is the 5e watchword.

Also sanctuary doesn't work with spirit guardians and spirit guardians and conjure celestial are also mutually exclusive. It would be more believable if your claimed example was in fact even possible.

Summoning an army of angels was a reference to Spirit Guardians which summons celestial spirits to aid you. And it does work with Sanctuary. Cast spirit guardians. Next round cast Sanctuary. Sanctuary only breaks if you cast a spell or make an attack. Moving around the battlefield while your existing spell effect mulches people is not making an attack nor are you casting another spell so yes it does work.

Additionally Planar Ally, or Gate or Planar Binding AREN'T exclusive to Spirit Guardians so you can have an angel buddy with SG if you want.

Edit: also calling freaking Dagon a fish is like calling Smaug a newt...

Fwiffo86

2015-04-01, 05:19 PM

Galen

2015-04-01, 05:33 PM

AFB - Does Spirit Guardians take concentration? Does Sanctuary? If the answer is yes to both, no, you don't get to use both of them at the same time.
Spirit Guardians yes, Sanctuary no.

Strill

2015-04-01, 09:12 PM

You mean more dice then the more dice they already get from higher levels? And more powerful than the increases to the superiority die size? I also think Know Your Enemy is quite useful for leveraging those maneuvers as effectively as possible.The increase to die size is irrelevant. What the Battlemaster needs is more powerful utility. Near the end-game, casters approach the power of gods while the Battlemaster is still doing the same tricks he was at level 3. He needs a better selection of more powerful late-game maneuvers.

Yes I think they need more dice. At level 20 a battlemaster gets two dice for each of the Eldritch Knight's spell slots, but those spells are far more powerful than any of the Battlemaster's maneuvers.

charcoalninja

2015-04-02, 10:14 AM

Exactly. It takes a battlemaster almost all his mojo to match the effect of a Thunderwave spell for crying out loud and it's a level 1 spell.

MrStabby

2015-04-02, 10:40 AM

for what its worth I have been doing one campaign at 14/15 level, one at 1 to 6 and a one off stand alone session at level 18.

At level 18 things were a bit borked and it was less fun than the others, but the rest seemed perfectly well balanced over that range. Admittedly the level 18 one was only 2 sessions so maybe a bit light on experience there (but can throw it into the pot in case it adds to what anyone else thinks).

silveralen

2015-04-02, 11:57 AM

The increase to die size is irrelevant. What the Battlemaster needs is more powerful utility. Near the end-game, casters approach the power of gods while the Battlemaster is still doing the same tricks he was at level 3. He needs a better selection of more powerful late-game maneuvers.

Yes I think they need more dice. At level 20 a battlemaster gets two dice for each of the Eldritch Knight's spell slots, but those spells are far more powerful than any of the Battlemaster's maneuvers.

No. A single level one spell does less than a full attack+manuever. Manuevers do not take an entire turn. Manuevers should not come close to a spell in terms of because you do far more in your turn than a single manuever.

Also, what is the highest you've played so far? High level casters are not nearly as powerful at high levels as you describe.

Exactly. It takes a battlemaster almost all his mojo to match the effect of a Thunderwave spell for crying out loud and it's a level 1 spell.

Stop trying to be an AoE class. You aren't. Single targets are where battlemaster excels.

RulesJD

2015-04-02, 12:20 PM

No. A single level one spell does less than a full attack+manuever. Manuevers do not take an entire turn. Manuevers should not come close to a spell in terms of because you do far more in your turn than a single manuever.

Also, what is the highest you've played so far? High level casters are not nearly as powerful at high levels as you describe.

Stop trying to be an AoE class. You aren't. Single targets are where battlemaster excels.

That is completely false. Level 20 Wizard will always be better than a level 20 Battlemaster. Why? Because the Wizard can just Wish -> Simulacrum the Battlemaster. Then the Wizard has their own level 20 Battlemaster AND all of the remaining Wizard powers. Or how about just casting True Polymorph to turn into an Ancient Brass Dragon with Legendary Saves and Legendary Actions?

Mara

2015-04-02, 12:22 PM

Legendary Saves and Legendary Actions?

Lol. Cause the spell doesn't specifically say you don't get those right?

silveralen

2015-04-02, 12:35 PM

That is completely false. Level 20 Wizard will always be better than a level 20 Battlemaster. Why? Because the Wizard can just Wish -> Simulacrum the Battlemaster. Then the Wizard has their own level 20 Battlemaster AND all of the remaining Wizard powers. Or how about just casting True Polymorph to turn into an Ancient Brass Dragon with Legendary Saves and Legendary Actions?

Yes, a copy that can't recharge any abilities, regain health except in a laboratory, and has half the health. In short, you have a battlemaster that might be as good as the real thing for 2-3 encounters, if that.

Read true polymorph again please.

RulesJD

2015-04-02, 03:37 PM

Lol. Cause the spell doesn't specifically say you don't get those right?

Ahh thank you for catching that. Thankfully there is still a significantly large amount of AC/HP for Ancient Brass to be well worth it. Or Demilich. Or etc. At the very least you'll have to go toe to toe with a slightly reduced CR20 monster, eat through all its health, before the actual Wizard poofs into existence with everything they have minus 1 level 9 spell slot.

Yes, the Simulacrum Battlemaster will be slightly worse than a regular one. But guess what? It doesn't matter. The point it is can blow all its abilities over a few encounters. Long rest in your impossible to reach Demiplane, new Wish -> Simulacrum. It doesn't matter if it's useless after a day of adventuring.

Also, RAW, it only doesn't recover spell slots. BM maneuvers aren't spell slots. Clearly RAI it wouldn't get them back, but that doesn't matter if you are playing strictly RAW.

Can a Battlemaster claim that it is literally impossible to kill? No. But a Wizard can. Clone + copy spellbook + Demiplane = invincible fortress all able to be created for free with Wish. A properly prepared and creative level 20 wizard is impossible to TPK.

I'm sorry you feel that all classes should be equally powerful at level 20, but that just is not the case. Hell at level 13 a Wizard can completely negate any non-spell casting class with with Forcecage. There is literally nothing that could be done about it because the spell does not permit a save to avoid. Just cast Mass Suggestion at whatever level you want and if your BM fails the likely DC 17+ Wis save, they are under the control of the Wizard for at least 24 hours, possibly up to 1 year.

That's why, with access to level 7-9 spells, it just isn't a competition when the player is creative. All you have to do is fail 1 save that you aren't proficient in and your character is gone. And a wizard could just Forcecage you in place and keep making you make those saves 3-4 times. You're going to fail one. Suggestion of "you are old and need to retire, come into this Demiplane and relax for a year". Close Demiplane, Alter Memory on yourself to wipe the memory of the Demiplane's location, and poof, character irrevocably sheet dead.

Vogonjeltz

2015-04-02, 04:25 PM

Summoning an army of angels was a reference to Spirit Guardians which summons celestial spirits to aid you. And it does work with Sanctuary. Cast spirit guardians. Next round cast Sanctuary. Sanctuary only breaks if you cast a spell or make an attack. Moving around the battlefield while your existing spell effect mulches people is not making an attack nor are you casting another spell so yes it does work.

Ah, next time you should be specific to avoid causing confusion.

I'd still say that violates the spirit of the sanctuary spell if not the specific letter. (The intention clearly being that a sanctuaried creature can't harm others and remain sanctuaried).

The increase to die size is irrelevant. What the Battlemaster needs is more powerful utility. Near the end-game, casters approach the power of gods while the Battlemaster is still doing the same tricks he was at level 3. He needs a better selection of more powerful late-game maneuvers.

Yes I think they need more dice. At level 20 a battlemaster gets two dice for each of the Eldritch Knight's spell slots, but those spells are far more powerful than any of the Battlemaster's maneuvers.

So what, exactly, is the utility you want added in? They already get to tack on rider effects and bonus damage to their attacks. Is there a rider effect that doesn't exist that you wanted to add?

The bit about casters is eye-roll inducing, they're fragile and get limited opportunities to maybe do something big. Furthermore in the same timeframe that the EK can have 11 spells to cast (24 hours) the Battlemaster could use up to 144 superiority dice (168 if they take the martial adept feat). The potential must be taken into account when tweaking such things.

Exactly. It takes a battlemaster almost all his mojo to match the effect of a Thunderwave spell for crying out loud and it's a level 1 spell.

And it takes 24 hours to regain that slot from the last long rest, whereas it only takes 1 hour to regain all the mojo jojo. It's ok for the Maneuver to only add advantage/disadvantage onto all the attacks for a round (or more circumstances depending) and to effectively add a damage die, because they refresh easily and often, whereas typically spells do not.

That is completely false. Level 20 Wizard will always be better than a level 20 Battlemaster. Why? Because the Wizard can just Wish -> Simulacrum the Battlemaster. Then the Wizard has their own level 20 Battlemaster AND all of the remaining Wizard powers. Or how about just casting True Polymorph to turn into an Ancient Brass Dragon with Legendary Saves and Legendary Actions?

Well, for one thing Simulacrums are formed without gear and have 1/2 hp of the target. So, average hp on this simulacrum is going to be 32.

A Battlemaster with no feats and a 10 for str could on average kill his own simulacrum in 1 round using only a single superiority die, which he is guaranteed to have thanks to Relentless. So 1 Maneuver defeats 1 9th level spell. That's supposed to be godlike power?

pwykersotz

2015-04-02, 04:51 PM

That is completely false. Level 20 Wizard will always be better than a level 20 Battlemaster. Why? Because the Wizard can just Wish -> Simulacrum the Battlemaster. Then the Wizard has their own level 20 Battlemaster AND all of the remaining Wizard powers. Or how about just casting True Polymorph to turn into an Ancient Brass Dragon with Legendary Saves and Legendary Actions?

You're looking at this from a one-on-one PvP perspective which the game was not built for. Wizards and Barbarians have similar abilities to put down foes. It doesn't matter if you can spend several slots to trick an opponent into a demiplane and let them starve, the Barbarian can hit it with his axe. Or either one of the two can drown it. Or befriend it. Or hire it. Or any other options.

archaeo

2015-04-02, 05:57 PM

Can a Battlemaster claim that it is literally impossible to kill? No. But a Wizard can. Clone + copy spellbook + Demiplane = invincible fortress all able to be created for free with Wish. A properly prepared and creative level 20 wizard is impossible to TPK.

This seems to assume that the only thing facing high-level Wizards are other creatures with class levels or things that behave like the fluff says they will in the MM. I imagine that a smarmy Wizard sitting pretty in some "invincible fortress" might find that this is an untenable hypothesis pretty quickly.

Icewraith

2015-04-02, 06:43 PM

So, what do you do when the monsters bury you alive in the tiny hut? You know, by collapsing the passageway around you, burying the hut in tons of rubble. I mean, the obvious answer is: Suffocate or Starve to death and resort to cannibalism and then suffocate, but there could be yet another horrible outcome for those who display that level of hubris.

I guess I don't get the attitude of those who seem to think that the world will not react to their actions. Would they do nothing if they went back to the home base and found the first room ransacked and the butler dead? It doesn't add up.

"Tiny Hut" actually creates a party-sized force bubble that can be opaque to an outside observer but transparent to anyone inside the bubble. You can still see and hear things going on outside the bubble, so you'll know if monsters are trying to move out or set up an ambush outside the bubble. It might allow you to make ranged attacks through the bubble as well, but AFB. I never said "don't post a watch".

Unless you're at the level where the monsters in the dungeon might be expected to greater invisibility their way past the bubble to the entrance and then cast earthquake (that's still a thing, right? AFB) or something to collapse the entire dungeon with no warning, it's very hard to sneak up on and ambush the occupants of a bubble of force that you can't see in but the occupants can see and hear out of. Most variations on the tactic of "gank the sentry and kill everyone in their sleep" run into immediate problems. Higher level parties with an actual arcane caster in the ranks instead of just a ritual caster also have the option of Mordenkainen's Magnificent Brothel Mansion, which doesn't have the 10 minute ritual casting time.

Not saying it's always the ideal solution, but if it's rest or die in the next encounter, and the party is 5th or 6th+, it's nice to have the Tiny Hut around as an option.

I have to say, at 12th level at least, so far I haven't been seeing the things the caster dominance people are describing.

afnolte

2015-04-02, 07:12 PM

My party's at level 15 right now. Our dwarfen barbarian holds his own when surrounded, and the dragonborn rogue has been doing really well ever since he figured out that, unlike the rest of the party, he isn't a melee fighter. The dragonborn paladin did solo-kill an adult green dragon last level. In 2 turns. In midair. But he made some excellent damage rolls with his divine smite. My human eldritch knight tends to be outclassed by the sheer amount of damage that can be dealt in 1 turn, but he has the most guaranteed damage assuming his attacks hit. It's been fun and even though my character may be the weakest in terms of stopping power, he makes up for it with versatility. I focused on area damage spells, so he's the best qualified to deal with massed enemies, and I took the Healer feat at first level so he could act as the party's medic for the first few levels. Plus I got to use the alchemical iron man suit for one battle.

RulesJD

2015-04-02, 10:10 PM

This seems to assume that the only thing facing high-level Wizards are other creatures with class levels or things that behave like the fluff says they will in the MM. I imagine that a smarmy Wizard sitting pretty in some "invincible fortress" might find that this is an untenable hypothesis pretty quickly.

The point I'm making is that the DM has to literally change the RAW of the game to counteract a high level wizard. To counteract a high level Battlemaster without any spell casting you just have a draogn breathweapon from 90ft away.

RulesJD

2015-04-02, 10:14 PM

*snip**

Well, for one thing Simulacrums are formed without gear and have 1/2 hp of the target. So, average hp on this simulacrum is going to be 32.

A Battlemaster with no feats and a 10 for str could on average kill his own simulacrum in 1 round using only a single superiority die, which he is guaranteed to have thanks to Relentless. So 1 Maneuver defeats 1 9th level spell. That's supposed to be godlike power?

Without gear doesn't matter. You can literally just Wish the gear into existence if you want, or pay for it. If a BM fighter has 64 health (given that 32 is 1/2 of 64), an Evocation Wizard could 1-shot kill the BM without breaking a sweat. It wouldn't even be a competition. What you should have realized is that a BM level 20 fighter will have ~200hp, so the Simulacrum would have 100hp. It would have all the abilities of the other BM, so Riposte etc.

1v1 comparison is used to show just how amazingly disproportionate the difference is at high levels WHEN you have a creative Wizard.

pwykersotz

2015-04-02, 10:32 PM

1v1 comparison is used to show just how amazingly disproportionate the difference is at high levels WHEN you have a creative Wizard.

Eh, I think that's a fairly poor metric to use. A better one is to stat a few diverse builds for each class and pit them against the same slew of monsters and see which class performs the best. But even that is flawed, because classes synergize with each other in interesting ways.

Ralanr

2015-04-02, 11:06 PM

Malifice

2015-04-03, 12:32 AM

Strill

2015-04-03, 12:54 AM

So what, exactly, is the utility you want added in? They already get to tack on rider effects and bonus damage to their attacks. Is there a rider effect that doesn't exist that you wanted to add?
It's not that I think they're missing an effect. It's that as they level up, they just pick from the scraps of abilities they didn't already pick, while meanwhile they're woefully outclassed compared to the world-shattering utility of a high-level Wizard, who can just Wish their problems away.

The bit about casters is eye-roll inducing, they're fragile and get limited opportunities to maybe do something big.Except that once they get to 8th and 9th level spells, it doesn't matter that they're fragile, since they can spy on you and kill you from miles away, or even from another plane.

Furthermore in the same timeframe that the EK can have 11 spells to cast (24 hours) the Battlemaster could use up to 144 superiority dice (168 if they take the martial adept feat). The potential must be taken into account when tweaking such things.I'm going by the DMG's recommendation of 2-3 short rests per long rest. Not even going to answer that nonsense about 144 superiority dice.

Gnomes2169

2015-04-03, 02:34 AM

For what it's worth as a DM of a level 10 party (about to be level 11, party is a Paladin, Wizard, Monk, Barbarian and Sorcerer), the only real problem I have with designing challenging encounters is... the freaking never-dying monster called the barbarian! :smallfurious: The paladin and monk are hard to hit and can use a good bit of utility, the wizard is pretty focused on blowing things up, the sorcerer is the sneaky illusionist son of a jerk, but the freaking barbarian hits like a large semi-truck and... never goes down. The wizard has dropped twice, the sorcerer is new and hasn't had time to drop (but is more than halfway there already), the monk has dropped 3 times and the paladin has gone down a total of 5 times. 5. The closest the barbarian has gotten to dropping has been at level 1, when he was brought down to 3 hit points after a long, almost overwhelming ambush where the assassins were fortified behind cover. Just... just damn him. With the paladin's aura of "don't die", I can't even reliably spell him away from the combat spotlight. Wherever he goes, errything dies, and nothing lands a solid blow on him. >->

Traps do a little something though. I may need to throw more traps in there... yesssssssssssssss... tomb of horrors... muahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...

Vogonjeltz

2015-04-03, 07:04 AM

Without gear doesn't matter. You can literally just Wish the gear into existence if you want, or pay for it. If a BM fighter has 64 health (given that 32 is 1/2 of 64), an Evocation Wizard could 1-shot kill the BM without breaking a sweat. It wouldn't even be a competition. What you should have realized is that a BM level 20 fighter will have ~200hp, so the Simulacrum would have 100hp. It would have all the abilities of the other BM, so Riposte etc.

1v1 comparison is used to show just how amazingly disproportionate the difference is at high levels WHEN you have a creative Wizard.

You used the hypothetical wish slot to cast simulacrum in 1 round. There are no more wishes for the day, so your entire plan does not work.

Gwendol

2015-04-03, 07:48 AM

Without gear doesn't matter. You can literally just Wish the gear into existence if you want, or pay for it. If a BM fighter has 64 health (given that 32 is 1/2 of 64), an Evocation Wizard could 1-shot kill the BM without breaking a sweat. It wouldn't even be a competition. What you should have realized is that a BM level 20 fighter will have ~200hp, so the Simulacrum would have 100hp. It would have all the abilities of the other BM, so Riposte etc.

1v1 comparison is used to show just how amazingly disproportionate the difference is at high levels WHEN you have a creative Wizard.

The Hyperbole is strong in this one

Seriously, you are comparing two different classes without even getting close to defining what metric is being used.

Fwiffo86

2015-04-03, 08:16 AM

Without gear doesn't matter. You can literally just Wish the gear into existence if you want, or pay for it. If a BM fighter has 64 health (given that 32 is 1/2 of 64), an Evocation Wizard could 1-shot kill the BM without breaking a sweat. It wouldn't even be a competition. What you should have realized is that a BM level 20 fighter will have ~200hp, so the Simulacrum would have 100hp. It would have all the abilities of the other BM, so Riposte etc.

1v1 comparison is used to show just how amazingly disproportionate the difference is at high levels WHEN you have a creative Wizard.

This supposition presumes that the Wizard has certain spells available to him. Again, using the improper logic that a wizard will have access to all spells at all levels. This is faulty logic at best. Wizard spells are more powerful than clerical equivalents BECAUSE they aren't guaranteed to be available. Any DM who is paying attention even nominally will realize this.

Madfellow

2015-04-03, 08:42 AM

Just cast Mass Suggestion at whatever level you want and if your BM fails the likely DC 17+ Wis save, they are under the control of the Wizard for at least 24 hours, possibly up to 1 year.

If only fighters had an ability that let them automatically succeed on saving throws. Oh, wait.

That's why, with access to level 7-9 spells, it just isn't a competition when the player is creative. All you have to do is fail 1 save that you aren't proficient in and your character is gone. And a wizard could just Forcecage you in place and keep making you make those saves 3-4 times. You're going to fail one. Suggestion of "you are old and need to retire, come into this Demiplane and relax for a year". Close Demiplane, Alter Memory on yourself to wipe the memory of the Demiplane's location, and poof, character irrevocably sheet dead.

D&D =/= PvP

Fwiffo86

2015-04-03, 08:46 AM

That's why, with access to level 7-9 spells, it just isn't a competition when the player is creative. All you have to do is fail 1 save that you aren't proficient in and your character is gone.

Are you forgetting the mechanic that allows an additional save every round for the entire duration of the spell? At best, you lose control of your character for a couple of rounds in most cases. Faulty belief in the power of spells.

silveralen

2015-04-03, 09:09 AM

I asking love how people have decided mass suggestion is basically dominate. Despite it being limited quite deliberately in the sort of thing you can order.

SharkForce

2015-04-03, 09:18 AM

fighters don't have guaranteed saves. they have an ability that lets them reroll a failed save. if we presume a 10 wisdom and no proficiency in wisdom saves (about where i expect default for a fighter is), odds are, you're still not making that save. a reroll is only powerful if you had a decent chance to make the save in the first place. it is never truly a guaranteed save, though against a great number of monsters (which frequently force strength or con saves and often have DCs lower than 19) it can certainly translate to a fairly good chance of making the save.

Ralanr

2015-04-03, 12:46 PM

RulesJD

2015-04-03, 12:50 PM

Are you forgetting the mechanic that allows an additional save every round for the entire duration of the spell? At best, you lose control of your character for a couple of rounds in most cases. Faulty belief in the power of spells.

You need to read Mass Suggestion. The only faulty belief is in your reading of the spell. You get 1 save, period (two with indomitable but best of luck hitting that DC 19 with a non-proficient save). The only other way of breaking the spell is having yourself or a companion hurt the creature, the task is accomplished, or the duration completes.

There is NOTHING in the BMs arsenal that lets it approach the power of a level 20 Wizard. All your hopes rest on the DM breaking the rules of the game.

RulesJD

2015-04-03, 12:54 PM

This supposition presumes that the Wizard has certain spells available to him. Again, using the improper logic that a wizard will have access to all spells at all levels. This is faulty logic at best. Wizard spells are more powerful than clerical equivalents BECAUSE they aren't guaranteed to be available. Any DM who is paying attention even nominally will realize this.

Any Wizard will take Wish as soon as possible. Why? Because it lets you cast any other spell on ANY other list up to 8th level. Like a better Cleric spell? Fine, cast Wish and bam, there it is. It doesn't matter what you have prepared when you have Wish prepared. It just happens that Wish -> Simulacrum is particularly powerful.

There are other spells that are too good not to always have prepared. Forcecage, Mass Suggestion, Wall of Force, Dimension Door, etc. With a handful of spells you can lock down any non-spell casting class. That is the power of level 20 spell casters IF they are creative.

Fwiffo86

2015-04-03, 12:56 PM

You need to read Mass Suggestion. The only faulty belief is in your reading of the spell. You get 1 save, period (two with indomitable but best of luck hitting that DC 19 with a non-proficient save). The only other way of breaking the spell is having yourself or a companion hurt the creature, the task is accomplished, or the duration completes.

There is NOTHING in the BMs arsenal that lets it approach the power of a level 20 Wizard. All your hopes rest on the DM breaking the rules of the game.
----
Any Wizard will take Wish as soon as possible. Why? Because it lets you cast any other spell on ANY other list up to 8th level. Like a better Cleric spell? Fine, cast Wish and bam, there it is. It doesn't matter what you have prepared when you have Wish prepared. It just happens that Wish -> Simulacrum is particularly powerful.

There are other spells that are too good not to always have prepared. Forcecage, Mass Suggestion, Wall of Force, Dimension Door, etc. With a handful of spells you can lock down any non-spell casting class. That is the power of level 20 spell casters IF they are creative.

I would think when discussing the "power" of a level 20 wizard, you would take into consideration all of the abilities available to the wizard in question, not just one single spell. I was speaking broadly in reference to all the spells, which more commonly than not, allow multiple saves. You also seem to be forgetting that a wizard is NOT guaranteed to have access to any spells period. Wizard's acquire by research or DM approval only.

As for being creative, I agree. However, while Wish is certainly going to be the spell selected at 9th, you are hinging your argument on a spell you can cast 1 per day to mimic any spell you don't already have prepared. I find that logic unreliable. It is certainly true. But I will take a multiple use ability with less power over a single use ability any day.

I maintain that the "power" of the wizard is situational at best, and vastly diminished. I do not subscribe to caster supremacy in this edition. The evidence is quite to the contrary.

Ralanr

2015-04-03, 01:17 PM

Doesn't every spell the wizard casts after casting wish do non reducible and immunity bypassing necrorotic damage in d10's based on the level of the spell cast afterwards?

Also, how I imagine a fight going down if a wizard uses wish first round against a fighter.

Wizard: Face my mighty power! I wish-
Fighter: Wait, wait, wait. Hold up. You're wishing?
Wizard: Uh...yeah. It's a very powerful spell in which I ask the universe for anything.
Fighter: So...you're asking the universe to give you something as a sign of your power...How does this work?
Wizard: Uhh...it shows I have connections? I mean I can bend reality here.
Fighter: I think sorcerers bend reality on a daily basis and Clerics and/or paladins showcase their connections every day with their prayers and smites. How are you any better?
Wizard: Cause I ask the universe. It bends to my will.
Fighter: And takes everything literally. You'd think if you were powerful enough to bend the universe you wouldn't need to be literal. And what kind of guy uses his most powerful spell the first round?
Wizard: The guy who wants to show off his power!
Fighter: The guy who wants to show off his connections...I mean seriously, this is like a kid telling other kids his dad is the guard captain so he doesn't get beat up.

silveralen

2015-04-03, 01:37 PM

Forum Explorer

2015-04-03, 01:42 PM

Or the one command which can't put the fighter in danger gets completed. Because suggestion isn't dominate, no matter how much people try to pretend otherwise.

Or can't be completed and is invalid, or is vague and thus easy to complete, or isn't reasonable and is invalidated that way.

Gnomes2169

2015-04-03, 01:46 PM

Doesn't danger sense give him advantage against traps?

Only if he's aware of the trap... Buahahahahahaaaaaaaaa

ChubbyRain

2015-04-03, 02:29 PM

Only if he's aware of the trap... Buahahahahahaaaaaaaaa

Correction.

Things that the barbarian can see. So the barbarian may not be aware of the trap, but the spray of darts requiring a Dex save or the flame of fire requiring a Dex save would be something the barbarian sees.

To remove the advantage versus Dex saves the barbarian must be blind, deaf, or incapacitated. No where does it say that being unaware of the attack/spell/trap would take away the advantage.

Funny enough being restrained and being prone would just cancel out your advantage. A restrained and prone Barbarian has a decent (relative really, saving throw system is a bit messed up) shot at passing a Dex save versus a fireball.

Ralanr

2015-04-03, 02:53 PM

Funny enough being restrained and being prone would just cancel out your advantage. A restrained and prone Barbarian has a decent (relative really, saving throw system is a bit messed up) shot at passing a Dex save versus a fireball.

Barbarians are known for bending their bodies in ways they shouldn't. :smallbiggrin:

Madfellow

2015-04-03, 02:57 PM

Any Wizard will take Wish as soon as possible.

If it's possible at all. There's no guarantee that the wizard will be able to learn Wish.

With a handful of spells you can lock down any non-spell casting class. That is the power of level 20 spell casters IF they are creative.

Again, D&D is not a PvP game. If you are playing D&D as a PvP game, you are doing it wrong.

Magic Myrmidon

2015-04-03, 03:01 PM

Forum Explorer

2015-04-03, 03:16 PM

Why are so many people saying that it's not guaranteed the wizard will be able to get wish? Don't they just get to pick their 2 new spells every level? Or are you saying that DMs will say "no, you can't take that spell". Because that's not exactly judging based on universal rules.

Banning Wish is an entirely reasonable thing to do. I think the only reason it's in the game is because it's a 'legacy' spell.

That being said, if you are restricting yourself to only using it's 'Everyspell' feature, then it's not too overly powerful. Yeah, you can have the perfect spell to solve an encounter, though most encounters, particularly high level ones, can't be solved with a single spell.

The biggest problem is the 'wish>Simulacrum' combo. The instant creation of a new strong ally, once per day (who cares if it can't heal if you just bring a new one back) is pretty insanely powerful. Everything else? Eh, having the perfect spell is about the same effect as the other level 9s can have.

Icewraith

2015-04-03, 03:20 PM

Banning Wish is an entirely reasonable thing to do. I think the only reason it's in the game is because it's a 'legacy' spell.

That being said, if you are restricting yourself to only using it's 'Everyspell' feature, then it's not too overly powerful. Yeah, you can have the perfect spell to solve an encounter, though most encounters, particularly high level ones, can't be solved with a single spell.

The biggest problem is the 'wish>Simulacrum' combo. The instant creation of a new strong ally, once per day (who cares if it can't heal if you just bring a new one back) is pretty insanely powerful. Everything else? Eh, having the perfect spell is about the same effect as the other level 9s can have.

Aside from Wish->Simulacrum, I don't see why one would ban wish. If you don't use the "duplicate 8th level or lower spell" you're simply inviting a DM screw, so you're technically trading down.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-03, 03:28 PM

Aside from Wish->Simulacrum, I don't see why one would ban wish. If you don't use the "duplicate 8th level or lower spell" you're simply inviting a DM screw, so you're technically trading down.

Because as a DM and as a Player, I don't particularly enjoy DM screws?

It is basically the kender of spells. It can be used well, but it requires a lot of trust, and it can be easier to just ban the spell and avoid the potential headache.

Icewraith

2015-04-03, 04:52 PM

Because as a DM and as a Player, I don't particularly enjoy DM screws?

It is basically the kender of spells. It can be used well, but it requires a lot of trust, and it can be easier to just ban the spell and avoid the potential headache.

Players don't enjoy actual DM screws, and I've generally tried to be even-handed about this sort of thing, but the POTENTIAL for a DM screw is a wonderful little piece of table drama. One of the players is desperate to save their character from (what they believe to be) a certain party wipe, so they're willing to risk it all on a full-blown non-spell duplicating Wish.

I mean how often does all conversation in the room stop, then everyone turns to look at you, and you get the opportunity to utter what are probably the most terrifying (game-related) words a player can hear- "Are you sure you want to do that?". If you've developed an evil grin and the ability to raise one eyebrow, employ them here.

Then if the player truly believes they are in such a tight corner that they need a wish to get out of it, the normal game stops, and the mind games begin. The players desperately try to come up with a ironclad wish while you can either try to keep a straight face OR madly cackle with laughter. Or alternate. Build up the image of the evil DM, holding their fragile characters in the palm of your hand, able to crush them utterly at any moment. Pull out your repertoire of supervillain body language- steeple your fingers together and stare relentlessly, or find a white cat to pet while you sit. Build the tension, but if things start to drag instill a deadline. Bring the tension to a boil, then have your player speak their wish, make sure they understand they need to get this in one go, no re-dos.

You've been a fair dm, you've made sympathetic calls, but there's still the gnawing fear that this time- THIS time you won't be so reasonable.

Then, you describe the result. An effect like Wish deserves a bit of mystery and fear, as the players know what they want it to do but not what it's going to do. Take time, go over the details, roll some dice several times, decide what happens, and tell them exactly what their characters see, but not exactly what happened or whatever mechanical effect you have decided to inflict on the enemy, and definitely don't tell them its status if possible. Unless the request is pure cheese or so poorly worded you can't believe they ended up with that phrasing, they should get more or less what they were asking for. You should be able to see the relief as they players realize the gamble paid off, or the horror as the wishing player sneezes in the middle of their sentence.

Wish, if approached with the proper mindset, is a blessing, not a curse for the DM. You just need to make sure that there's a proper amount of respect for such a powerful and potentially dangerous effect. You can always just ban wishing for Simulacrums if that's a concern, it's simply too much fun to have at the table as a last-ditch hail mary that might work great or fail tremendously.

Edit: It's also a great way to have a vengeful BBEG go down swinging, as he Wishes something dreadful on the party, but pays a terrible cost to do so.

Mara

2015-04-03, 05:33 PM

archaeo

2015-04-03, 06:32 PM

People should stop using simulacrum/wish as a reason to ban wish. The obvious homebrew response to the spell is to just a) raise it to level 9, b) prevent simulacra from casting spells, or c) removing it entirely. Wish is not the problem in that spell combo.

It's a problem that will eventually get resolved, anyway; that spell isn't going to last through the first round of revisions when WotC starts issuing errata and whatnot.

I don't understand it either. I don't find anything wrong with wish but if your argument against wish being too strong is, "Well a DM could just house-rule ban it" then that argument is not very compelling.

I have a hard time getting worked up about spells being over or underpowered for exactly that reason, though. It's one thing when what you want to change is a foundational element of the game, like 5e's asymmetrical approach to class balance, but when you have a problem with a handful of spells, it's not exactly hard work to cross them off the list.

There are totally valid reasons to both allow wish and to ban it. Personally, I wouldn't preemptively ban the spell, especially given that at the outset of the campaign, it may be months and months before casting it even becomes an option. But I don't think either approach is really problematic.

Envyus

2015-04-03, 07:10 PM

There are other spells that are too good not to always have prepared. Forcecage, Mass Suggestion, Wall of Force, Dimension Door, etc. With a handful of spells you can lock down any non-spell casting class. That is the power of level 20 spell casters IF they are creative.

You are not fighting other classes.

Mass suggestion is not nearly as good as you say it is. Force Cage while great does not work if the target is too big. Wall of Force makes it so you can't harm the target and it's easily bypassed in lots of cases of use. Dimension Door is a short range teleport a cool spell but nothing major.

Xetheral

2015-04-03, 10:03 PM

I have a hard time getting worked up about spells being over or underpowered for exactly that reason, though. It's one thing when what you want to change is a foundational element of the game, like 5e's asymmetrical approach to class balance, but when you have a problem with a handful of spells, it's not exactly hard work to cross them off the list.

I entirely agree. It's not a good thing that some individual elements need to be removed, but for a home game with people you know it's quick and simple to fix. (That's probably why I found 3.5 more palatable than many of the posters on the 5e forum here.)

Forum Explorer

2015-04-04, 01:01 AM

Players don't enjoy actual DM screws, and I've generally tried to be even-handed about this sort of thing, but the POTENTIAL for a DM screw is a wonderful little piece of table drama. One of the players is desperate to save their character from (what they believe to be) a certain party wipe, so they're willing to risk it all on a full-blown non-spell duplicating Wish.

I mean how often does all conversation in the room stop, then everyone turns to look at you, and you get the opportunity to utter what are probably the most terrifying (game-related) words a player can hear- "Are you sure you want to do that?". If you've developed an evil grin and the ability to raise one eyebrow, employ them here.

Then if the player truly believes they are in such a tight corner that they need a wish to get out of it, the normal game stops, and the mind games begin. The players desperately try to come up with a ironclad wish while you can either try to keep a straight face OR madly cackle with laughter. Or alternate. Build up the image of the evil DM, holding their fragile characters in the palm of your hand, able to crush them utterly at any moment. Pull out your repertoire of supervillain body language- steeple your fingers together and stare relentlessly, or find a white cat to pet while you sit. Build the tension, but if things start to drag instill a deadline. Bring the tension to a boil, then have your player speak their wish, make sure they understand they need to get this in one go, no re-dos.

You've been a fair dm, you've made sympathetic calls, but there's still the gnawing fear that this time- THIS time you won't be so reasonable.

Then, you describe the result. An effect like Wish deserves a bit of mystery and fear, as the players know what they want it to do but not what it's going to do. Take time, go over the details, roll some dice several times, decide what happens, and tell them exactly what their characters see, but not exactly what happened or whatever mechanical effect you have decided to inflict on the enemy, and definitely don't tell them its status if possible. Unless the request is pure cheese or so poorly worded you can't believe they ended up with that phrasing, they should get more or less what they were asking for. You should be able to see the relief as they players realize the gamble paid off, or the horror as the wishing player sneezes in the middle of their sentence.

Wish, if approached with the proper mindset, is a blessing, not a curse for the DM. You just need to make sure that there's a proper amount of respect for such a powerful and potentially dangerous effect. You can always just ban wishing for Simulacrums if that's a concern, it's simply too much fun to have at the table as a last-ditch hail mary that might work great or fail tremendously.

Edit: It's also a great way to have a vengeful BBEG go down swinging, as he Wishes something dreadful on the party, but pays a terrible cost to do so.

Like I said, it's the kender of spells. A kender can be used for a unique and interesting roleplaying opportunity, and can be a lot of fun for the entire party. But it often just results in trolling, frustrated players, and bad feelings.

Wish is the same thing. It can be used well, and ideally is pretty much exactly what you said. But in the wrong hands, it isn't used well. The DM better be damn willing to play the evil genie game to prevent abuse, but must also be willing to make the spell worth it as well. That can be hard to do. And the player has to be responsible enough to not try and slip some abuse through and expect it to go through. Or to use it as a giant screw you when they get frustrated.

So just like I understand why some DMs ban Kender, I understand why some DMs just flat out ban wish.

Talon Sky

2015-04-04, 01:33 AM

And here I am, just sitting here enjoying my most godly bard since 2nd ed.... :p

A problem I'm having with this discussion is that the argument seems to be implying a lot of things. Like the wizard beating the fighter in initiative. If the fighter wins, good luck casting any spells.

Fighter: "I prepare my action to (X harming action) the wizard if he casts any spells."
Wizard: "I cast-" *fizzle*

Also, we really should think about magic items/weapons/armor, since a LOT of them seem geared towards martial characters. Heck, I'm pretty certain by RAW that fighters can use wands without difficulty.

I'm currently running a game with a human rogue, halfling warlock, half-orc ranger and an elf cleric all at level 5. We've had no balance issues....in fact, the bigger issue to me seems to be Dex>Str in every aspect.

Strill

2015-04-04, 03:18 AM

A problem I'm having with this discussion is that the argument seems to be implying a lot of things. Like the wizard beating the fighter in initiative. If the fighter wins, good luck casting any spells.

Fighter: "I prepare my action to (X harming action) the wizard if he casts any spells."
Wizard: "I cast-" *fizzle*

Doesn't work. The spell resolves first, which can easily prevent the fighter from interrupting. Moreover, the wizard can just cast a spell that doesn't need concentration.

Gwendol

2015-04-04, 03:36 AM

If the fighter goes first there is a decent chance the wizard won't be casting spells.

diplomancer

2015-04-04, 04:27 AM

I feel, like many others, that "caster supremacy" is a category error. Yes, a high level wizard will probably beat a high level fighter. But this does not entail caster supremacy.

D&D is not a PvP game. Even more than that, D&D is not a solo game. There could be argued that there is caster supremacy if an all caster party would always beat a "not all caster" party, i.e, if any addition of a martial would hinder a party (which, from what I have heard, was a real problem in 3.5e). As it stands, I am pretty sure that a party containing a Fighter, a Rogue, a Bard, and a Wizard would beat an All wizard or all caster party (As well as beat an all martial party)

5e looks very well balanced.

RulesJD

2015-04-04, 04:35 AM

If the fighter goes first there is a decent chance the wizard won't be casting spells.

There is exactly zero chance of the fighter being able to do anything at all, regardless of winning initiative. Contingency -> Wall of Force centered on myself at a radius of just me after I take damage, or 3/4 health, or whatever you want. As soon as the fighter hits the first strike, wall of force goes up and prevents the fighter from doing anything else. Wizard then has 10 minutes to **** around casting buffs, etc. before coming out and destroying the fighter.

Hell, for super cheese just float the dome 1/2 inch off the ground so that spells can slip out but the fighter can't get close enough to reach you. You have an invincible dome that the BM can't do crap about, while you are free to cast every spell you want that doesn't require concentration.

RulesJD

2015-04-04, 04:37 AM

If it's possible at all. There's no guarantee that the wizard will be able to learn Wish.

Again, D&D is not a PvP game. If you are playing D&D as a PvP game, you are doing it wrong.

How about this, you give me the rules whereby you will accept the judgement as to the power of a class. You can dictate whatever you want. I guarantee you that a creative level 20 spellcaster will have a superior result to a level 20 non-spellcaster.

RulesJD

2015-04-04, 04:40 AM

{scrubbed}

RulesJD

2015-04-04, 04:45 AM

Or the one command which can't put the fighter in danger gets completed. Because suggestion isn't dominate, no matter how much people try to pretend otherwise.

The suggestion only has to sound reasonable, not reasonable to the character. It doesn't really matter. My argument is that a creative level 20 spell caster outshines their non-spell casting brethern. If you can't come up with a "reasonable" suggestion for the spell (especially given the example of a Knight leaving a battle and giving away all of its gear to a random stranger), you aren't a creative spell caster by definition.

Oh, and you also need to re-read the spell. The restrictions do not include one that would "put the fighter in danger". The actual text reads "Asking the creature to stab itself, throw itself onto a spear, immolate itself, or do some other obviously harmful act ends the spell." Suggesting that the enemies companions are really traitors to the cause and he needs to help your party kill them is not an obviously harmful act when taken in light of the examples regarding what amounts to suicide.

Wartex1

2015-04-04, 04:46 AM

There is exactly zero chance of the fighter being able to do anything at all, regardless of winning initiative. Contingency -> Wall of Force centered on myself at a radius of just me after I take damage, or 3/4 health, or whatever you want. As soon as the fighter hits the first strike, wall of force goes up and prevents the fighter from doing anything else. Wizard then has 10 minutes to **** around casting buffs, etc. before coming out and destroying the fighter.

Hell, for super cheese just float the dome 1/2 inch off the ground so that spells can slip out but the fighter can't get close enough to reach you. You have an invincible dome that the BM can't do crap about, while you are free to cast every spell you want that doesn't require concentration.
First of all, Wall of Force requires Concentration, and so does pretty much every other buff the Wizard can use.

Second of all, spells from Contingency can only affect the caster, so the fighter can just waltz through the wall.

Third, if the fighter hits you in melee, congratulations! You just trapped yourself in a small bubble with a guy swinging a very deadly sword.

Giant2005

2015-04-04, 04:50 AM

How about this, you give me the rules whereby you will accept the judgement as to the power of a class. You can dictate whatever you want. I guarantee you that a creative level 20 spellcaster will have a superior result to a level 20 non-spellcaster.

No-one is suggesting that Schrodinger's Wizard isn't immensely powerful. People are suggesting that Schrodinger'z Wizard doesn't exist.

Wartex1

2015-04-04, 04:51 AM

The suggestion only has to sound reasonable, not reasonable to the character. It doesn't really matter. My argument is that a creative level 20 spell caster outshines their non-spell casting brethern. If you can't come up with a "reasonable" suggestion for the spell (especially given the example of a Knight leaving a battle and giving away all of its gear to a random stranger), you aren't a creative spell caster by definition.

Oh, and you also need to re-read the spell. The restrictions do not include one that would "put the fighter in danger". The actual text reads "Asking the creature to stab itself, throw itself onto a spear, immolate itself, or do some other obviously harmful act ends the spell." Suggesting that the enemies companions are really traitors to the cause and he needs to help your party kill them is not an obviously harmful act when taken in light of the examples regarding what amounts to suicide.It has to sound reasonable to the target. Interpretation other than that is rules lawyering so you can empower yourself. Betraying your allies isn't reasonable unless said target is a back-stabber.

The_Hansard

2015-04-04, 07:24 AM

First of all, Wall of Force requires Concentration, and so does pretty much every other buff the Wizard can use.

Second of all, spells from Contingency can only affect the caster, so the fighter can just waltz through the wall.

Third, if the fighter hits you in melee, congratulations! You just trapped yourself in a small bubble with a guy swinging a very deadly sword.

How many attacks would a lvl 20 BM have? 3? If they won initiative then I could see them using 1 attack to damage the wizard 1 to do something creative like throwing pepper in his/her face (good luck casting now) and then the last attack grappling the wizard and stating that your attempting to restrain their arms.

That should ‘hopefully’ stop him from casting anytime soon. No?

Wartex1

2015-04-04, 07:42 AM

Fighter gets 4 and gets Action Surge.

Vogonjeltz

2015-04-04, 08:33 AM

It's not that I think they're missing an effect. It's that as they level up, they just pick from the scraps of abilities they didn't already pick, while meanwhile they're woefully outclassed compared to the world-shattering utility of a high-level Wizard, who can just Wish their problems away.

A) Wish isn't a thing until level 17+ for a single-classed Wizard.
B) It's 1 a day and there's no guarantees of success, so that statement really should read: until they possibly wish their problem away. Maybe.
C) I literally demonstrated Wish being used less effectively than a single manuever. If that's world shattering, what isn't?

Except that once they get to 8th and 9th level spells, it doesn't matter that they're fragile, since they can spy on you and kill you from miles away, or even from another plane.

Care to demonstrate? What spell spies across planes? (scrying doesn't) What spell harms from another plane? (wish only emulates other spells unless you're using wish for its: "Wish denied", property.)

I'm going by the DMG's recommendation of 2-3 short rests per long rest. Not even going to answer that nonsense about 144 superiority dice.

Strictly speaking there's nothing that mechanically prevents the 144 rests the way there is a specific rule preventing more than 1 8 hour rest per 24 hours, so that recommendation is interesting but totally irrelevent.

Re: Wishing in a simulacrum, I guess I'm also not really concerned. The life expectancy of a naked simulacrum wizard is probably the surprise round vs a CR appropriate challenge. Hp ranges between 12 and 90. Let's hope nobody pushes them into some lava in a volcano. (average damage 105, iirc).

For value the wizard would be better off just conjuring some minions with a lower level spell.

Madfellow

2015-04-04, 08:36 AM

How about this, you give me the rules whereby you will accept the judgement as to the power of a class. You can dictate whatever you want. I guarantee you that a creative level 20 spellcaster will have a superior result to a level 20 non-spellcaster.

As it stands, I am pretty sure that a party containing a Fighter, a Rogue, a Bard, and a Wizard would beat an All wizard or all caster party (As well as beat an all martial party)

I actually have a perfect example, which I've given before on another thread. Two level 8 parties against two trolls. One party was all wizards, the other was an even mix (fighter, rogue, cleric, sorcerer). The first party had burned through all their spells and were down to only cantrips (or they were saving their slots for later; I wasn't privy to their sheets), which couldn't win out against the last troll's regeneration. In a few more turns, it would have wiped them out. In the end I had to cheat in order to prevent that (one of the wizards used Stone Shape to trap it, despite the fact that there wasn't any stone handy).

The second party ate through both trolls in two turns. It was a slaughter.

How many attacks would a lvl 20 BM have? 3? If they won initiative then I could see them using 1 attack to damage the wizard 1 to do something creative like throwing pepper in his/her face (good luck casting now) and then the last attack grappling the wizard and stating that your attempting to restrain their arms.

That should ‘hopefully’ stop him from casting anytime soon. No?

Nah, you START with the grapple, then make your 7 attacks while he flails helplessly. Poor sucker won't last through the turn.

Ralanr

2015-04-04, 02:22 PM

I actually have a perfect example, which I've given before on another thread. Two level 8 parties against two trolls. One party was all wizards, the other was an even mix (fighter, rogue, cleric, sorcerer). The first party had burned through all their spells and were down to only cantrips (or they were saving their slots for later; I wasn't privy to their sheets), which couldn't win out against the last troll's regeneration. In a few more turns, it would have wiped them out. In the end I had to cheat in order to prevent that (one of the wizards used Stone Shape to trap it, despite the fact that there wasn't any stone handy).

The second party ate through both trolls in two turns. It was a slaughter.

Nah, you START with the grapple, then make your 7 attacks while he flails helplessly. Poor sucker won't last through the turn.

Can you give us a rundown of how it went? I'm on the side that does believe that a group made of up multiple classes is more affective, but I think proof will be wanted from both sides.

In grapple can you break the wizard's fingers/arms? If you can then that shuts down casting for the wizard. Hell a good throat punch would shut them for a few turns. Improvisation has its perks.

Madfellow

2015-04-04, 03:34 PM

Can you give us a rundown of how it went? I'm on the side that does believe that a group made of up multiple classes is more affective, but I think proof will be wanted from both sides.

These were both a while ago, but I'll do the best I can.

The wizard party encountered the trolls in a white dragon's lair (this was the first adventure of the Rise of Tiamat campaign). The trolls spotted them and ran straight at them. The conjurer cast Grease, causing both trolls to fall prone and keep sliding forward until they were right in front of the party. I figured the trolls were done for and that this would just be a humorous speed bump. I was wrong. The party got a whole turn to toss spells at these guys, but they were still alive by the end of it. They got to their feet and started wailing on the PCs. The enchanter hit one of the trolls with a spell (Confusion, maybe?), which caused it to flee the fight (inviting at least one attack of opportunity, which did next to nothing).

As the one troll continued to run down the hallway, screaming bloody murder (the evoker had set it on fire), the party continued to pelt it with Magic Missiles and various cantrips. They were worried about it raising an alarm and bringing reinforcements. Meanwhile, the troll that was still in the room with them was free to keep smacking them around. They finally dropped the fleeing troll, but I knew that if this kept up the remaining one was going to kill them. It still had half its HP, at least. Then the transmuter cast Shape Stone, wanting to trap it in improvised shackles. There wasn't any stone around for him to shape (it was all ice), but I allowed it anyway in the interest of avoiding a TPK.

The mixed party actually got ambushed by the trolls, which jumped out at them from inside a snow drift. The trolls got a surprise round, did some damage, and then it was the PCs' turn. Cleric went up and smacked one with his hammer, rogue hit one with a sneak attack (I think this was a critical as well; she nearly killed one of them with a single hit), fighter shot off a few arrows, and the sorcerer roasted one of them with a Scorching Ray. On the trolls turn, the one on fire screamed and threw itself back into the snow bank to put itself out while the other one, nearly dead, turned and ran. That invited an attack of opportunity from the cleric, which killed it. On their turn, the sorcerer finished off the other troll with another Scorching Ray.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-04, 08:45 PM

How many attacks would a lvl 20 BM have? 3? If they won initiative then I could see them using 1 attack to damage the wizard 1 to do something creative like throwing pepper in his/her face (good luck casting now) and then the last attack grappling the wizard and stating that your attempting to restrain their arms.

That should ‘hopefully’ stop him from casting anytime soon. No?

3? Try 8 if he uses action surge. First attack as a trip to get advantage on the rest. Burning all superiority dice for extra damage and to throw the frightened condition on the wizard. Honestly, it's hardly rare for a Battlemaster to flat out 1 turn kill a level 20 wizard if they burn everything.

For extra hilarity? Taking the Sentinal and Mage Slayer feats. Actually Mage Slayer and Heavy Weapon Master would likely be more optimal (-5 to hit isn't that big of a deal against a wizard, not when you have advantage, and the +10 damage would help a lot. That plus picking up an extra attack if they tried to cast a spell, or forcing them to disengage and waste their turn. Oh, and rerolling 1-2 with Heavy Weapon Fighting Style). Or you can take all three cause you have feats to spare!

Of course the fighter would likely be going first, because he has more ASI to spend on increasing his Dex, and thus initiative. And they could be a ranged fighter for other fun stuff.

tarlison

2015-04-04, 10:47 PM

we experimented with a level 20 party agaimst tarrasque we found out that spell casters where almost useless against it , but they where able ro defeat the tarrasque by simply good old fashion team work the champion with his great sword try to cut off monster with a hit and run tactics under the use of haste while the eldrich knight hold down the momsters positiom and the mage casting support spells from a distance imstead of direct damage spell, if it would have been an all wizard party they could have end up as T-Foods

Ralanr

2015-04-04, 11:22 PM

RulesJD

2015-04-04, 11:36 PM

First of all, Wall of Force requires Concentration, and so does pretty much every other buff the Wizard can use.

Second of all, spells from Contingency can only affect the caster, so the fighter can just waltz through the wall.

Third, if the fighter hits you in melee, congratulations! You just trapped yourself in a small bubble with a guy swinging a very deadly sword.

You don't know how Contingency works. You also don't know how Wall of Force works.

Yes, you select a spell that can target you. You then create a Wall of Force, as a sphere, of the radius needed to fit only yourself inside it. If a creature is cut by the wall (which the BM would be) the WIZARD gets to choose which side of the wall it ends up on.

Yes, it requires Concentration. But Plane Shift and you're out of there. Or use Mirror Image + Blink to buff, then Dimension Door right as you decide to drop concentration on your turn.

RulesJD

2015-04-04, 11:38 PM

3? Try 8 if he uses action surge. First attack as a trip to get advantage on the rest. Burning all superiority dice for extra damage and to throw the frightened condition on the wizard. Honestly, it's hardly rare for a Battlemaster to flat out 1 turn kill a level 20 wizard if they burn everything.

For extra hilarity? Taking the Sentinal and Mage Slayer feats. Actually Mage Slayer and Heavy Weapon Master would likely be more optimal (-5 to hit isn't that big of a deal against a wizard, not when you have advantage, and the +10 damage would help a lot. That plus picking up an extra attack if they tried to cast a spell, or forcing them to disengage and waste their turn. Oh, and rerolling 1-2 with Heavy Weapon Fighting Style). Or you can take all three cause you have feats to spare!

Of course the fighter would likely be going first, because he has more ASI to spend on increasing his Dex, and thus initiative. And they could be a ranged fighter for other fun stuff.

First hit = Wall of Force = zero more hits. You get to hit once, maybe. After that, you will eventually be Force caged or a variety of other solutions.

Mr.Moron

2015-04-04, 11:38 PM

You don't know how Contingency works. You also don't know how Wall of Force works.

Yes, you select a spell that can target you. You then create a Wall of Force, as a sphere, of the radius needed to fit only yourself inside it. If a creature is cut by the wall (which the BM would be) the WIZARD gets to choose which side of the wall it ends up on.

Yes, it requires Concentration. But Plane Shift and you're out of there. Or use Mirror Image + Blink to buff, then Dimension Door right as you decide to drop concentration on your turn.

First hit = Wall of Force = zero more hits. You get to hit once, maybe. After that, you will eventually be Force caged or a variety of other solutions.

Congratulations! You've won D&D. What are you going to do next?

EDIT: (Of course before whatever that is, feel free to teabag the monster manual as is the tradition)

JNAProductions

2015-04-04, 11:41 PM

First hit = Wall of Force = zero more hits. You get to hit once, maybe. After that, you will eventually be Force caged or a variety of other solutions.

And then what? The Fighter isn't dead, just delayed.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-04, 11:59 PM

First hit = Wall of Force = zero more hits. You get to hit once, maybe. After that, you will eventually be Force caged or a variety of other solutions.

Contingency flat out calls out the spell as only being able to effect you, even if it could normally target others.

Wall of force is a point on the grid, creating a shape of some sort. A sphere around yourself is not effecting only you, it's effecting the person whose attacks you are interrupting, and everything else within the sphere with you. Also the Sphere itself has a minimum area of 10 feet. If the sphere targets you (as in you are in the epicenter of the sphere), then the fighter wouldn't be pushed out of the sphere anyways.

In short, by RAW, you are 100% wrong on how these two spells interact. If you cannot accept that, then yes I agree. Wizards do break the game, when you break the rules to allow them to.

EDIT: To get the point across. By RAW, if you chose Fireball to be cast when you get hit, even though an enemy (or a bunch) is right beside you, you would be the only person to take any damage from it.

Wartex1

2015-04-05, 12:01 AM

You don't know how Contingency works. You also don't know how Wall of Force works.

Yes, you select a spell that can target you. You then create a Wall of Force, as a sphere, of the radius needed to fit only yourself inside it. If a creature is cut by the wall (which the BM would be) the WIZARD gets to choose which side of the wall it ends up on.

Yes, it requires Concentration. But Plane Shift and you're out of there. Or use Mirror Image + Blink to buff, then Dimension Door right as you decide to drop concentration on your turn.

You know you can't target yourself with Wall of Force, right? You can't cast it using Contingency.

PeterM

2015-04-05, 01:55 AM

I actually have a perfect example, which I've given before on another thread. Two level 8 parties against two trolls. One party was all wizards, the other was an even mix (fighter, rogue, cleric, sorcerer). The first party had burned through all their spells and were down to only cantrips (or they were saving their slots for later; I wasn't privy to their sheets), which couldn't win out against the last troll's regeneration. In a few more turns, it would have wiped them out. In the end I had to cheat in order to prevent that (one of the wizards used Stone Shape to trap it, despite the fact that there wasn't any stone handy).

I don't much care who's right on this issue, but I think you're comparing apples to oranges. A party that only has cantrips or is too stupid to use better spells when needed isn't a fair comparison against a party that either has all of their resources or is better at figuring out what's needed. I don't think anyone's arguing that wizards are still overpowered when they've burned all their spell slots, or when they refuse to use anything but cantrips.

RulesJD

2015-04-05, 04:44 AM

Contingency flat out calls out the spell as only being able to effect you, even if it could normally target others.

Wall of force is a point on the grid, creating a shape of some sort. A sphere around yourself is not effecting only you, it's effecting the person whose attacks you are interrupting, and everything else within the sphere with you. Also the Sphere itself has a minimum area of 10 feet. If the sphere targets you (as in you are in the epicenter of the sphere), then the fighter wouldn't be pushed out of the sphere anyways.

In short, by RAW, you are 100% wrong on how these two spells interact. If you cannot accept that, then yes I agree. Wizards do break the game, when you break the rules to allow them to.

EDIT: To get the point across. By RAW, if you chose Fireball to be cast when you get hit, even though an enemy (or a bunch) is right beside you, you would be the only person to take any damage from it.

*shrug* I used Wall of Force because it's a higher level spell that I prefer. You get the same protection from Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere which is RAW acceptable. Congrats, same result.

You also need to review what the language "with a radius of up to 10 feet" actually minutes. "Up to" is generally not understood to mean "minimum". In fact, it means the exact opposite of that.

Envyus

2015-04-05, 07:41 AM

You also need to review what the language "with a radius of up to 10 feet" actually minutes. "Up to" is generally not understood to mean "minimum". In fact, it means the exact opposite of that.

You are right about the Wall of Force Radius but it's still not usable with Contingency.

Envyus

2015-04-05, 07:50 AM

*shrug* I used Wall of Force because it's a higher level spell that I prefer. You get the same protection from Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere which is RAW acceptable. Congrats, same result.

No spell effects can pass through the Sphere. Congrats you have trapped yourself for up to a minute. It does not do anything to win the fight.

diplomancer

2015-04-05, 08:10 AM

No spell effects can pass through the Sphere. Congrats you have trapped yourself for up to a minute. It does not do anything to win the fight.

It's worse than that. He is now at the mercy of the fighter, who can pick him up and throw him at an environmental hazard. And as a contingency fires off regardless of the wizard's will, it will fire off even if there is such a hazard (if there is no such hazard, the fighter prepares his action to full attack the wizard, the fighter's friend casts desintegrate at the orb. Wizard dies. D&D is not a solo game).

Forum Explorer

2015-04-05, 10:38 AM

*shrug* I used Wall of Force because it's a higher level spell that I prefer. You get the same protection from Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere which is RAW acceptable. Congrats, same result.

You also need to review what the language "with a radius of up to 10 feet" actually minutes. "Up to" is generally not understood to mean "minimum". In fact, it means the exact opposite of that.

Sure, which leads us to the next tactic. Using the 'ready' action to attack the wizard as soon as he isn't in the sphere. I suppose with a bow would be more reliable, if less damage. Or like others said, pushing the sphere into some sort of hazard.

I'm curious what your next step in this whole fight is.

You are right about the wall of force, I misread that. Doesn't change anything.

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 10:47 AM

And then what? The Fighter isn't dead, just delayed.

I made this point earlier and it was just kind of glossed over. It's a rather big flaw in the whole "Contingency" plan. That, and who sets up a contingency for immediately upon being attacked? That renders you useless in every fight, and gets expensive and time-consuming very, very quickly.

RulesJD

2015-04-05, 11:18 AM

No spell effects can pass through the Sphere. Congrats you have trapped yourself for up to a minute. It does not do anything to win the fight.

At best, the BM may ready 1 attack because you do not get multiattack with readied actions. There are plenty of spells that the Wizard may cast to buff themselves, but they don't have to. When it is the Wizards turn, he may simply choose to drop the sphere (which can be done as a free action at any time per the pHB, then the BM gets 1 attack, maybe) and cast Force Cage. Or Teleport to literally anywhere. Or just Dimension Door anywhere, etc. Depending on DM interpretation of the rules, in the absolute worse case scenario, the BM could get off 2 attacks before being taken out of the fight completely.

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 11:22 AM

Giant2005

2015-04-05, 11:28 AM

At best, the BM may ready 1 attack because you do not get multiattack with readied actions.

That isn't true, the description of the Ready Action states quite clearly that the user gets to "choose the action you will take in response to that trigger".
If he chooses to use the Attack Action in response to that trigger, then he would get the full number of attacks that the Attack Action bestows.

Wartex1

2015-04-05, 11:32 AM

So, assuming Greatsword, that's an average 12 damage per hit, not counting any class features, feats, or magic weapons, which together can probably bump that up to 30+ per hit, with 8 hits. That's more health than the Wizard could ever have at level 20 without magic items, and even with said magic items, you'd have to cheat on your HP rolls to do so.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 11:33 AM

*shrug* I used Wall of Force because it's a higher level spell that I prefer. You get the same protection from Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere which is RAW acceptable. Congrats, same result.

Same result in that it also doesnt work.

You need a spell with 'Range: Self' to link with a contingency.

Any reason the Fighter couldnt just make an opposed Strength (Athletics) check to simply restrain the casters hands, preventing any casting of spells with somatic or material components?

Hope the contingency is worded well.

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 11:36 AM

Malifice

2015-04-05, 11:43 AM

~25 makes more sense (+3 weapon, +10 GWM), but that's excessive. ~15 is better, since it doesn't take the -5 penalty (you've got a good chance of hitting anyway, but no sense being risky) but does have a +3 weapon. And it's still 120 damage, whereas a Wizard has (6+4*19+20*1) 102 HP with a Constitution of 12-13. Bump that up to 14-15, and you get 122, which will just barely survive the average damage.

Overall, a Fighter has a good chance of OTKing a Wizard, and will definitely do it in two turns if he spends two Action Surges.

I was factoring in a rare and 2 uncommon items as per DMG. Rare item probably being a +2 weapon.

So +13 (2d6+7) or 15 damage with GWS. +8 (2d6+17) with GWM 'on' and an extra +8 damage on the first 6 attacks thanks to Battlemaster dice (spamming menacing and trip attack to negate any disadvantage/ grant yourself advantage on the remaining 7(+1) attacks, and precision attack for any that miss). Score a crit and in addition to the damage spike, you also get a 9th attack (thanks to GWM).

Even vs AC 20, you're easily looking at 100+ DPR. Considerably more with a lucky crit or two.

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 11:45 AM

Forgot the BM shenanigans. Yeah, that Wizard is dead as a doornail, and if he isn't, he's still got 8 saving throws to make to avoid being Frightened, Prone, or what-have-you.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 11:56 AM

Forgot the BM shenanigans. Yeah, that Wizard is dead as a doornail, and if he isn't, he's still got 8 saving throws to make to avoid being Frightened, Prone, or what-have-you.

I pretty much assume most Wizard 20's are walking around with Foresight (so menacing attack only removes the disadvantage on attacks against), Mage armor and spamming Shield all day long. Probably spamming Mirror image too if they wanna be super defensive (great defensive buff that doesnt use concentration). Also has a Contingency (teleport) and a pre made Clone hidden somewhere.

Theyre a paranoid bunch those Wizards.

Of course none of the above saves them from Strength Athletics checks to hold the arms and stop most casting attempts (that said - Misty step; components 'V').

Maybe Action surge (first action jam a sock in the mouth) (second action, twist both arms behind the back). Dont need to permissive a DM to pull that off, and I dont know too many wizards with bling Strength scores and proficiency in Athletics.

Or for a more gamist solution, a Monk 18, Fighter 2 to flurry and stun them, followed up by an action surged athletics check to lock up the arms, them repeat each round with judicious headbuts to the face. Nice saves as back up (just in case).

SharkForce

2015-04-05, 11:57 AM

I was factoring in a rare and 2 uncommon items as per DMG. Rare item probably being a +2 weapon.

So +13 (2d6+7) or 15 damage with GWS. +8 (2d6+17) with GWM 'on' and an extra +8 damage on the first 6 attacks thanks to Battlemaster dice (spamming menacing and trip attack to negate any disadvantage/ grant yourself advantage on the remaining 7(+1) attacks, and precision attack for any that miss). Score a crit and in addition to the damage spike, you also get a 9th attack (thanks to GWM).

Even vs AC 20, you're easily looking at 100+ DPR. Considerably more with a lucky crit or two.

unless of course the wizard does not actually have 0 AC, as you seem to be presuming, in which case, you're very unlikely to hit 9 times with only +8 on your attack rolls. (around 14-15 AC is fairly easy to get for a wizard, and makes you have only about 2/3 hit rate).

still, yes, in 1-2 rounds at most the fighter will get through the wizard's health (though i find it disingenuous to use the term "DPR" to describe what is a very blatant and unsustainable nova). provided, of course, the wizard just sits there like a drooling idiot and doesn't, say, use a shield spell to bump their AC to 19-20 for that round (oh hey, that drops you to hitting ~2/5 of the time, that might have a negative impact on the power of your nova, don't you think?), or simply get away (by flying, or by teleporting, or whatever else) and deal with you from beyond the reach of your nova.

edit: not that PvP is a particularly good measure in the first place, mind you. ability to deal with enemies is much more telling than ability to kill your allies.

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 12:02 PM

edit: not that PvP is a particularly good measure in the first place, mind you. ability to deal with enemies is much more telling than ability to kill your allies.

For which the Fighter is far more neccessarry. The Wizard has trouble blasting hard enough to actually win fights without burning through slots like crazy, whereas the Fighter has sustainable DPR and short-rest based novas. (Not to mention sustainable options, like grappling and such, whereas the Wizard is limited by either spell slots or crippling bad Athletics scores.)

And before you bring it back up, yes. By RAW you can replace a Fighter's DPR with swarms of summons, but that's abusing the rules pretty hard. Under RAI, the Fighter is not replacable by any Wizard spell or set of spells.

Edit: Also, +8? +6 Proficiency, +2 Weapon, +5 Stat mod for +13. Using BM abilities, you get (7+5+6.5) 18.5 damage per hit, hitting more than half the time even at 20 AC (let's say 60% of the time), for (.6*8*18.5) 88.8 damage. Not instantly lethal without some luck, but that Wizard is a goner if the Fighter decides to grapple instead of just attacking. Even with Misty Step, you're close enough to Action Surge Dash over and then 4 attacks to finish you off.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 12:07 PM

unless of course the wizard does not actually have 0 AC, as you seem to be presuming, in which case, you're very unlikely to hit 9 times with only +8 on your attack rolls. (around 14-15 AC is fairly easy to get for a wizard, and makes you have only about 2/3 hit rate).

Factored that in Bro.

+13 (+8), (2d6+7[17])+1d12 = 33 average amage with GWF at +8. Assuming AC 20 (Mage armor, Dex 14 and Shield spamming) youre looking at hitting on 12+ (40 percent of 33 = around 13 DPR). For the first 6 attacks, then it drops to 10 DPR for the remaining 2 attacks (40 percent of 25).

Around 100 damage on average against AC 20 with a +2 sword. Crits trigger an extra attack thanks to GWM, in addition to a big damage spike, so 120+ is reasonably common (40 percent of the time you do it you'll get a crit in those 8 attacks).

Miss on an attack and spam precise attack to land the attack anyways.

If the Wizard foolishly didnt cast Foresight that morning (or you catch him in the 16 hours it isnt up) then most of those attacks will be at advantage (thanks to trip attack and menacing attack) so the numbers push to around 200 DPR.

A super paranoid Wizard spamming Foresight, Mirror image, shield, mage armor, contingency and Clone will probably escape anyways, but I assume 20th level Fighters (i.e. Lord Robilar) to have plans for just this sort of shennanigans.

Wartex1

2015-04-05, 12:11 PM

That's also not counting extra damage from weapons like flametongue or items such as Belt of Giant Strength.

SharkForce

2015-04-05, 12:22 PM

Malifice

2015-04-05, 12:24 PM

That's also not counting extra damage from weapons like flametongue or items such as Belt of Giant Strength.

Yeah, Fighters get much more good stuff than Wizards in the Magic item stakes.

Most Fighter items are designed to do what he already does much better (Belts push Strength above 20, magic armor and shields stack, as do bows and ammunition). There are several potent magic weapons that really push Fighters OTT.

Also Fighters get much more mileage out of potions and miscellaneous items that allow them to do things they ordinarily cant do (Fly, turn ethereal or gaseous, haste, go invisible, dimension door, heal etc).

Most 'Wizard' items simply allow the Wizard to do more of what they are already doing anyways (Wands, scrolls and Staves) and the bonuses to Spell attack rolls are harder to find and dont scale as high as bonus to strength and bonus to attack, AC and damage items.

Non armor/ shield resistance/ protection items are pretty even for both classes.

Im a firm believer that yo can dial 'up' the power of most warrior types easier with magic items, than you can with spellcasters.

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 12:26 PM

Planar Binding is for things like traveling the planes, guard duty, finding information, protecting a VIP while you find the conspiracy, and yes, sometimes even added muscle. Planar Binding is not for replacing party members, especially because it leads to an arms race-if you bring two Celestial Apes, your foes will start bringing three Fiendish Gorillas.

And as for competing DPR sources, yes, they exist. But Fighter is the king. Being the best at something is worth a lot, even if you have competitors.

Finally, look at this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?406018-Playing-As-A-Martial-Class). This is actual playing of Fighters, among other classes, and virtually no one is dissappointed. The hypothetical Minionmancer is not a problem. If anything, martial supremacy is in play, quite contrary to the theorycrafting.

SharkForce

2015-04-05, 12:34 PM

Yeah, Fighters get much more good stuff than Wizards in the Magic item stakes.

Most Fighter items are designed to do what he already does much better (Belts push Strength above 20, magic armor and shields stack, as do bows and ammunition). There are several potent magic weapons that really push Fighters OTT.

Also Fighters get much more mileage out of potions and miscellaneous items that allow them to do things they ordinarily cant do (Fly, turn ethereal or gaseous, haste, go invisible, dimension door, heal etc).

Most 'Wizard' items simply allow the Wizard to do more of what they are already doing anyways (Wands, scrolls and Staves) and the bonuses to Spell attack rolls are harder to find and dont scale as high as bonus to strength and bonus to attack, AC and damage items.

Non armor/ shield resistance/ protection items are pretty even for both classes.

Im a firm believer that yo can dial 'up' the power of most warrior types easier with magic items, than you can with spellcasters.

harder to find items, perhaps. but melees don't get higher bonuses. just easier ones. theoretically, you can get up to +7 to spell attacks (only +4 to DC) from 3 items, though only warlocks can also enjoy a full +7 to DC from their items (and to be honest, i doubt many wizards will choose to attune to a wand that only gives +3 to spell attacks even if they find one). unless of course you allow tomes, or an ioun stone to boost proficiency bonus. really, the DC boost is what you want most anyways, since most attack roll based spells (with the exception of contagion) don't crush your enemies nearly as hard as save-based spells.

there are plenty of items out there that casters would love to have. many of them grant abilities that don't require concentration, for example, which is just as valuable to the wizard as to the fighter.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 12:39 PM

i can replace the fighter's DPR with *two* summoned creatures. that's not much of a swarm.

and if planar binding is *not* intended to be used to control summoned monsters (in spite of discussing doing exactly that in the spell's description), then what, pray tell, is it intended to do?

i mean, i'd realy love to know. my psychic powers seem to be on the fritz lately, what with my inability to determine that the rules were intended to not do what they're described as doing. so, since your psychic powers appear to be working well enough to detect not only that the intent is not what was written, but to go one step further and decipher the intent in spite of having no evidence whatsoever of that intent, please, do share with the rest of us lowly mortals that cannot read minds at ranges of hundreds or thousands of miles.

not to mention that fighters are hardly the only sources of DPR in the game even if you completely disregard summoned monsters, and that there are other sources of DPR amongst casters (sorcerer and warlock being the best at spell DPR, bard and warlock being the best at weapon DPR, and each of them in their own way being able to compete with fighter DPR perfectly adequately).

Summoned Monsters (particularly with PLanar Binding) require a LOT of DM fiat.

Youre dealing with a sentient creature. If its hostile to you the spell explicity states the creature attempts to twist your commands against you. Im hazarding a guess that most intelligent extra planar creatures dont take too well to being controlled against their will (to say the least), even if the task you give them is something they would ordinarily not be opposed to doing via alignment (Hey there Solar buddy, sorry for yanking you into the Material plane and all, I know you probably have nothing better to do and all, but would you care to help me knock off this Fighter thats been giving me the ****s lately?).

You also need to fork out 1000gp per casting, and the creature needs to fail a Charisma save. You also need someway to summon the creature in the first place (Gate works, assuming you know its name, the outsiders Deity lets you, and you have a spare 5000gp gem lying around) before you trap it within 60' of you for 24 hours (magic circle traps it.. again assuming it fails its Charisma saves vs this spell, and again costing 100gp - probably 200 gp because the caster probably wants to be standing in a circle himself).

A lot of variables there. Multiple saves, DM fiat, costly components, time. More DM fiat.

Ralanr

2015-04-05, 12:46 PM

Summoned Monsters (particularly with PLanar Binding) require a LOT of DM fiat.

Youre dealing with a sentient creature. If its hostile to you the spell explicity states the creature attempts to twist your commands against you. Im hazarding a guess that most intelligent extra planar creatures dont take too well to being controlled against their will (to say the least), even if the task you give them is something they would ordinarily not be opposed to doing via alignment (Hey there Solar buddy, sorry for yanking you into the Material plane and all, I know you probably have nothing better to do and all, but would you care to help me knock off this Fighter thats been giving me the ****s lately?).

You also need to fork out 1000gp per casting, and the creature needs to fail a Charisma save. You also need someway to summon the creature in the first place (Gate works, assuming you know its name, the outsiders Deity lets you, and you have a spare 5000gp gem lying around) before you trap it within 60' of you for 24 hours (magic circle traps it.. again assuming it fails its Charisma saves vs this spell, and again costing 100gp - probably 200 gp because the caster probably wants to be standing in a circle himself).

A lot of variables there. Multiple saves, DM fiat, costly components, time. More DM fiat.

All this just to fight another PC? Yeah that's not happening. If I was a player in this situation I'd smack both PC's and tell them to stop being idiots.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 12:51 PM

harder to find items, perhaps. but melees don't get higher bonuses. just easier ones. theoretically, you can get up to +7 to spell attacks (only +4 to DC) from 3 items,

All your attument slots used for +7 to hit, nothing to damage, +4 to DC. And youve had to track down a Staff of the Magi, Wand of the War mage and Robes of the Arhcmage (2 legendary and one very rare).

I have the same chance of picking up a vorpal sword +3, and a Girdle of 29 Strength for +12 to hit and damage in melee and auto kill on a natural 20. Two slots and two legendary items only.

Of course the chances of picking up those items are pretty rare, but while the Fighter is dreaming of getting the above and advancing through the levels, he has a lot more chances of picking up (magic weapon x) (magic armour x) (gauntlets/ belt of strength) while he waits. These items range from uncommon and up and appear on random treasure charts (and in published adventures) far far far more often than the Wizard items you need above.

there are plenty of items out there that casters would love to have. many of them grant abilities that don't require concentration, for example, which is just as valuable to the wizard as to the fighter.

Few of them let the Wizard do stuff he couldnt do anyways or have the same amplification effect on the wizards core abilities that magic items do (due to greater chance of utility, availability and power amplification) for the Fighter.

SharkForce

2015-04-05, 01:52 PM

- why would you try and planar binding a solar? you don't need a CR 21 creature to do DPR. nor do you need gate, because CR 9 and less is plenty for 1-2 minions that will do about as much as a high level fighter. which shouldn't be too surprising, considering that a pair of level 6 fighters probably deal about as much damage as a single level 20 fighter, and are probably lower than CR 9.

and CR 9 (and less) you can get from bog-standard summoning spells, which (somehow-or-other) can be combined with planar binding to extend them. so sure, you'll have problems if you try and control a solar or a pit fiend. but if you just grab a couple of fey animals, which is all you need for DPR, you're not likely to have much of a problem.

and yes, I did acknowledge that the magic items to boost attack rolls are pretty rare. I never refuted that. all I refuted was your claim that they don't exist.

as to not being able to get anything on the way, that seems pretty doubtful. I'd love to get a cloak of invisibility or boots of flying, because whether or not I can already do those things, I can't do those things and combine them with other concentration-based abilities (also, the duration available from those items is generally a lot longer than a single spell would give). depending on caster, I might still use weapons and armour occasionally, and regardless, I can still use things that boost defense. and, assuming equal division of party loot, while you're likely to get those swords and armour that show up, that means that by default the stuff you're leaving for the casters are the things that give you those extra abilities. unless of course you're being a dog in the manger and refuse to pick items that are only useful to you for some reason.

also, a girdle of giant strength is not worth +9 to hit. it's worth +4. even if you dump-statted your primary attack attribute since forever and sucked for the part of the game where you should have been at your prime, you're still comparing to the caster's (and everyone else's) maxed-out main stat by the time you've got a shot at a girdle of giant strength (29).

as to items that boost the wizard's primary abilities, i don't see how items that remove the need to prepare certain spells aren't an improvement, i especially don't see how things like +1 to your proficiency bonus are not improving what casters do, and i likewise don't see how a bonus to something like AC (or a secondary attribute for a saving throw) is not useful to a wizard unless you don't consider being alive and not CC'd to contribute to the caster's ability to adventure.

Gwendol

2015-04-05, 02:42 PM

I made this point earlier and it was just kind of glossed over. It's a rather big flaw in the whole "Contingency" plan. That, and who sets up a contingency for immediately upon being attacked? That renders you useless in every fight, and gets expensive and time-consuming very, very quickly.

My guess is the wizard uses Schroedinger's contingency. Very adaptable...

RulesJD

2015-04-05, 04:43 PM

Same result in that it also doesnt work.

You need a spell with 'Range: Self' to link with a contingency.

Any reason the Fighter couldnt just make an opposed Strength (Athletics) check to simply restrain the casters hands, preventing any casting of spells with somatic or material components?

Hope the contingency is worded well.

Re-read the spell description, particularly this part: "that can target you." That does not mean a range of self. The wording of ORS is clearly "choose a target". It works both RAW and undoubtedly RAI.

Again, all these possible scenarios involve the fighter being able to reach the wizard in melee. I can't emphasize enough how that is simply never ever going to happen. At best, 1 or two hits if you let the readied action go off prior to the Wizard teleporting out.

The Wizard would not run away. The Wizard would Force Cage the Fighter then proceed to blast it from 120ft away while having (insert concentration buff spell here, I like Great Invisibility personally but to each their own). Using upcast spell slots and assuming a Fighter HP of 200 and a spell slot for Force Cage, it would take an Evocation Wizard 3 rounds to burn through approximately 255 hp of damage that the Fighter could not avoid. Force Cage lasts 1 hour. That leaves the Wizard with 597 more rounds to do...really anything. True Polymorph to see if the Fighter fails the DC 19 Wis Save. Mass Suggestion. Regular polymorph. Summon creatures. Power Word Kill when the Fighter is bloodied. Animate Objects on some ball bearings and throw them into the Force Cage to watch the fighter get beat to death Magneto style. My personal favorite would be Wish -> Simulacrum -> Magic Jar to just straight up take over your entire Fighter character. Good luck with the DC 19 Charisma save (potentially higher if we're adding in magical items, which would push the save up to around DC 21, a literally impossible save if you dump stat charisma like most fighters).

Oh and you thought maybe you would design a ranged bow fighter? Nope. Force cage + wall of force between me and the Fighter. Almost all of my suggestions for activities while the Fighter is stuck do not require concentration so the Wall would prevent any ranged attacks.

You have yet to suggest a scenario where a creative Wizard doesn't absolutely outshine a non-spell caster. Oh, and Contingency doesn't require somatic components to trigger. Nor does Misty Step or Dimension Door. So even grappling the hands (which any Wizard worth a damn will have proficiency in Acrobatics + at least 16 Dex) will do nothing. Oh, and the grappling condition has zero effect on spell casting anyways, so again you have to break the rules of the game in order to stop the Wizard. The Wizard merely has to use a few spells they've been given access to.

Wartex1

2015-04-05, 04:50 PM

Forum Explorer

2015-04-05, 06:23 PM

At best, the BM may ready 1 attack because you do not get multiattack with readied actions. There are plenty of spells that the Wizard may cast to buff themselves, but they don't have to. When it is the Wizards turn, he may simply choose to drop the sphere (which can be done as a free action at any time per the pHB, then the BM gets 1 attack, maybe) and cast Force Cage. Or Teleport to literally anywhere. Or just Dimension Door anywhere, etc. Depending on DM interpretation of the rules, in the absolute worse case scenario, the BM could get off 2 attacks before being taken out of the fight completely.

Someone beat you to it, but no, not by the rules. He'd still get his three attacks, and likely kill the wizard, or leave him within inches of dead.

Re-read the spell description, particularly this part: "that can target you." That does not mean a range of self. The wording of ORS is clearly "choose a target". It works both RAW and undoubtedly RAI.

Again, all these possible scenarios involve the fighter being able to reach the wizard in melee. I can't emphasize enough how that is simply never ever going to happen. At best, 1 or two hits if you let the readied action go off prior to the Wizard teleporting out.

The Wizard would not run away. The Wizard would Force Cage the Fighter then proceed to blast it from 120ft away while having (insert concentration buff spell here, I like Great Invisibility personally but to each their own). Using upcast spell slots and assuming a Fighter HP of 200 and a spell slot for Force Cage, it would take an Evocation Wizard 3 rounds to burn through approximately 255 hp of damage that the Fighter could not avoid. Force Cage lasts 1 hour. That leaves the Wizard with 597 more rounds to do...really anything. True Polymorph to see if the Fighter fails the DC 19 Wis Save. Mass Suggestion. Regular polymorph. Summon creatures. Power Word Kill when the Fighter is bloodied. Animate Objects on some ball bearings and throw them into the Force Cage to watch the fighter get beat to death Magneto style. My personal favorite would be Wish -> Simulacrum -> Magic Jar to just straight up take over your entire Fighter character. Good luck with the DC 19 Charisma save (potentially higher if we're adding in magical items, which would push the save up to around DC 21, a literally impossible save if you dump stat charisma like most fighters).

Oh and you thought maybe you would design a ranged bow fighter? Nope. Force cage + wall of force between me and the Fighter. Almost all of my suggestions for activities while the Fighter is stuck do not require concentration so the Wall would prevent any ranged attacks.

You have yet to suggest a scenario where a creative Wizard doesn't absolutely outshine a non-spell caster. Oh, and Contingency doesn't require somatic components to trigger. Nor does Misty Step or Dimension Door. So even grappling the hands (which any Wizard worth a damn will have proficiency in Acrobatics + at least 16 Dex) will do nothing. Oh, and the grappling condition has zero effect on spell casting anyways, so again you have to break the rules of the game in order to stop the Wizard. The Wizard merely has to use a few spells they've been given access to.

If you are casting spells in, he can shoot arrows out. For likely more damage and at a better chance to hit. Greater Invisibility doesn't give you any bonus to defense from being hit, it just gives you advantage on Stealth Checks to avoid being seen. Any of those spells? Well either it won't effect him for the hour because you did a full force cage, or he can shoot out because it's a cage of bars, and he kills you on the second turn.

Summoning spells? Well either they require concentration, which isn't a problem for the fighter, or it requires more then an hour. So the forcecage will end before it's done and the fighter gets to interrupt it.

True Polymorph would work, but that's regardless of the forcecage tactic. You are better off opening with that instead of forcecage. But of course that does require you to survive the opening attacks, and if the fighter makes his save (which he gets a reroll on) he will certainly kill you the following round.

Power Word kill has the Forcecage problem. If you can cast spells on him, he can shoot you with arrows. And he will kill you faster.

Mass Suggestion wouldn't do anything. It's the jedi mind trick, not dominate person.

If you can throw the objects in the cage, he can shoot arrows out.

Wish>Simulacrum is a full out broken combo. It's the only one I'm aware of, but it does exist by RAW. So I'll begrudgingly give you that one, though I'll note any sane DM will ban that particularly combo at the start (my favorite way of fixing that combo? Make Simulacrum a level 9 spell, no other changes needed).

Of course, your bias is really obvious. You are starting the fight off by giving the Wizard prep time in the form of a contingency that is pretty much useless for any actual adventuring. Not only is the prep time a huge plus, but the contingency is specifically targeted for this scenario and very little otherwise. Remove that? And it's no contest. The fighter will kill the wizard the majority of the time in the first round.

Besides you are giving the Wizard thousands of gold advantage to burn on spells, while the fighter doesn't have anything. So let's even that up with some poison shall we? Throw some Purple Worm Venom on the Fighters attacks for an additional 168 damage per round, unless the wizard makes four DC 19 Consitution checks. That damage alone would kill a wizard, let alone the additional damage from the fighter's attacks or action surge to add another 168 damage.. (And that still leaves a 1000 gp the fighter has to spend on whatever.) Ha! At that point a single level 20 fighter can kill two level 20 wizards if they don't have contingencies aimed at that specific scenario.

And what's this about a bow fighter? You can go both really easily. :smallamused: Cause all that above? No feats or magic items. Getting a 20 in both Dex and Strength is trivial for a fighter. I'm confident that even with feats you can manage it.

All you've really proven so far is that if you take a favorable interpretation of the rules towards a wizard's spells, then the wizard will have an advantage and likely win. No duh! You can do that in the other direction too! For example? A fighter can go up, grapple the wizard (not an attack, contingency doesn't activate), do an opposed Athletics to shackle the wizard, an opposed Athletics to gag the wizard, an opposed athletics to take away the arcane focus/spell components and then action surge for more opposed athletics tests to strip the wizard naked.

EDIT: That isn't to say the wizard can't or shouldn't win. But it's much more even then you are implying.

Ralanr

2015-04-05, 06:28 PM

All you've really proven so far is that if you take a favorable interpretation of the rules towards a wizard's spells, then the wizard will have an advantage and likely win. No duh! You can do that in the other direction too! For example? A fighter can go up, grapple the wizard (not an attack, contingency doesn't activate), do an opposed Athletics to shackle the wizard, an opposed Athletics to gag the wizard, an opposed athletics to take away the arcane focus/spell components and then action surge for more opposed athletics tests to strip the wizard naked.

The safe word is "Darkness" :smallbiggrin:

In all seriousness, yay for rule interpretation!

JNAProductions

2015-04-05, 06:29 PM

...and then action surge for more opposed athletics tests to strip the wizard naked.

Ah, but wait! The Wizard is an Enchanter with 20 Charisma, and stripping him naked instantly seduces the Fighter!

Edit: Ninja'd by better joke.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 10:35 PM

Re-read the spell description, particularly this part: "that can target you." That does not mean a range of self. The wording of ORS is clearly "choose a target". It works both RAW and undoubtedly RAI.

Doubtfull. In 3.5 a spell with 'targets' needed the 'Target' header in its description (near range etc). But i'll let it slide.

Again, all these possible scenarios involve the fighter being able to reach the wizard in melee. I can't emphasize enough how that is simply never ever going to happen. At best, 1 or two hits if you let the readied action go off prior to the Wizard teleporting out.

Its been pointed out to you that a readied action is a full action; so 4 attacks (possibly plus another) for a Fighter of 20th level.

And why must the Fighter reach the Wizard in melee? Plenty of Fighters are pretty darn good with ranged attacks too (which you can also add superiority dice to as well for what its worth).

The Wizard would not run away. The Wizard would Force Cage the Fighter then proceed to blast it from 120ft away while having (insert concentration buff spell here, I like Great Invisibility personally but to each their own). Using upcast spell slots and assuming a Fighter HP of 200 and a spell slot for Force Cage, it would take an Evocation Wizard 3 rounds to burn through approximately 255 hp of damage that the Fighter could not avoid. Force Cage lasts 1 hour.

Wizard cast the barred version of Forcecage as his action, leaving 1 inch gaps. Fighter shoots Bow through these slits at the Wizard in return for his action.

That leaves the Wizard with 597 more rounds to do...really anything. True Polymorph to see if the Fighter fails the DC 19 Wis Save. Mass Suggestion.

DC19 Wis save? The Fighter has a +9 Will save thanks to Resilient (Wis). He makes it on a 10+. Gets a re-roll if he fails too thanks to Indomitable. Then (thanks for blowing your action wizard) he action surge + full attacks AGAIN. He gets 2 action surges at this level.

Oh and you thought maybe you would design a ranged bow fighter? Nope. Force cage + wall of force between me and the Fighter. Almost all of my suggestions for activities while the Fighter is stuck do not require concentration so the Wall would prevent any ranged attacks.

Stat up your Wizard 20. I'll stat up a Fighter 20. Feel free to use the recommendations for starting equipment for a 'Standard' campaign from the DMG.

We can see if its a cake walk as you assume.

Oh, and Contingency doesn't require somatic components to trigger.

Nope - but it does require a pretty carefully worded trigger.

Nor does Misty Step or Dimension Door.

Put your hand over the Wizards mouth.

Oh, and the grappling condition has zero effect on spell casting anyways, so again you have to break the rules of the game in order to stop the Wizard.

There are rules in the PHB for improvising actions. In fact, theyre the core rules for skill use. Grabbing someones hands or covering their mouth are perfectly acceptable actions for someone to take. Unless you find sneaking up behind a creature with a Stealth check and grabbing them via an athletics check and placing your free hand over the mouth to break versimitude or something.

This isnt a computer game mate, no matter how much you want it to be.

Envyus

2015-04-05, 11:30 PM

Oh and you thought maybe you would design a ranged bow fighter? Nope. Force cage + wall of force between me and the Fighter. Almost all of my suggestions for activities while the Fighter is stuck do not require concentration so the Wall would prevent any ranged attacks.

Then you delayed him until the Wall runs out as you can't attack him through the Wall ether. It helps you run away.

Anyway this super does not matter. As D&D is not built for PvP. A better idea would be to base this on who could do better in an encounter alone.

Here a hard encounter for a single level 20 character is two Oni. lets assume they are in a 50 ft square arena. Wizard/Battlemaster start in the south end while the Oni start in the two north corners.

Malifice

2015-04-05, 11:37 PM

RulesJD

2015-04-06, 12:04 AM

And where does it mention that grappling cannot effect spellcasting?

It does specifically say that somatic components require free use of the arms, and that verbal components must be spoken. Plus, one hand must be used for material components or a spellcasting focus.

A fighter could grapple hands, cover the mouth, or disarm the component or focus.

Because nowhere in the Grappled condition does it list an inability to cast spells. All it does is reduce your movement speed to zero. Even the restrained condition does not stop your casting of spells. Please ready the PHB conditions.

Envyus

2015-04-06, 12:09 AM

Because nowhere in the Grappled condition does it list an inability to cast spells. All it does is reduce your movement speed to zero. Even the restrained condition does not stop your casting of spells. Please ready the PHB conditions.

There is also a thing called Improvised actions. One of which can be gag his mouth.

Xetheral

2015-04-06, 12:19 AM

Its been pointed out to you that a readied action is a full action; so 4 attacks (possibly plus another) for a Fighter of 20th level.

While you can ready an Attack Action, the Extra Attack feature explicitly only applies when taking the Attack Action on your turn. So readying, which allows you to take the Attack Action as a Reaction on someone else's turn, doesn't let you use Extra Attack.

RulesJD

2015-04-06, 12:24 AM

Someone beat you to it, but no, not by the rules. He'd still get his three attacks, and likely kill the wizard, or leave him within inches of dead.

If you are casting spells in, he can shoot arrows out. For likely more damage and at a better chance to hit. Greater Invisibility doesn't give you any bonus to defense from being hit, it just gives you advantage on Stealth Checks to avoid being seen. Any of those spells? Well either it won't effect him for the hour because you did a full force cage, or he can shoot out because it's a cage of bars, and he kills you on the second turn.

Summoning spells? Well either they require concentration, which isn't a problem for the fighter, or it requires more then an hour. So the forcecage will end before it's done and the fighter gets to interrupt it.

True Polymorph would work, but that's regardless of the forcecage tactic. You are better off opening with that instead of forcecage. But of course that does require you to survive the opening attacks, and if the fighter makes his save (which he gets a reroll on) he will certainly kill you the following round.

Power Word kill has the Forcecage problem. If you can cast spells on him, he can shoot you with arrows. And he will kill you faster.

Mass Suggestion wouldn't do anything. It's the jedi mind trick, not dominate person.

If you can throw the objects in the cage, he can shoot arrows out.

Wish>Simulacrum is a full out broken combo. It's the only one I'm aware of, but it does exist by RAW. So I'll begrudgingly give you that one, though I'll note any sane DM will ban that particularly combo at the start (my favorite way of fixing that combo? Make Simulacrum a level 9 spell, no other changes needed).

Of course, your bias is really obvious. You are starting the fight off by giving the Wizard prep time in the form of a contingency that is pretty much useless for any actual adventuring. Not only is the prep time a huge plus, but the contingency is specifically targeted for this scenario and very little otherwise. Remove that? And it's no contest. The fighter will kill the wizard the majority of the time in the first round.

Besides you are giving the Wizard thousands of gold advantage to burn on spells, while the fighter doesn't have anything. So let's even that up with some poison shall we? Throw some Purple Worm Venom on the Fighters attacks for an additional 168 damage per round, unless the wizard makes four DC 19 Consitution checks. That damage alone would kill a wizard, let alone the additional damage from the fighter's attacks or action surge to add another 168 damage.. (And that still leaves a 1000 gp the fighter has to spend on whatever.) Ha! At that point a single level 20 fighter can kill two level 20 wizards if they don't have contingencies aimed at that specific scenario.

And what's this about a bow fighter? You can go both really easily. :smallamused: Cause all that above? No feats or magic items. Getting a 20 in both Dex and Strength is trivial for a fighter. I'm confident that even with feats you can manage it.

All you've really proven so far is that if you take a favorable interpretation of the rules towards a wizard's spells, then the wizard will have an advantage and likely win. No duh! You can do that in the other direction too! For example? A fighter can go up, grapple the wizard (not an attack, contingency doesn't activate), do an opposed Athletics to shackle the wizard, an opposed Athletics to gag the wizard, an opposed athletics to take away the arcane focus/spell components and then action surge for more opposed athletics tests to strip the wizard naked.

EDIT: That isn't to say the wizard can't or shouldn't win. But it's much more even then you are implying.

{scrubbed} Here we go:

Readied attacks = you only make ONE attack, period. Reference: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/24/extra-attack-ready/

Greater Invisibility = you have no earthly idea what spell casting is and please stop discussing it as if you did. Greater Invisibility means you cannot be seen. Please look up what happens when you are attacking an unseen target, and when you are attacking a target that cannot see you (I'll give you a hint, it means disadvantage/advantage). This is the best and most well known effect of Greater Invisibility.

Summoning Spells = the wizard summons the creature(s) inside the Force Cage. The Fighter is now trapped inside with whatever creature(s) the Wizard chooses. The "bar' version of the Force Cage permits spells to go in and out.

I can't emphasize this enough. The Fighter will never be able to hit more than once per round with a ranged attack as a readied action. A Wall of Force between the Force Cage and the Wizard = no arrows can get through. The Wizard simply walks up to the WoF and then moves around it to cast a spell before moving back behind cover. When he moves from behind the wall, the readied action triggers and the fighter makes 1 ranged weapon attack. The Wizard then rolls a D20 to see if the arrow is directed at the Mirror Image (the Wizard has 10 minutes to cast whatever buff he likes that doesn't require concentration, it's not like the Fighter is going anywhere). Etc. Please read the rules in the PHB regarding readied actions again.

That is literally breaking RAW. The example given is a noble knight giving away all of its equipment. I could literally make that the requirement, wait for Force Cage to drop, and for the next 24 hours (or 30 days or 1 year) the fighter could do nothing but give away all of his equipment. The only chance of breaking it would be if I or my companions damaged the Fighter. Telling a Fighter that "we're going to duel like men, walk into this Demiplane where we can fight fair" is well within the bounds of Suggestion.

Bow Fighter = See above regarding Wall of Force/Greater Invisibility/Foresight, whatever. A bow fighter is no more dangerous to a Wizard than is a sword Fighter.

Contingency = That's literally what any creative level 20 Wizard will use for their Contingency. At level 20 you deal with monsters and effects that can kill you in one turn, so you're damn sure going to have a Contingency that prevents exactly that scenario. The spell lasts for ten days. Prepping a spell every TEN DAYS is not giving an unfair advantage to the Wizard, it's basic common sense.

Grapple = Congrats, you're learning. That is pretty much the only chance the Fighter has at defeating the Wizard by not activating the Contingency. Unfortunately, you are going well beyond RAW in what a grapple check can accomplish. Additionally, the "binding" by shackles is Restrained, which does not impair Somatic components. Also, the opposed check is NOT just athletics, it is the Fighters athletics versus the Wizards Athletics OR Acrobatics. Proficiency in Acrobatics + starting at 16 Dex = only -2 on the check versus a BM fighter. A better example would be a raging Barbarian to at least have advantage on the check.

Disarming = an Attack, at least by AL rules given that a Disarming strike is a BM feature. Welcome to house rule but there you go.

RulesJD

2015-04-06, 12:31 AM

Then you delayed him until the Wall runs out as you can't attack him through the Wall ether. It helps you run away.

Anyway this super does not matter. As D&D is not built for PvP. A better idea would be to base this on who could do better in an encounter alone.

Here a hard encounter for a single level 20 character is two Oni. lets assume they are in a 50 ft square arena. Wizard/Battlemaster start in the south end while the Oni start in the two north corners.

First Round -> Force Cage one or both.

Second Round -> Wall of Force in a dome but 1 inch off the ground.

Third - whatever round -> Their dex save is pretty weak, so maybe just Fireball them to death for giggles. The best would probably be to Overchannel Scorching Ray against the Force Cage target. If all hit, that's 102 fire damage in a round. Next round, just cast over channeled Firebolts (sadly RAW but I'll admit not RAI) until dead.

Ralanr

2015-04-06, 12:33 AM

RulesJD

2015-04-06, 01:09 AM

*snip*

Stat up your Wizard 20. I'll stat up a Fighter 20. Feel free to use the recommendations for starting equipment for a 'Standard' campaign from the DMG.

We can see if its a cake walk as you assume.

*snip*
.

Please do.

Human Variant Divination Wizard
STR - 8
DEX - 16
CON - 14
INT - 20
WIS - 10
CHA - 8

Alert
Magic Initiate Hex + Eldritch Blast (Alternative, Lucky)
Resiliency (Con)

+9 to Initiative, you would be at disadvantage on your initiative check if I get surprise from Scrying or another source due to Hex (Dex). If DM bans Scrying (which they should) then I would take Lucky feat to ensure that my 3 daily portent rolls are appropriately high/low.

Prior Setup -> Wish + Clone + Demiplane + complete alternate Spellbook + Arcane Focus.
Wish -> Simulacrum myself every day if any Simulacrum resources have been expended the previous day.
Animate Dead -> Shunt into seperate Demiplane
Contingency -> On hit, ORS on myself (I don't care what you think happened in 3.5, the rules in 5.0 are clear that Range and Target are different.)
Simulacrum Contingency -> If within 5ft of Wizard and touching Wizard that has his movement restricted, Dimension Door.
Start of each day = Mage Armor, Death Ward, 3 D20 Portent dice, Scrying location of my target (Foresight if I didn't cast Wish prior)
Spell Master level 1 = Shield (obviously)
Spell Master level 2 = Detect Thoughts (always know when a hostile creature is within 30ft)

Your setup? And just FYI, this isn't even the most overpowering setup. That would require 4 levels of Sorcerer to gain Metamagic so that I can force disadvantage on any save or suck(die) spells like Magic Jar if for some reason I don't want to waste a Portent dice on.

Oh, didn't even see that you want to permit magic items. Not familiar with the scaling by level tables in the DMG.

RulesJD

2015-04-06, 01:25 AM

Ok, that's evocation. Now do the next 7 wizard schools.

Um, that just makes the fight against the Oni go faster. Any should could do the required damage over the 10 minutes that Wall of Force lasts. You really should propose enemies that are much more resistant to magic.

newsman77

2015-04-06, 01:30 AM

{scrubbed}

Envyus

2015-04-06, 01:30 AM

First Round -> Force Cage one or both.

Second Round -> Wall of Force in a dome but 1 inch off the ground.

Third - whatever round -> Their dex save is pretty weak, so maybe just Fireball them to death for giggles. The best would probably be to Overchannel Scorching Ray against the Force Cage target. If all hit, that's 102 fire damage in a round. Next round, just cast over channeled Firebolts (sadly RAW but I'll admit not RAI) until dead.

You will start taking damage on the fire bolts pretty quickly. As a Cantrip is a 0th level spell meaning the damage does start going up. I don't get how people can say it's raw that they are not damaged.

Anyway your strategy fails horribly. They know Gaseous Form so they can just walk through the gaps in the wall of force and Force Cage.

Also anything that no sensible DM would allow if you try and spin doctor it like Simulacum Wish is not allowed. We are going by RaI not horribly interpreted RaW here.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-06, 02:00 AM

All of this? Doesn't matter at all.

Because I brought it up earlier. Simply taking a mundane poison, that is less expensive then the components to cast Force Cage + Contingency, will make the Fighter's damage basically always exceed the Wizards HP. And casting Force Cage? That's your turn. The Fighter gets an entire turn to go before you can put up a force wall, or a greater invisibility, or anything. You basically have to be in range of a bow to cast the spell in the first place, and he gets to full attack you.

And yes, taking the two characters in a blank fight and giving the wizard contingency is unreasonable. It's giving the wizard prep time (something that has always benefited the wizard the most of any class). It's just as reasonable to let the fighter buy an Elephant. Afterall, it's only 200 GP to do so. He can get a herd of elephants for the same price as a forcecage spell. But we need to buy that poison, so, I guess he'll have to settle with a mere three or four.

Also do you seriously have that sort of contingency in place when you play? How is that not activated every single day? I mean, it's not that hard to attack a wizard with level 20 encounters, and if any attack activates it, it's an easy way to blow one high level spell, and a lower level spell of the wizard every day. Without penalty really, cause you can use the rest of the monster's attacks on the rest of the party.

But like others have said, the entire scenario is ridiculous, so I'm not going to address it further. The Oni idea is much better, but I think if we could make an obstacle course would be better. Ending in a fight against a stronger monster, and giving the characters two short rests with some random encounters in the obstacle course.

Fwiffo86

2015-04-06, 08:47 AM

{scrubbed}

First issue: There is no need for you to attempt to insult me.

Second issue: You are correct, you get 44 spells "known" by leveling. All other spells are at DM approval to be released/found/copied. This has never changed in any edition. I don't believe this is "power-tripping" as it is clearly how the game actually works.

Third issue: Just because you "can" learn and research spells when you level (something that should take gold/and down-time for experimentation) does not immediately mean that certain spells are even allowed in the game. Again, just because "you" think one thing, does not make it true in all cases.

SharkForce

2015-04-06, 10:02 AM

You will start taking damage on the fire bolts pretty quickly. As a Cantrip is a 0th level spell meaning the damage does start going up. I don't get how people can say it's raw that they are not damaged.

well then, maybe you should read the description more closely.

you take damage from overchannel per spell level. it does not matter if you take 1 damage per spell level, or 10, or 100, or even 1,000,000,000 damage per spell level, because you multiply it by 0. per RAW, overchannel does no damage to the caster. (edit: from cantrips, that is. obviously not the case for other spells, but then, that's why overchannel is a completely crap ability unless it doesn't damage you on cantrips).

on a side note, if you need to make houserules to make the game balanced, that means that there was no balance in the first place.

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 10:10 AM

That's been errata'ed out. You only get one free Overchannel using cantrips.

And no, that's wrong. It means the balance was not perfect, not that there was none at all.

SharkForce

2015-04-06, 10:17 AM

there is no errata for 5th edition yet. there is a developer comment from the guy who has explicitly noted himself as not being the one in charge of rules that they're looking at it to see if it needs changing, and including a suggested house rule that DMs can apply if they feel it's too much to allow overchannel to be used for free on cantrips.

that isn't errata. that isn't even a clear intention to publish errata altering it. that's an "oh, maybe we'll publish some errata if we find that it's causing problems".

Envyus

2015-04-06, 10:20 AM

well then, maybe you should read the description more closely.

you take damage from overchannel per spell level. it does not matter if you take 1 damage per spell level, or 10, or 100, or even 1,000,000,000 damage per spell level, because you multiply it by 0. per RAW, overchannel does no damage to the caster. (edit: from cantrips, that is. obviously not the case for other spells, but then, that's why overchannel is a completely crap ability unless it doesn't damage you on cantrips).

on a side note, if you need to make houserules to make the game balanced, that means that there was no balance in the first place.

The Hell it's not crap at all read the ability.

Overchannel
Starting at 14th level, you can increase the power of
your simpler spells. When you cast a wizard spell of
5th level or lower that deals damage, you can deal
maximum damage with that spell.
The first time you do so, you suffer no adverse effect.
If you use this feature again before you finish a long
rest, you take 2d12 necrotic damage for each level of
the spell, immediately after you cast it. Each time you
use this feature again before finishing a long rest, the
necrotic damage per spell level increases by 1d12. This
damage ignores resistance and immunity.

So you get a free max damage spell. Then you start taking damage. Even then most people would be willing to take a bit of damage.

For Cantrips there is no multiplication. You don't take 2d12 Necrotic damage, but each time you use it after that free use the Necrotic Damage increases by 1d12. Starting at at 0 then going up.

Giant2005

2015-04-06, 10:23 AM

For Cantrips there is no multiplication. You don't take 2d12 Necrotic damage, but each time you use it after that free use the Necrotic Damage increases by 1d12. Starting at at 0 then going up.

Read that passage you quoted from the book again. It doesn't support your stance, it crushes it.

archaeo

2015-04-06, 10:33 AM

on a side note, if you need to make houserules to make the game balanced, that means that there was no balance in the first place.

This, of course, assumes that "balance" is anything approaching an objective concept, much less one that can be easily applied to a game as open-ended as D&D.

pwykersotz

2015-04-06, 10:33 AM

Read that passage you quoted from the book again. It doesn't support your stance, it crushes it.

Not at all.

Cantrip - 0th level spell. Initial Overchannel damage - 0d12 (Explicit based on spell level).

So round 1: No damage, exempt.
Round 2: 0d12 damage.
Round 3: 1d12 damage.
Round 4: 2d12 damage.

It's hardly a difficult way to read it. What we ended up establishing from the previous thread with this discussion was both interpretations seem valid, but because of the way English works, your initial bias on reading tends to lock you into the first way you saw it.

Giant2005

2015-04-06, 10:37 AM

Not at all.

Cantrip - 0th level spell. Initial Overchannel damage - 0d12 (Explicit based on spell level).

So round 1: No damage, exempt.
Round 2: 0d12 damage.
Round 3: 1d12 damage.
Round 4: 2d12 damage.

It's hardly a difficult way to read it. What we ended up establishing from the previous thread with this discussion was both interpretations seem valid, but because of the way English works, your initial bias on reading tends to lock you into the first way you saw it.

There isn't really any room for interpretation "the necrotic damage per spell level increases by 1d12" is pretty cut and dry.

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 10:38 AM

Cantrips are usually treated as 1/2 level spells, when it's needed elsewhere in the rules. So perhaps it should go up by d6 instead of d12 for them.

Envyus

2015-04-06, 10:41 AM

Not at all.

Cantrip - 0th level spell. Initial Overchannel damage - 0d12 (Explicit based on spell level).

So round 1: No damage, exempt.
Round 2: 0d12 damage.
Round 3: 1d12 damage.
Round 4: 2d12 damage.

It's hardly a difficult way to read it. What we ended up establishing from the previous thread with this discussion was both interpretations seem valid, but because of the way English works, your initial bias on reading tends to lock you into the first way you saw it.

This was how I saw it as well. It's also pretty much the way the Developers say they intended it.

SharkForce

2015-04-06, 11:10 AM

The Hell it's not crap at all read the ability.

So you get a free max damage spell. Then you start taking damage. Even then most people would be willing to take a bit of damage.

For Cantrips there is no multiplication. You don't take 2d12 Necrotic damage, but each time you use it after that free use the Necrotic Damage increases by 1d12. Starting at at 0 then going up.

no, you get a free max damage spell, then spells after that start murdering your face off if you cast anything remotely worthwhile.

for example, after your first use, maybe you're thinking that a max damage fireball could really help out in the next fight. well, let's have a look... how much damage will that be to you? oh, that's right. 6d12 damage. to a level 10 wizard. if you're in a desperate enough situation to need a max damage fireball, you've probably taken damage. overchanneling that fireball is probably going to put you down, and quite frankly, given a choice between a max damage fireball and a conscious wizard, i'll take the conscious wizard, thank you very much.

but maybe you're higher than level 10. then it wouldn't be so bad, right? except... a max damage fireball isn't going to do very much good to a dangerous encounter at level 15 most likely. maybe if we bump it up a little, and use, say, a level 6 damage spell. i mean, max damage sunbeam will give me max damage every round (and a chance to blind), that sounds promising, right? except, of course, that 12d12 damage has, once again, a rather uncomfortably high chance of knocking me unconscious, and costing me concentration which i would need to keep the spell active.

and heaven forbid you should want to use it a third time in a day. at that point, it's got a fair chance of outright killing you, not just knocking you unconscious.

overchannel is a good ability the first time you use it in a day. after that, it either isn't worth the damage because the situation isn't dire enough, or the situation is dire enough, but you can't afford to take the damage to cast a spell that would make a difference maximized because having a conscious wizard with a decent amount of HP is more valuable than having an unconscious wizard (unless you have no spell slots left, but then, if you don't have any spell slots left, you have nothing worth maximizing either).

of course, taking 1d12 damage isn't that bad (for your first cantrip use)... but then again, a max damage cantrip isn't that good, either. and really, the whole point of damage cantrips is basically to give casters something to do on turns where they would otherwise be throwing darts or rocks or something like that.

overchannel is basically trash unless it doesn't do any damage to the evoker. RAW, that happens with cantrips, and with their first use of the day (meaning they can't use it on cantrips without using up that first use of the day, so they either wait until they need the overchannel and don't get supercharged cantrips for the most part anyways, or they don't get their supercharged evocation).

pwykersotz

2015-04-06, 11:25 AM

There isn't really any room for interpretation "the necrotic damage per spell level increases by 1d12" is pretty cut and dry.

If they had said "The necrotic damage increases by a number of d12's equal to the level of the spell", then yes, I would agree with you that it's unambiguous. This is the way (I believe) you are reading it.

First way:
Necrotic damage (per spell level increases by 1d12) - 0th level spell means an increase of 0d12 because you multiply the spell level by the d12 and add it to the total.
0th Level Calculation - (2d12*0)+(0*1d12) = 0

Second way:
Necrotic damage per spell level (increases by 1d12) - 0th level spell means an increase of 1d12 because you first calculate damage per spell level which is 0, then add 1d12 and increase that number of d12 by 1 each additional casting.
Calculation - (2d12*0)+1d12

Now as a contrast, 4th level spells.
First way:
(2d12*4)+(4*1d12) = 12d12
Second way:
(2d12*4)+1d12 = 9d12

Both are 100% valid, internally consistent readings. That 1d12 increases with every subsequent casting each time, it just matters what it's being multiplied by. It's worth noting that in the second method, you could basically replace "damage per spell level" with "total damage" and have it end the same. Now based on the clarifications, I believe it was intended to use the first method and not function at all with cantrips. But the second method is just as viable.

The only time there's a logical conflict is when someone tries to use one calculation for cantrips, and the other for 1-9 level spells.

Giant2005

2015-04-06, 11:32 AM

If they had said "The necrotic damage increases by a number of d12's equal to the level of the spell", then yes, I would agree with you that it's unambiguous. This is the way (I believe) you are reading it.

First way:
Necrotic damage (per spell level increases by 1d12) - 0th level spell means an increase of 0d12 because you multiply the spell level by the d12 and add it to the total.
0th Level Calculation - (2d12*0)+(0*1d12) = 0

Second way:
Necrotic damage per spell level (increases by 1d12) - 0th level spell means an increase of 1d12 because you first calculate damage per spell level which is 0, then add 1d12 and increase that number of d12 by 1 each additional casting.
Calculation - (2d12*0)+1d12

That second way makes no sense at all - you would have to ignore the "per spell level" clause to have it function like that.
Here is your statement fixed:
Second way:
Necrotic damage per spell level (increases by 1d12) - 0th level spell means an increase of 1d12 because you first calculate damage per spell level which is 0, then add 1d12 per spell level and increase that number of d12 by 1 each additional casting.
Calculation - (2d12*0)+(1d12*0)

pwykersotz

2015-04-06, 11:37 AM

That second way makes no sense at all - you would have to ignore the "per spell level" clause to have it function like that.

:smallsigh:

I actually pointed that out. It's still valid and consistent. You may not like it, but it's not wrong.

Giant2005

2015-04-06, 11:39 AM

:smallsigh:

I actually pointed that out. It's still valid and consistent. You may not like it, but it's not wrong.

I still don't understand how you can justify your stance... What does the "per spell level" clause in that statement mean if it doesn't mean "per spell level"?

pwykersotz

2015-04-06, 11:48 AM

I still don't understand how you can justify your stance... What does the "per spell level" clause in that statement mean if it doesn't mean "per spell level"?

It can mean exactly what it says. The initial damage is based on how many spell levels are used. Note the 2d12*4 bit on both calculations for 4th level spells. Notice also that there are two different clauses used to identify this.

"You take 2d12 damage for each level of the spell"

Now there are two ways to read the second statement. One is "Damage per spell level" is the same as the total damage from the previous calculation, indicating The other is to say that you multiply out the extra d12.

Edit: I think this will be my last post on the matter for this thread. It's a bit of a tangent. :smallsmile:

Envyus

2015-04-06, 11:57 AM

no, you get a free max damage spell, then spells after that start murdering your face off if you cast anything remotely worthwhile.

for example, after your first use, maybe you're thinking that a max damage fireball could really help out in the next fight. well, let's have a look... how much damage will that be to you? oh, that's right. 6d12 damage. to a level 10 wizard. if you're in a desperate enough situation to need a max damage fireball, you've probably taken damage. overchanneling that fireball is probably going to put you down, and quite frankly, given a choice between a max damage fireball and a conscious wizard, i'll take the conscious wizard, thank you very much.

but maybe you're higher than level 10. then it wouldn't be so bad, right? except... a max damage fireball isn't going to do very much good to a dangerous encounter at level 15 most likely. maybe if we bump it up a little, and use, say, a level 6 damage spell. i mean, max damage sunbeam will give me max damage every round (and a chance to blind), that sounds promising, right? except, of course, that 12d12 damage has, once again, a rather uncomfortably high chance of knocking me unconscious, and costing me concentration which i would need to keep the spell active.

You don't get the ability until level 14. So it won't happen to a level 10 wizard. And uh a max damage fireball will do quite a bit of damage at level 15. Also you can't use level 6 spells with over channel.

Also you would be surprised what a player is will to take in order to do damage. A Evo Wizard in one of my games was willing to drain his life like mad to put out huge damage. At one point annihilating a group of Glabrezu were were fighting by firing off 3 cones of Cold Two of them Overchannled (He had the Elemental Adept feat so he was cutting through the Demons Cold Resistance.)

SharkForce

2015-04-06, 12:09 PM

48 fire damage, save for half, to an area, at level 14... no, not really that impressive. if the fight was threatening enough to need extreme resources, it's threatening enough to need something more impressive than that. that's about the equivalent of a fighter's "i don't care enough to even spend short rest resources" damage for 1 round to each enemy. unless they make their save, in which case it's more like the wizard's "i don't care enough to spend any resources at all" damage to each enemy.

if the wizard in your group was able to just take 10d12 (or 20d12) damage without caring, then the fight was probably not that desperate a situation, and you probably would have walked away with less damage taken had you used another solution.

@pwykersotz: i suppose you *could* read it that way. but it makes absolutely no sense to write it that way unless you intend it to increase the damage per level multiple. the only reason i could ever imagine writing it the way it is and not meaning that the next time you do it you take 3d12 per spell level, then 4d12, etc, is if i was deliberately writing it in an unclear way. it would be *vastly* more clear if it just said to increase the damage by 1d12.

Mr.Moron

2015-04-06, 12:19 PM

Mara

2015-04-06, 12:28 PM

People still trying to get free cantrip overcharge? Ignoring the fact that cantrips are always treated as 0.5 spell level in any situation where cost comes up?

K.

Gwendol

2015-04-06, 12:35 PM

People still trying to get free cantrip overcharge? Ignoring the fact that cantrips are always treated as 0.5 spell level in any situation where cost comes up?

K.

Yup. "Caster supremacy" indeed.

silveralen

2015-04-06, 03:17 PM

{scrubbed}

The game designer basically confirmed it as an oversight, said it will be errata'd, and recommended the DM just tell the player no if I recall.

Cazero

2015-04-06, 03:22 PM

How I would rule it :
Considering you can cast a cantrip in the same turn as another spell, cantrip aren't spells in the rule sense and can't be overchanneled. Cantrip still are magic tough, and are thus ruled as 0th level spells for dispel magic, counterspell or similar magic interactions where spell level matters.

Mara

2015-04-06, 03:26 PM

{scrubbed}

Evoker still good. Sorry that it doesn't let you do 40 or more damage per round without expending a spell slot.

silveralen

2015-04-06, 03:27 PM

{scrubbed}

I haven't played with an evocation wizard or run the numbers myself so I honestly don't have an opinion either way. I'd probably do something like having the caster take a single point of damage or 1d4 or something rather than outright removing his ability to over channel cantrips if it seemed like an issue. Just enough so it was an actual decision, not an always on ability.

Edit: Actually I might ban it, I wasn't familiar with overchannel but it and firebolt outdamages eldritch blast, at level 17 it is 45 damage vs 42. Which is kinda an issue when one of warlock's selling points over wizard is more damage at will.

Mara

2015-04-06, 03:44 PM

Isn't crazy how much a person's deep narrative concept character can depend so much on a single tricky RAW exploit?

I also love the idea that a wizard is worthless trash unless they are breaking the rules. Apparently good at blasting is just worthless if you have to use slots!

silveralen

2015-04-06, 04:05 PM

{scrubbed}

There is probably a good way to handle it I'm just too out of it to think of one right now. Not super happy having it outperform EB in raw damage, hex takes a kinda decent commitment for warlock to keep up all things considered, but it seems extreme to strip it completely.

Maybe allow overchannel to act as empower (as the sorcerer metamagic) over maximize for cantrips? Might replace the whole ability with always on empower for evocations if the player dislikes the self damaging nature. That might step on sorcerer's toes a bit though. Ehhh.... I think I'm okay with that, not like empower is one of the better metamagics anyways, really depends on how the player feels about overchannel as is.

Vogonjeltz

2015-04-06, 04:16 PM

I pretty much assume most Wizard 20's are walking around with Foresight

1/3 of the day. (8 hour duration).

So we can also assume they never are able to cast wish, given that they blew that single 9th level spell slot on Foresight?

That is literally breaking RAW. The example given is a noble knight giving away all of its equipment. I could literally make that the requirement, wait for Force Cage to drop, and for the next 24 hours (or 30 days or 1 year) the fighter could do nothing but give away all of his equipment.

Not how that works. What happens is that if the condition given occurs (i.e. Give your gear away to the first beggar you meet) then when that happens it takes hold. Until such time, the Fighter would be perfectly free to murder the Wizard with literally no hinderance. More importantly, the target could simply say: "I'm giving your all my equipment" and the spell ends. Once their frame of mind has been restored, they then kill the Wizard. Mass Suggestion is a terrible combat spell because it has enormous elephantine loopholes that often cause absolutely nothing to happen.

If they had said "The necrotic damage increases by a number of d12's equal to the level of the spell", then yes, I would agree with you that it's unambiguous. This is the way (I believe) you are reading it.

They did say that: "the necrotic damage per spell level".

Giant2005 is completely right in that cantrips specifically won't cause damage, however they will cause the increase in damage if a spell of level 1+ is ever overchanneled before a reset.

Big deal, an Evoker gets good damage on cantrips. I don't see any cause for concern there.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-06, 04:23 PM

{scrubbed}

Whoop de doo. You are slightly weaker then the other Wizard classes. So is Champion for fighter and it still sees plenty of fun play.

And honestly? I don't think people aren't going to use it for higher level spells. That same calculation that makes you take damage on Cantrips, also reduces severely the damage you take on the higher level spells. So taking the extra damage isn't as big of a deal, and makes for a fun reckless character.

Is anyone playing an Evoker (or has a game with one) after level 14? I seem to remember someone saying so.

silveralen

2015-04-06, 06:31 PM

Whoop de doo. You are slightly weaker then the other Wizard classes. So is Champion for fighter and it still sees plenty of fun play.

And honestly? I don't think people aren't going to use it for higher level spells. That same calculation that makes you take damage on Cantrips, also reduces severely the damage you take on the higher level spells. So taking the extra damage isn't as big of a deal, and makes for a fun reckless character.

Is anyone playing an Evoker (or has a game with one) after level 14? I seem to remember someone saying so.

I've played alongside an illusionist up to 16, and his abilities make evoker look good by comparison, at least at every level other than 14 (yeah, even potent cantrip). Despite that, the player clearly enjoyed himself because he was there to do fun, clever illusion things.

I think most of wizard's power comes from being a full ritual caster with unparalleled spell access, most of the additional abilities are gravy. They all seem to have one stand out ability, the rest being kinda meh.

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 06:54 PM

Honestly, Necromancer is best. No other class can, by RAW, gain infinite HP. (You need a spot of help, but 3 levels in Cleric will let you achieve it solo by 13.)

Inured To Undeath-...and your hit point maximum can't be reduced. Level 10 Necromancer ability.

3 levels in Cleric nets you Aid, assuming you can't get any other way to raise your HP cap. (Note that ItU only says your maximum can't be reduced-it CAN be increased.) As soon as you hit Wizard 10/Cleric 3, you have 3 2nd-, 3rd-, and 4th-level spells each, 2 5th, and 1 each of 6th and 7th. That's a total of (3*5+3*10+3*15+2*20+25+30) 185 HP increase per day.

Take a week off of adventuring, and come back with over 1300 HP. That's enough HP to survive falling from orbit. 10 times. Assuming max damage each time.

Take a year off? Enjoy an HP pool of over 65,000.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-06, 07:20 PM

Envyus

2015-04-06, 07:21 PM

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 07:22 PM

*Looks at the old thread posts*

Some people don't care about that. I'd agree, though-I wouldn't allow it, and no one I know would.

Envyus

2015-04-06, 07:22 PM

Just to tell everyone Potent Cantrip works now. There are 5 or so Cantrips that work with the ability.

Mara

2015-04-06, 08:10 PM

Yeah but that does not matter as no one would ever allow it.

I would not consider the duration running out a reduction. Nor would I let Aid stack with itself (I would let the healing stack just not the max increase).

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 08:12 PM

Yup. That's RAI and RACS. Not RAW, though. RAW is a terrible, horrible thing that turns men and women into computers.

Ralanr

2015-04-06, 08:14 PM

Yup. That's RAI and RACS. Not RAW, though. RAW is a terrible, horrible thing that turns men and women into computers.

RACS? That's not suppose to mean rule of cool or something is it?

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 08:18 PM

Rules As Common Sense.

Ralanr

2015-04-06, 08:25 PM

Rules As Common Sense.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_akLHpeO7qyA/S_qFK4esDKI/AAAAAAAAAzQ/hroZSpG1fNo/s1600/motivational+demotivator+%287%29.jpg

JNAProductions

2015-04-06, 08:29 PM

Yeah, RACS is kinda rare on these forums. But I try to use it much as I can, excepting when the actual Rule of Cool supercedes it.

Ralanr

2015-04-06, 08:41 PM

Yeah, RACS is kinda rare on these forums. But I try to use it much as I can, excepting when the actual Rule of Cool supercedes it.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/db/7e/7f/db7e7fd2f6436e662bd63d1cef54fbfe.jpg

It's the reason I'm playing a dragonborn rather than a half-orc.

Mara

2015-04-06, 08:46 PM

Yup. That's RAI and RACS. Not RAW, though. RAW is a terrible, horrible thing that turns men and women into computers.
I consider it RAW.

Applying 'reduction' in the broad sense requires using RAI about that word.

Malifice

2015-04-06, 09:38 PM

Please do.

Human Variant Divination Wizard
STR - 8
DEX - 16
CON - 14
INT - 20
WIS - 10
CHA - 8

Alert
Magic Initiate Hex + Eldritch Blast (Alternative, Lucky)
Resiliency (Con)

+9 to Initiative, you would be at disadvantage on your initiative check if I get surprise from Scrying or another source due to Hex (Dex). If DM bans Scrying (which they should) then I would take Lucky feat to ensure that my 3 daily portent rolls are appropriately high/low.

Prior Setup -> Wish + Clone + Demiplane + complete alternate Spellbook + Arcane Focus.
Wish -> Simulacrum myself every day if any Simulacrum resources have been expended the previous day.
Animate Dead -> Shunt into seperate Demiplane
Contingency -> On hit, ORS on myself (I don't care what you think happened in 3.5, the rules in 5.0 are clear that Range and Target are different.)
Simulacrum Contingency -> If within 5ft of Wizard and touching Wizard that has his movement restricted, Dimension Door.
Start of each day = Mage Armor, Death Ward, 3 D20 Portent dice, Scrying location of my target (Foresight if I didn't cast Wish prior)
Spell Master level 1 = Shield (obviously)
Spell Master level 2 = Detect Thoughts (always know when a hostile creature is within 30ft)

Your setup? And just FYI, this isn't even the most overpowering setup. That would require 4 levels of Sorcerer to gain Metamagic so that I can force disadvantage on any save or suck(die) spells like Magic Jar if for some reason I don't want to waste a Portent dice on.

Oh, didn't even see that you want to permit magic items. Not familiar with the scaling by level tables in the DMG.

Can you afford the components for even half the above with the 20,000 gp you have at 20th level?

Seeing as you're in a campaign featuring a DM that's happy with Wish spells getting tossed around willy nilly with no consequences, and whom also apparently allows simulacrum chaining (meaning the world must be full of legions of high level wizard simulacrums, and the economy is utterly destroyed due to fabricate/wish) we seem to have a fairly 'permissive' DM.

Guess its just our different play styles man. You tossed a Wish at my table, and if it had the potential for abuse (via simulacrum abuse) I'd rule something like the Simulacrum views itself as the real you, and (sensing you as a new threat to its existence) immediately flees, becoming a NPC desiring your death. RAI thats pretty much been the intent of Wish since its inception in 1E; the spell invites the DM to mess with the PC who tries to abuse it. I personally consider 'infinite simulacrum chaining' to trigger the clause in the second paragraph of a use 'beyond the scope of the spell' leading to twisted consequences.

But hey, like I said, you have a permissive DM. Maybe he would also allow a high level Fighter to improvise a Strength (athletics check) to put your Wizard in a choke-hold and knock him out. And before you cry about that not 'being in the rules as written' allow me to point out that it clearly is. Improvising actions with skill use is clearly in the 'RAW' on how skills work in 5th edition.

SharkForce

2015-04-06, 09:46 PM

he's not chaining infinite simulacrums (unless i've misunderstood what you're referring to). he's getting a new one every day that replaces the old one if the old one expended resources that it cannot recover.

and considering wish removes the need for expensive components... yeah, i'm pretty sure he's got the money for it.

(though i do agree that having contingency running at the time is pretty sketchy if we're talking about a wizard adventuring... if it's the wizard sitting at home resting from the last adventure, then the contingency is probably not discharged).

Malifice

2015-04-06, 10:36 PM

he's not chaining infinite simulacrums (unless i've misunderstood what you're referring to). he's getting a new one every day that replaces the old one if the old one expended resources that it cannot recover.

So he's using his 9th level spell slot to save him a 7th level slot, 12 hours and 1500gp?

I'd allow that. With caveats.

Out of curiosity, what stops the simulacrum from wishing the caster away once it forms?

Seeing as he is 'like the caster in every way' I would assume it has the wizards knowledge or at least would be smart enough (Int 20) to immediately realize it is itself a simulacrum, to also understand that it's role is cannon fodder for the Wizard it is under the control of, and accordingly (in an effort of self preservation) to try and immediately neutralize the PC that created it (probably using its duplicated Wish spell to do so).

Its a safe bet the PC Wizard himself would loathe being under the control of someone else, and Im also sure the PC Wizard wouldnt appreciate having his entire existence be reduced to 'you're my cannon fodder' for some other Wizard who wished him into existence. That being the case, it's safe to say the Simulacrum feels the exact same way, and would seek to preserve his own life and free himself from control using all the methods at his disposal (just like the parent Wizard would).

Call it 'Asminovs law of simulacra'. Ultron and all that.

and considering wish removes the need for expensive components... yeah, i'm pretty sure he's got the money for it.

What about the clones, demi-planes, undead and contingencies?

(though i do agree that having contingency running at the time is pretty sketchy if we're talking about a wizard adventuring... if it's the wizard sitting at home resting from the last adventure, then the contingency is probably not discharged).

I'm still sketchy on contingency ORS too. I don't think you can target yourself with the spell anymore than you can target yourself with a wall of force.

SharkForce

2015-04-06, 11:44 PM

So he's using his 9th level spell slot to save him a 7th level slot, 12 hours and 1500gp?

I'd allow that. With caveats.

Out of curiosity, what stops the simulacrum from wishing the caster away once it forms?

Seeing as he is 'like the caster in every way' I would assume it has the wizards knowledge or at least would be smart enough (Int 20) to immediately realize it is itself a simulacrum, to also understand that it's role is cannon fodder for the Wizard it is under the control of, and accordingly (in an effort of self preservation) to try and immediately neutralize the PC that created it (probably using its duplicated Wish spell to do so).

Its a safe bet the PC Wizard himself would loathe being under the control of someone else, and Im also sure the PC Wizard wouldnt appreciate having his entire existence be reduced to 'you're my cannon fodder' for some other Wizard who wished him into existence. That being the case, it's safe to say the Simulacrum feels the exact same way, and would seek to preserve his own life and free himself from control using all the methods at his disposal (just like the parent Wizard would).

the description of the simulacra spell stops that. well, and in the case of the wish in particular, the fact that the simulacra is a copy of him at the time he cast the spell, and for obvious reasons you can't have cast wish and also still not have cast it, so the simulacra will not have a level 9 slot (now or ever, since it cannot recover spell slots in what was presumably an attempt to balance things. precisely why every other limited resource is not a problem to recover while spells are is the sort of question that will derail this thread and make it go for another several pages, so i'd recommend you not ask).

in any event, the simulacra is friendly to you (and your party, once you so designate them), and obeys your orders and "acts according to your wishes".

Call it 'Asminovs law of simulacra'. Ultron and all that.

What about the clones, demi-planes, undead and contingencies?

the clone technically requires that he have sacrificed a wish spell to it at some point in the past technically (some DMs may require that he actually purchase the container though, or at the very least have some container even if it isn't an expensive one). actually dying should be more rare than the conditions that trigger a contingency, so having a clone in storage is pretty reasonable (technically, there's nothing that says you can't have a dozen clones in storage... though technically, there's also nothing that says what happens if you do that, either). a more reasonable contingency for adventuring safety, imo, would be to teleport your corpse to your clone. why? so that you get your gear back, of course.

animate dead requires no expensive components. having the undead controlled indefinitely means he needs to have killed humanoids with finger of death (not as hard or as likely to make people angry as it sounds; goblins, for example, are a perfectly legitimate target) and limits him to zombies, technically (well, he *could* have theoretically spent a while in the distant past turning them into skeletons or similar creatures with true polymorph). he could otherwise have a demiplane full of uncontrolled undead of a large variety of types without recurring cost (he will need at least one 150 gp gem if he wants undead more powerful than skeletons and zombies, but i imagine he's talking about a plane full of controlled undead).

demiplanes do not, in fact, have any monetary cost whatsoever. you can have as many as you like, but accessing them requires your level 8 spell slot, so you can pretty much only interact with at most 2 of them in a single day (and if you're consistently using your level 9 spell slot to prepare for other days, you're down to just 1).

contingency merely requires a one-time investment of gold. or, if you use wish, technically no investment of gold. precisely how that works in terms of keeping a non-existant statue on his person is anyone's guess; personally, i'd require the contingency to be tied to *something* that he must keep on his person, but would waive the requirement that the something be an expensive statue. a strictly RAW reading indicates that he doesn't even need that, however.

I'm still sketchy on contingency ORS too. I don't think you can target yourself with the spell anymore than you can target yourself with a wall of force.

i'm not talking about targeting at all. i'm just saying that if you have a contingency where the trigger is "someone attacked me", and you've been out adventuring, it isn't reasonable to assume it has not been triggered yet. as far as targeting, imo you could pretty much target yourself with ORS (if you get a save, you're being targeted imo, and in this particular case while it never uses the word target explicitly it does only list the option of the spell being cast on a creature or object with no option for just throwing into empty space in the description), so that should actually be fine. though again, i *really* doubt you've gone through an entire adventuring day (let alone 10 of them) without *somebody* trying to shoot you.

RulesJD

2015-04-06, 11:59 PM

Envyus

2015-04-07, 12:20 AM

Wish specifically removes the need for material components. Demiplane is free to cast. You can literally Wish for 25,000gp each day. Money means literally nothing to a level 20 Wizard. I fully agree that Wish completely breaks the game if you have even a modicum of creativity, however the creators choose to include it in the game. Along with Arcane Eye and a variety of other game breaking spells.

If we're allowing improvised actions, that's even better. First spell will be Wish -> Fighter never existed. Congrats, you're done. Or Wish -> Flight for 24 hours without concentration + Greater Invisibility. Elephant Army? Hi, here's a Meteor Swarm.

You can't wish for a lot of that stuff. You can't wish for Meteor Swarm because it's a ninth level spell and thus not valid. Wishing the Fighter does not exist would probably just straight up not work as spell is noted to have limits or it would do something like the spells text says and warp you into a point in time were the Fighter does not exist. You would probably get ether Flight for 24 hours without concentration or 24 hour greater invisibility not both with a single casting even then the stress would screw you. Summoning an Elephant army could be bad unless you word the wish in a specific way. You can't even wish for 25000 gold each day. You can wish for an item up to 25000 gold in value.

Added on all of these wishs can backfire horribly on you. Because you forgot about the fine print of the spell.

The stress of casting this spell to produce any effect
other than duplicating another spell weakens you. After
enduring that stress, each time you cast a spell until
you finish a long rest, you take 1d10 necrotic damage
per level of that spell. This damage can't be reduced or
prevented in any way. In addition, your Strength drops
to 3, if it isn't 3 or lower already, for 2d4 days. For each
of those days that you spend resting and doing nothing
more than light activity, your remaining recovery time
decreases by 2 days. Finally, there is a 33 percent
chance that you are unable to cast wish ever again if you
suffer this stress.
So no wish does not break the game if you have a bit of creativity. As being creative will likely result in you losing access to the spell.

Also how the hell does Arcane Eye break the game. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Malifice

2015-04-07, 12:24 AM

in any event, the simulacra is friendly to you (and your party, once you so designate them), and obeys your orders and "acts according to your wishes".

While it may be friendly and cat according to your wishes, who is it that interprets your wishes? Nothing in the spell indicates it is your unquestioning mind-slave, more of a friendly and generally helpful NPC version of yourself that does what you ask it to do (like it was your good friend).

The copy may be 'friendly' to you when created, but where in the spell does it say it stays 'friendly' to you regardless of how poorly you treat it? Like the creature it copies, we can assume it doesn't want to die, feels pain, and has identical desires to the creature it copies. It may quickly grow resentful of its creator.

Also bear in mind it (as a copy of the Wizard) also knows the wizards intentions at the time he cast the spell to make it, and is also smart enough (Int 20) to figure out what it is and why it was created (in this case, as cannon fodder). It would also know about other simulacrums that preceded it, and their ultimate fate.

Imagine popping into existence as a copy of yourself. You would obviously have your own best interests at heart (thus you would be friendly to the 'real' you). However you would also know how and why you were created (and that you are in fact a creation). The reasons for your creation (and knowledge of both your intended demise, and the fact that the real 'you' has control over you) may very well override your starting attitude of 'friendly' towards your creator sooner rather than later.

If a player complains about the above, hand him the Simulacrum to play, and take control of his PC. If he tries to weasel out of his (now NPC) Wizard creators control, and winds up resenting his creator, he cant exactly complain when the NPC Simulacrum of himself does the same when the roles are reversed.

(technically, there's nothing that says you can't have a dozen clones in storage... though technically, there's also nothing that says what happens if you do that, either).

Talk to Manshoon about this.

animate dead requires no expensive components. having the undead controlled indefinitely means he needs to have killed humanoids with finger of death (not as hard or as likely to make people angry as it sounds; goblins, for example, are a perfectly legitimate target) and limits him to zombies, technically (well, he *could* have theoretically spent a while in the distant past turning them into skeletons or similar creatures with true polymorph). he could otherwise have a demiplane full of uncontrolled undead of a large variety of types without recurring cost (he will need at least one 150 gp gem if he wants undead more powerful than skeletons and zombies, but i imagine he's talking about a plane full of controlled undead).

A demiplane and a horde of undead minions is a lot harder to get (and get away with with relation to the latter) than a castle and an army of soldiers (the latter of which a Fighter 20 is probably going to have, if he desires it).

RulesJD

2015-04-07, 02:35 AM

You can't wish for a lot of that stuff. You can't wish for Meteor Swarm because it's a ninth level spell and thus not valid. Wishing the Fighter does not exist would probably just straight up not work as spell is noted to have limits or it would do something like the spells text says and warp you into a point in time were the Fighter does not exist. You would probably get ether Flight for 24 hours without concentration or 24 hour greater invisibility not both with a single casting even then the stress would screw you. Summoning an Elephant army could be bad unless you word the wish in a specific way. You can't even wish for 25000 gold each day. You can wish for an item up to 25000 gold in value.

Added on all of these wishs can backfire horribly on you. Because you forgot about the fine print of the spell.

So no wish does not break the game if you have a bit of creativity. As being creative will likely result in you losing access to the spell.

Also how the hell does Arcane Eye break the game. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Most of those replies were to other posters as well. Why on earth would you cast Wish just to cast another 9th level spell that literally takes no effort?

You're using non-PHB descriptions to have any sort of chance against the Wizard, so I'm using non-PHB uses of Wish. It is perfectly valid in your world.

I know you can't get both Flight + Invisibility without concentration. That's why I stated Greater Invisibility. As in you cast that.

I have no desire to summon an Elephant army. That was in response to the idea that a fighter could buy an elephant army. My response was that the Wizard could wipe out that army in 1 spell. Oh, and yes you can generate an item of up to 25,000gp. My item is a piece of gold worth 25,000gp. I can do that literally every day while sitting in my demiplane.

All the "questions" about Simulacrum are clearly just attempts to ignore the rules. Yes, the created thing is loyal to you and obeys your commands, it says so in the spell description. Again, you are proving my point. The only way you can claim that a high level wizard isn't significantly more powerful is to break the rules.

Forum Explorer

2015-04-07, 02:58 AM

Most of those replies were to other posters as well. Why on earth would you cast Wish just to cast another 9th level spell that literally takes no effort?

You're using non-PHB descriptions to have any sort of chance against the Wizard, so I'm using non-PHB uses of Wish. It is perfectly valid in your world.

I know you can't get both Flight + Invisibility without concentration. That's why I stated Greater Invisibility. As in you cast that.

I have no desire to summon an Elephant army. That was in response to the idea that a fighter could buy an elephant army. My response was that the Wizard could wipe out that army in 1 spell. Oh, and yes you can generate an item of up to 25,000gp. My item is a piece of gold worth 25,000gp. I can do that literally every day while sitting in my demiplane.

Wish for flight without concentration?

**** DM: You are now a pigeon with a pigeon's stats! (Bigger **** DM: Gravity reverses and you fly away from the planet, leaving the atmosphere and killing yourself!)

Me as DM: You grow a pair of wings, but...(any number of drawbacks related to a pair of wings)

Wish for a giant piece of gold worth 25, 000 GP?

**** DM: No one nearby has the money to just pay you 25, 000 GP! Plus you normally only get 50% of it's worth when you sell it back. (Bigger **** DM: As you approach the vendor you notice your pouch is lighter. You've been robbed!)

Me as DM: Sure, hope you don't permanently lose the spell as a result.

Which is something you are ignoring. All these uses? You get a 33% chance to never use Wish again. It's much too useful to potentially lose on something trivial like money (wings might be worth it depending on your DM) Simply getting to level 20 should earn you more then enough gold for most things that you want, or if you haven't, leave you powerful enough to simply take the gold from some monsters (or towns if you are evil).

But like others have said, most uses of wish do leave the DM open to screw you over. And if you're an annoying player bent on using questionable RAW exploits to 'break' the game, he'll likely gleefully take the opportunity to do so.

Giant2005

2015-04-07, 03:28 AM

Please do.

Human Variant Divination Wizard
STR - 8
DEX - 16
CON - 14
INT - 20
WIS - 10
CHA - 8

Alert
Magic Initiate Hex + Eldritch Blast (Alternative, Lucky)
Resiliency (Con)

+9 to Initiative, you would be at disadvantage on your initiative check if I get surprise from Scrying or another source due to Hex (Dex). If DM bans Scrying (which they should) then I would take Lucky feat to ensure that my 3 daily portent rolls are appropriately high/low.

Prior Setup -> Wish + Clone + Demiplane + complete alternate Spellbook + Arcane Focus.
Wish -> Simulacrum myself every day if any Simulacrum resources have been expended the previous day.
Animate Dead -> Shunt into seperate Demiplane
Contingency -> On hit, ORS on myself (I don't care what you think happened in 3.5, the rules in 5.0 are clear that Range and Target are different.)
Simulacrum Contingency -> If within 5ft of Wizard and touching Wizard that has his movement restricted, Dimension Door.
Start of each day = Mage Armor, Death Ward, 3 D20 Portent dice, Scrying location of my target (Foresight if I didn't cast Wish prior)
Spell Master level 1 = Shield (obviously)
Spell Master level 2 = Detect Thoughts (always know when a hostile creature is within 30ft)

Your setup? And just FYI, this isn't even the most overpowering setup. That would require 4 levels of Sorcerer to gain Metamagic so that I can force disadvantage on any save or suck(die) spells like Magic Jar if for some reason I don't want to waste a Portent dice on.

Oh, didn't even see that you want to permit magic items. Not familiar with the scaling by level tables in the DMG.

Why is any of this even relevant to the thread?
If a Wizard spends his life molding himself into paper so he can beat rock, then he absolutely should beat rock and there is nothing wrong with that. The game only breaks down if Scissors is capable of beating both Rock and Paper and that most certainly isn't the case here. That build you posted focuses on fighting against a Fighter so much that another Wizard of equal power would absolutely destroy him - one dispel magic later and the non specialized Wizard is exactly the same as the anti-Fighter Wizard but with more spell slots left at his disposal.

Wizards are only OP in theory because of Schrodinger's Wizard syndrome. For some unknown reason people assume that Wizards are capable of anything and everything all of the time when the mechanics prevent that. In the game Schrodinger's Wizard simply doesn't exist.

Malifice

2015-04-07, 03:48 AM

All the "questions" about Simulacrum are clearly just attempts to ignore the rules. Yes, the created thing is loyal to you and obeys your commands, it says so in the spell description. Again, you are proving my point. The only way you can claim that a high level wizard isn't significantly more powerful is to break the rules.

It doesn't say it is mindlessly loyal to you, it says its friendly to you (and nothing in the spell indicates that this friendliness is permanent. It could obviously change depending on how the creature is treated and what it was created for). It also doesn't say that it mindlessly obeys your commands even if they are suicidal - it obeys your spoken commands to the best of its abilities, just as good as any 'friend' would.

Its also capable of taking independent action. Nothing in the spell implies it cant act on its own initiative (not as in rolled initiative, but as in acting as it sees fit subject to any orders to the contrary). It's also free to interpret your orders as it sees fit. It's a copy of you, with your intelligence and knowledge of why it was created; safe to say it doesn't want to die anymore than you do.

Its a copy of you. Not only doesnt it want to die anymore than you do, but if you created it as a copy of you, it also knows why you did so, that it is a creation, why it is friendly to you, and why it must follow your orders. It also knows if any spells it has prepared, or any other actions it could take could help it escape your control, which it may very well seek to do.

After all, wouldnt the Wizard who created it also seek to escape such control if he were in the simulacrums position? If the Wizard would seek to escape such control, why would the Simulacrum think any different? It thinks as he does, and with the same genius level intelligence score (probably 20), could probably find a way to escape its creator.

Not that I'm saying this is 'how the spell must work' but it's certainly reasonable DM interpretations of how to run this NPC you have just created.

Just like skill use is DM dependent, so are the actual effects of spells like Wish and Simulacrum. Both spells deal with things outside the casters control (a sentient creature on one hand, and a DM's ability to interpret what is 'beyond the scope of the wish spell thus triggering unexpected consequences' on the other.

Gwendol

2015-04-07, 04:26 AM

Kane0

2015-04-07, 04:40 AM

I think the game holds up alright at higher levels.

Mara

2015-04-07, 07:42 AM

Infinite Snowcones: You can't duplicate what you were duplicated from.
Rules citation: The simulacrum cannot become more powerful

Unlimited Wishes: I would rule that wish does not care if you or the duplicate you control cast wish. If you want to go beyond the 8th level or lower duplication be prepared to never cast wish again.
Rules citation: I could also just interpret the wish horribly if you want to be a real RAW stickler.

SharkForce

2015-04-07, 08:21 AM

It doesn't say it is mindlessly loyal to you, it says its friendly to you (and nothing in the spell indicates that this friendliness is permanent. It could obviously change depending on how the creature is treated and what it was created for). It also doesn't say that it mindlessly obeys your commands even if they are suicidal - it obeys your spoken commands to the best of its abilities, just as good as any 'friend' would.

Its also capable of taking independent action. Nothing in the spell implies it cant act on its own initiative (not as in rolled initiative, but as in acting as it sees fit subject to any orders to the contrary). It's also free to interpret your orders as it sees fit. It's a copy of you, with your intelligence and knowledge of why it was created; safe to say it doesn't want to die anymore than you do.

Its a copy of you. Not only doesnt it want to die anymore than you do, but if you created it as a copy of you, it also knows why you did so, that it is a creation, why it is friendly to you, and why it must follow your orders. It also knows if any spells it has prepared, or any other actions it could take could help it escape your control, which it may very well seek to do.

After all, wouldnt the Wizard who created it also seek to escape such control if he were in the simulacrums position? If the Wizard would seek to escape such control, why would the Simulacrum think any different? It thinks as he does, and with the same genius level intelligence score (probably 20), could probably find a way to escape its creator.

Not that I'm saying this is 'how the spell must work' but it's certainly reasonable DM interpretations of how to run this NPC you have just created.

Just like skill use is DM dependent, so are the actual effects of spells like Wish and Simulacrum. Both spells deal with things outside the casters control (a sentient creature on one hand, and a DM's ability to interpret what is 'beyond the scope of the wish spell thus triggering unexpected consequences' on the other.

nothing in the description of a sword explicitly states that 50% of the time it won't suddenly gain consciousness and stab you in the face because you keep whacking it against things. a DM could try to use that as justification to have it do so, but the DM in question would not be "interpreting" squat to justify that.

the spell does what it says. it does not do what it doesn't say. if you want to invent houserules to punish people for making effective choices, that's your business, but don't try and push your lame excuses on the rules and act like it's a reasonable interpretation for a friendly creature that obeys your commands and acts as you wish and has no ability to learn whatsoever to be fully sentient and attempt to kill its creator. it is not free to interpret orders as it sees fit. spells that have conditions on their control say so; conjure fey and conjure elemental tell you under what conditions the creature can not obey you, polymorph other tells you when your control wears off, animate dead and create undead tell you under what conditions you lose control, dominate spells tell you, charm spells tell you, suggestion spells tell you. there is an overwhelming pattern of this.

any text you interpret as allowing the simulacrum to betray its master is text that you added, not something that could be "interpreted" from the rules that don't even give so much as a hint that the simulacrum can ever do that.