Level 1 Wizard character, looking for advice/opini

[janus.syndicate]

Greetings everyone! Just joined the site to see if I can get some advice/opinions on building my level 1 wizard.

About the campaign


36 pt build. (DM is admittedly VERY tough, and plays even unintelligent creatures with intelligent tactics)

Stats assigned at this point are:
12 Str | 16 Dex | 14 Con | 18 Int | 8 Wis | 8 Cha


Any classes/p-classes from PHB1, DMG1 are ok.
Races allowed are PHB1, plus subtypes from MM1 (ie: deep dwarf, deep halfling, gray elf). Strongheart halfling is also permitted.
We can request feats/spells/p-classes from other official 3.5 books if they aren't unbalanced.
There are 2 or 3 other players:

Cleric (battle, not healer; possibly some kind of spiked chain/trip build - he hasn't decided yet)
Fighter/Rogue (dual wield wood elf, will be mostly fighter)
There might be a 3rd. We'll find out in 4 days when we start.



What I was thinking


I'm leaning toward a Conjuration specialist. I like the idea of being able to summon monsters. However, I also like the idea of being able to turn into one, and Transmutation is also appealing.

Opinions on Conj vs Trans? Is it worth it to specialize? Are there 2 schools that are worth giving up? If I had to choose 2, I'd likely go with Evocation and Necromancy. Are these bad choices to give up?


I'm torn between Deep Halfling, Strongheart Halfling, Gray Elf and Deep Dwarf (gray elf being the least appealing option atm because of the hit to Con). Strongheart Halfling is my frontrunner right now, for the small size and the extra feat.
The first feats I was thinking of taking are Improved Initiative (and Combat Casting, if Strongheart)
Skills ranks are Concentration (4), Escape Artist (2), Knowledge [Arcana] (4), Knowledge [Religion] (4), Knowledge [The Planes] (4), Spellcraft (4).
Spells to start (at least, atm): Color Spray, Grease, Identify, Mage Armor, Mount, Sleep, Summon Monster I


Any advice/opinions/suggestions would be much appreciated. Cheers! :)

[Afgncaap5]

Others are likely far more knowledgeable on this than I am. If you like summoning things, though, I say go with Conjuration. You can always keep Transmutation (and even specialize in it), while sacrificing two other things, though you might be a little feat-starved if you go that route (assuming you want to get Augment Summoning and its prerequisite.)

[Brova]

Conjuration v Transmutation: Conjuration is better at low levels. Also, the good stuff is a lot less likely to get banned. Summoning is not ideal. If you wanted to cast summon monster a bunch, you could just have the better class chassis of the Cleric.

Banned Schools: Ban Evocation. The pick one of Illusion, Enchantment, and Necromancy.

Race: Grey Elf is probably best, though it's a little worse without Elf Generalist.

Spells: Ditch summon monster I. It doesn't last long enough to matter right now. I might ditch mount, as it's fairly situational. Otherwise basically fine. Typically sleep/color spray/grease will be your go-to at 1st level.

Other Content: Elf Generalist is reasonably good if you don't want to ban schools. There are bunch of worthwhile PrCs. Where do you see yourself going at mid/high levels? I personally have a soft spot for Ultimate Magus, though based on the restrictions it seems unlikely the DM will okay anything like an ideal build.

[Nohwl]

wizard summoner is better than cleric if you can get the rapid summoning variant. either way, summoning picks up around level 9 if you can enter malconvoker. all the +2s to hp/hd and +2s to attack add up. might be a caster level behind, but it's worth it. until then, standard battlefield control tactics work well.

[Brova]

wizard summoner is better than cleric if you can get the rapid summoning variant.

DMM: Rapid. Also, the difference between full and standard action summons is just not all that big of a deal.


either way, summoning picks up around level 9 if you can enter malconvoker.

Don't do this. Malconvoker is a trap option. The big deal is that you lose a caster level, then can summon an extra evil creature with your summon monster spells. Half the time, if you hadn't lost that caster level, you could cast a higher level summon monster spell and simply summon d3 of the creatures in question. All while being a Dweomerkeeper or something.

If you want to summon, be a Druid with Greenbound Summoning. Failing that, be a Cleric and enjoy getting Domains, Turning, and a better chassis for nothing.

Wizard has some awesome spells, but it is actually a terrible class in every other respect. Any build that involves doing something another class could do is something you should do as that class.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Evocation and Necromancy are fantastic schools to give up. Specializing is usually worth it for the bonus spells.
Things you might ask about:

The Immediate Magic ACF from the Player's Handbook 2 is real nice, although the Conjurer version is rather strong.
Cloudy Conjuration from Complete Mage is a real nice low-level feat-- it doubles up the effect of your conjurations by auto-sickening anyone nearby for a round.
Master Specialist from Complete Mage is a nice, thematic, low-level PrC.
At level 3, see if you can get a Reserve feat from Complete Mage-- they really help your staying power at low levels by giving you an at-will ability to fall back on.



DMM: Rapid. Also, the difference between full and standard action summons is just not all that big of a deal.
No need to waste Turn attempts. Potential for Quickened summons. Free Augment Summoning. And, not but certainly not least, the ability to convert prepared spells into (lower-level) summon monster spells, doubling your versatility.


If you want to summon, be a Druid with Greenbound Summoning.
Yeah, that'll fly. (Don't get me wrong, Druid is probably the best PHB-only summoner, but this doesn't seem anything like the kind of high-op game you'd need to get away with something as horrifically overpowered as Greenbound Summoning)

[Brova]

Evocation and Necromancy are fantastic schools to give up. Specializing is usually worth it for the bonus spells.

This is true. You might consider becoming a Focused Specialist. Conjuration is one of the schools where it's worth it, and you aren't losing much by also giving up Illusion or Enchantment.


Things you might ask about:

The Immediate Magic ACF from the Player's Handbook 2 is real nice, although the Conjurer version is rather strong.
Cloudy Conjuration from Complete Mage is a real nice low-level feat-- it doubles up the effect of your conjurations by auto-sickening anyone nearby for a round.
Master Specialist from Complete Mage is a nice, thematic, low-level PrC.
At level 3, see if you can get a Reserve feat from Complete Mage-- they really help your staying power at low levels by giving you an at-will ability to fall back on.


Mostly good. I somewhat disagree with Master Specialist and reserve feats though. I prefer the fifth level of Wizard so you can get Spontaneous Divination over Master Specialist. Master Specialist is also generally going to be best if you plan on going Archmage later. Reserve feats just don't do enough in my estimation. By seventh or so you have enough spells to go all day, so they aren't really useful for very long.


Yeah, that'll fly. (Don't get me wrong, Druid is probably the best PHB-only summoner, but this doesn't seem anything like the kind of high-op game you'd need to get away with something as horrifically overpowered as Greenbound Summoning)

Oh I would never recommend it to OP. I intended it to be evaluated as the alternative to Malconvoker.

[Nohwl]

DMM: Rapid.

dmm rapid costs 2 feats and turn attempts to replicate an acf that you can get for the cost of a familiar that's more of a liability to you for the earlier levels. it also gets kind of expensive to boost turn attempts unless you're using the ruling where rebuke fire elementals or whatever counts as turn undead for dmm and you probably won't have enough turn attempts without that ruling or a bunch of nightsticks to put dmm rapid on all of your summon monster spells and use it for much else. it would be 18 turn attempts to get it on 9 summon monster spells, and that's just preparing 1 summon monster spell in every spell level (i'd expect 28ish turn attempts without too much investment into it without the fire elementals ruling or a bunch of nightsticks).

ignoring all of that, i don't think it's a very good deal especially when you could have better things to spend the attempts on like dmm persistent spell. i would recommend grabbing occular spell and just persisting the summons if you went the cleric route instead of using dmm rapid, especially when you pair it with extend spell and deceptive summons so they last for even longer.



Also, the difference between full and standard action summons is just not all that big of a deal.


it's the difference between doing something this round with your summon and waiting until the next one. it matters more with the summons that can cast spells, for example getting a bone devil (or 2 with malconvoker) and having it use wall of ice.



Don't do this. Malconvoker is a trap option. The big deal is that you lose a caster level, then can summon an extra evil creature with your summon monster spells. Half the time, if you hadn't lost that caster level, you could cast a higher level summon monster spell and simply summon d3 of the creatures in question. All while being a Dweomerkeeper or something.

If you want to summon, be a Druid with Greenbound Summoning. Failing that, be a Cleric and enjoy getting Domains, Turning, and a better chassis for nothing.

Wizard has some awesome spells, but it is actually a terrible class in every other respect. Any build that involves doing something another class could do is something you should do as that class.

malconvoker is fine as a prc and the wizard spell list is slightly better than the clerics. after taking the first level of malconvoker, you get spells at the same level a sorcerer does and it gives other stuff besides the ability to summon two evil creatures. the free extend is nice and the bonuses to hit and to hp are like another augment summoning. i recommend turning evil after you take all the levels you want in it and grab corrupt summoning to make all the things you summon evil, so the two summons thing applies to everything you can summon. also, i don't like rolling a 1 on that d3 and feeling like i wasted the slot and should have just used the lower level version of the spell.

[Brova]

dmm rapid costs 2 feats and turn attempts to replicate an acf that you can get for the cost of a familiar that's more of a liability to you for the earlier levels.

No, it costs you an ACF that replaces abrupt jaunt. Which is kind of insane. Also, by the time summoning is actually good, you can start doing Improved Familiar shenanigans. And Clerics are not exactly feat starved. Remember, our hypothetical Wizard is spending a pair of feats on Spell Focus (Conjuration) and Augment Summoning, one of which the Cleric gets for free and the other of which it doesn't need.


it would be 18 turn attempts to get it on 9 summon monster spells,

You're going to have trouble using summon monster spells that are even two levels bellow whatever the highest level you can cast right now is. Assuming you run around with some random utility spells, you're looking at three or four summon spells, which is nine or twelve turning attempts. That's almost doable just off of your basic turning. If you're allowed to burn random domain turning, you don't need items.


ignoring all of that, i don't think it's a very good deal especially when you could have better things to spend the attempts on like dmm persistent spell.

So the strategy is not good enough for the Cleric to consider, but the Wizard should shell out resources to do the same thing despite having a worse chassis?


it's the difference between doing something this round with your summon and waiting until the next one. it matters more with the summons that can cast spells, for example getting a bone devil (or 2 with malconvoker) and having it use wall of ice.

It depends. If you're expecting combat, it's not a difference at all. You just cast summon monster in the pre-battle buff phase where the casting time doesn't matter. If you get ambushed, it's kind of rough, but I'm not convinced that getting the extra round out is "worth it" compared to what you gave up.


the wizard spell list is slightly better than the clerics.

That's not the point. Obviously the Wizard spell list is better than the Cleric spell list (and frankly, it's massively better, particularly at low levels). Because everything else is worse. If you plan to do something that both Wizards and Clerics can do, why would you do it as a Wizard?


the free extend is nice and the bonuses to hit and to hp are like another augment summoning.

The free extend is only good if you regularly have encounters that are more than 1 round/level apart but less than 2 rounds/level. The bonuses to hit are nice, but remember that you also could have been a Druid and taken Greenbound Summoning.


also, i don't like rolling a 1 on that d3 and feeling like i wasted the slot and should have just used the lower level version of the spell.

But don't you like rolling a 3?

[Nohwl]

No, it costs you an ACF that replaces abrupt jaunt. Which is kind of insane. Also, by the time summoning is actually good, you can start doing Improved Familiar shenanigans. And Clerics are not exactly feat starved. Remember, our hypothetical Wizard is spending a pair of feats on Spell Focus (Conjuration) and Augment Summoning, one of which the Cleric gets for free and the other of which it doesn't need.

abrupt jaunt is very good, but rapid conjuration extremely hard to pass up for a summoner. i rate rapid summoning as slightly better than abrupt jaunt if you're playing a summoner. having stuff act this round instead of waiting for a round is really nice when you don't get those pre combat buff rounds. you can get augment summoning with another variant by giving up scribe scroll (which i never seem to use in games).



You're going to have trouble using summon monster spells that are even two levels bellow whatever the highest level you can cast right now is. Assuming you run around with some random utility spells, you're looking at three or four summon spells, which is nine or twelve turning attempts. That's almost doable just off of your basic turning. If you're allowed to burn random domain turning, you don't need items.

So the strategy is not good enough for the Cleric to consider, but the Wizard should shell out resources to do the same thing despite having a worse chassis?


unless i'm misremembering rapid spell, it should be 2 turn attempts per dmm rapid for 6-8. also, i prepare more than 3 or 4 summon monster spells for summoners and 14 turn attempts would be more along the lines of what i'd use, but whatever. deceptive summons makes those summon monster spells 2 levels lower than your highest spell level easier to use since it's boosting to hit and hp. along with the other boosts you can pick up from other sources the summons could end up better than you might think. get a +2 here and another +2 there...it all adds up, you know?

anyway, the cleric is spending more resources to do the same thing and i wouldn't build a summoner as wizard 20 or cleric 20. i would enter malconvoker (or some other summoning prc like thaumaturgist) as soon as possible. i'm looking at the chassis for the first 3 - 7 levels (anything that advances caster level is better than another level of cleric or wizard) and it's much harder to say if the hit to your spell list is worth the better chassis. you're not going to be much worse off as a cleric summoner, but it's easier to do battlefield control as a wizard and that works great with summons.



The free extend is only good if you regularly have encounters that are more than 1 round/level apart but less than 2 rounds/level. The bonuses to hit are nice, but remember that you also could have been a Druid and taken Greenbound Summoning.


the druid list is even worse than the clerics. summon natures ally and greenbound summoning falls off later in the game, so it depends on how long the game is expected to last and the extra duration is great for scouting in dungeons.



But don't you like rolling a 3?
i try to remove as much luck as possible from characters i play, since failing once can mean death. look up iterative probability proofing if you haven't heard of it. ignoring that, the monsters summoned are worse compared to the ones from malconvoker.

[Brova]

abrupt jaunt is very good, but rapid conjuration extremely hard to pass up for a summoner. i rate rapid summoning as slightly better than abrupt jaunt if you're playing a summoner. having stuff act this round instead of waiting for a round is really nice when you don't get those pre combat buff rounds. you can get augment summoning with another variant by giving up scribe scroll (which i never seem to use in games).

I would not consider giving up abrupt jaunt (or at higher optimization, Improved Familiar) and Spontaneous Divination to make summoning better.


i prepare more than 3 or 4 summon monster spells for summoners and 14 turn attempts would be more along the lines of what i'd use, but whatever.

Really? That's essentially all of your high level slots. Not a particularly good plan based on what you're giving up.


deceptive summons makes those summon monster spells 2 levels lower than your highest spell level easier to use since it's boosting to hit and hp.

Assume you are 9th level. The minimum to get the deceptive summons buff. Right off the bat you're casting summon monster IV instead of summon monster V. You're looking at the Fiendish Dire Wolf versus the Celestial Griffon. Average monster AC (found here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?172050-3-5-Average-Monster-Stats)) is about 21 at CR 9. Calculations assume Augment Summoning for both summoners, the Malconvoker bonus for the Malconvoker, and no other bonuses.

The Dire Wold gets one attack at +13 for 1d8+15. That's a 65% hit rate for an average damage per round of ~14.

The Celestial Griffon gets three attacks. A bite at +13 for 2d6+6. That's 65% to hit with for an average damage per round of ~8. It also gets two claws at +10 for 1d4+3. 50% to hit, average damage per round of ~4 total. That's a little bit worse, but it benefits more from buffs like Bardic Music, which you should definitely be using as a minionmancer. Also, it gets a pair of rakes on a charge, which bumps the damage up by ~6, putting it ahead or matched on damage until round four.

Defensively, the Griffon has better AC, more HP, and slightly worse saves (+5 v +6 Will).

The templates are basically equal, but smite evil is usually better than smite good.

Overall, the Griffon beats out the Dire Wolf. And remember, the Malconvoker spent a bunch of levels that could have been some other, better PrC to get here.

That's for the highest level spell you can cast. I'm not going to waste time with the assumption that you can do stuff with lower level summons.

But now let's compare to a Druid who spent a single feat on being a summoner: Greenbound Summoning. He's casting summon nature's ally V and is summoning a Greenbound Dire Lion. He doesn't have Augment Summoning or anything.

The Dire Lion gets two claws at +16 for 1d6+10 (average ~19) and a bite at +10 for 1d8+5 (average ~4). That's 23 total, more than one and a half times what either the Dire Wolf or the Griffon are doing, and it didn't even charge. It also gets better AC, better saves, better HP, various defenses, and some good SLAs (wall of thorns is a 5th level spell the Druid effectively got for free).

That seems better.

Now consider a higher level breakpoint. We're looking at 15th here. The Malconvoker gets summon monster VII, calling up a pair of Bone Devils. The not-Malconvoker gets summon monster VIII, calling up 1d3 (2) Huge Elementals. The Druid is going to cast summon nature's ally VIII, calling up 1d3 (2) Greenbound Dire Tigers.

The average monster at this level has an AC of 30.

The Bone Devils each get a bite (+16/1d8+9/average ~5), two claws (+14/1d4+5/average ~2), and a sting (+14/3d4+5/average ~3). All told that's 12 damage per round each, for a total of 24. Also some poison, which the average opponent is 20% to fail. If the fail, they lose about 3 points of Strength. They also throw down with major image and wall of ice. Not great in combat, but they do get some decent BFC. For a 7th level Wizard.

The, let's say Earth, Elementals get two slams at +21 for 2d10+11 each. That averages 17 damage per round exactly, for a total of 34. Not quite the utility of the Bone Devils, but a good bit more damage. And a great deal more HP.

Finally, the Greenbound Dire Tigers. The attack routine is two claws (+23/2d4+11/average ~11) and a bite (+17/2d6+5/average ~4). That's 26 each, beating the pair of Bone Devils individually. Also, they can drop wall of thorns and entangle. Also, they get rakes.

The Malconvoker is kind of okay, but not really great. He gets less damage and taking, but some BFC. But consider that instead of summoning, we could have tried to cast a save or die. Assuming a casting stat of roughly 30, you're looking at a DC of 28. The average opponent is less than 50% to make that if you're casting polymorph any object. So if you aren't mucking around with summon monster, you can just kill people. The Malconvoker is not looking good.


i'm looking at the chassis for the first 3 - 7 levels (anything that advances caster level is better than another level of cleric or wizard) and it's much harder to say if the hit to your spell list is worth the better chassis.

But we aren't looking at the spell list. We're looking at someone who apparently spends all their high level slots on summon monster. Given that you could totally do that as a Cleric, the fact that you lose anything at all by being a Wizard makes it a bad deal.


the extra duration is great for scouting in dungeons.

Extra duration is what animate dead or planar binding are for.


i try to remove as much luck as possible from characters i play, since failing once can mean death. look up iterative probability proofing if you haven't heard of it. ignoring that, the monsters summoned are worse compared to the ones from malconvoker.

The difference between 1 and 2 low level monsters is hardly life and death.

[Nohwl]

I would not consider giving up abrupt jaunt (or at higher optimization, Improved Familiar) and Spontaneous Divination to make summoning better.



Really? That's essentially all of your high level slots. Not a particularly good plan based on what you're giving up.

6 spells prepared means 1 or 2 per combat. kind of what i would expect from a summoner. 2 from your 3 highest spell levels would be fine.



Assume you are 9th level. The minimum to get the deceptive summons buff. Right off the bat you're casting summon monster IV instead of summon monster V. You're looking at the Fiendish Dire Wolf versus the Celestial Griffon. Average monster AC (found here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?172050-3-5-Average-Monster-Stats)) is about 21 at CR 9. Calculations assume Augment Summoning for both summoners, the Malconvoker bonus for the Malconvoker, and no other bonuses.

The Dire Wold gets one attack at +13 for 1d8+15. That's a 65% hit rate for an average damage per round of ~14.

The Celestial Griffon gets three attacks. A bite at +13 for 2d6+6. That's 65% to hit with for an average damage per round of ~8. It also gets two claws at +10 for 1d4+3. 50% to hit, average damage per round of ~4 total. That's a little bit worse, but it benefits more from buffs like Bardic Music, which you should definitely be using as a minionmancer. Also, it gets a pair of rakes on a charge, which bumps the damage up by ~6, putting it ahead or matched on damage until round four.

Defensively, the Griffon has better AC, more HP, and slightly worse saves (+5 v +6 Will).

The templates are basically equal, but smite evil is usually better than smite good.

Overall, the Griffon beats out the Dire Wolf. And remember, the Malconvoker spent a bunch of levels that could have been some other, better PrC to get here.

That's for the highest level spell you can cast. I'm not going to waste time with the assumption that you can do stuff with lower level summons.


damage is pretty much the same for both, hp is 2 lower for the wolf and that probably won't matter. saves are slightly higher for the wolf as you mentioned, but that's also probably not going to matter. ac is 3 lower for the wolf, but other than that the wolf and griffon are pretty much equal, with the griffon slightly ahead if you aren't summoning them as a standard action (wolf has a better standard action attack). not going to get into whether flight or scent and tripping is better. don't forget that this is when the malconvoker is a spell level down. you get 2 wolves once you hit 10, and the griffon definitely loses then.



But now let's compare to a Druid who spent a single feat on being a summoner: Greenbound Summoning. He's casting summon nature's ally V and is summoning a Greenbound Dire Lion. He doesn't have Augment Summoning or anything.


The Dire Lion gets two claws at +16 for 1d6+10 (average ~19) and a bite at +10 for 1d8+5 (average ~4). That's 23 total, more than one and a half times what either the Dire Wolf or the Griffon are doing, and it didn't even charge. It also gets better AC, better saves, better HP, various defenses, and some good SLAs (wall of thorns is a 5th level spell the Druid effectively got for free).

That seems better.

greenbound falls off later in the game, but it's good early on for summoners. if you look at level 10 where it's more favorable to the malconvoker, it's a different story.



Now consider a higher level breakpoint. We're looking at 15th here. The Malconvoker gets summon monster VII, calling up a pair of Bone Devils. The not-Malconvoker gets summon monster VIII, calling up 1d3 (2) Huge Elementals. The Druid is going to cast summon nature's ally VIII, calling up 1d3 (2) Greenbound Dire Tigers.

The average monster at this level has an AC of 30.

The Bone Devils each get a bite (+16/1d8+9/average ~5), two claws (+14/1d4+5/average ~2), and a sting (+14/3d4+5/average ~3). All told that's 12 damage per round each, for a total of 24. Also some poison, which the average opponent is 20% to fail. If the fail, they lose about 3 points of Strength. They also throw down with major image and wall of ice. Not great in combat, but they do get some decent BFC. For a 7th level Wizard.


bone devil stats are wrong, to hit and damage should be 2 higher for everything, it looks like deceptive summons wasn't included. this changes averages slightly...i was getting the following - bite - 6.2 damage, 2 claws - 2.85, sting - 4.35 damage for an average of 16.25 damage. since there are 2, it would be 32.5 damage from them. not going to double check the rest of the numbers.



The, let's say Earth, Elementals get two slams at +21 for 2d10+11 each. That averages 17 damage per round exactly, for a total of 34. Not quite the utility of the Bone Devils, but a good bit more damage. And a great deal more HP.

Finally, the Greenbound Dire Tigers. The attack routine is two claws (+23/2d4+11/average ~11) and a bite (+17/2d6+5/average ~4). That's 26 each, beating the pair of Bone Devils individually. Also, they can drop wall of thorns and entangle. Also, they get rakes.

the new averages make the devils more comparable to the other monsters you chose. damage for the earth elementals is higher than the devils, hp is higher but likely offset because of the much lower ac and dr, elementals don't have nearly as many skills as bone devils, and elementals are unable to spam wall of ice or other slas making their other utility lower. overall, i'd give it to the bone devils unless i'm fighting something with a lot of dr.

as for the tigers, they have higher damage. saves are pretty much the same. hp is higher for the devils. ac is pretty much the same. devils have better dr. skills are better for the devils. wall of thorns is one/day and devils can get flight or invisibility in addition to wall of ice spam, so i'm going to go with the devils for utility. the tigers lack the spam ability that bone devils have, unless your plan was to use entangle a bunch. don't think that's the best idea at 15th level though. at level 16, this changes to heavily favor the malconvoker.




The Malconvoker is kind of okay, but not really great. He gets less damage and taking, but some BFC. But consider that instead of summoning, we could have tried to cast a save or die. Assuming a casting stat of roughly 30, you're looking at a DC of 28. The average opponent is less than 50% to make that if you're casting polymorph any object. So if you aren't mucking around with summon monster, you can just kill people. The Malconvoker is not looking good.


from what i can see, malconvoker is pretty comparable even when it's a spell level behind (if you chose the same monster the malconvoker was summoning it would look like the malconvoker is even ahead when it's a spell level behind). when all builds you mentioned are casting the same level spells, it heavily favors the malconvoker. i'm having a hard time seeing it as a trap option as you described it. it's not on the level of incantatrix or initiate, but there are definitely much worse prcs to enter. as for options in combat that are better? summons are pretty reliable. if you want to spam save or dies and do nothing half the time, go for it. i don't care what you do in your game.

[Brova]

6 spells prepared means 1 or 2 per combat. kind of what i would expect from a summoner. 2 from your 3 highest spell levels would be fine.

So you're going to cast summons that are two levels down when you're half a level behind? You were already losing with max level castings, you really think dropping a Dretch or some Fiendish Wolves is going to matter at 9th level? I'm not going to waste my time on that.


you get 2 wolves once you hit 10, and the griffon definitely loses then.

Sure. But half the time the Malconvoker loses at his own game. If the specialty PrC is putting you behind the guy who sunk one feat into your shtick, it sucks.

And by the time you hit 5th level, the other guy has five levels in his PrC. So maybe he's a Red Wizard and Circle Magics his caster level up to 40. Or perhaps he's an Incantatrix and is an Incantatrix. And so on.


greenbound falls off later in the game, but it's good early on for summoners. if you look at level 10 where it's more favorable to the malconvoker, it's a different story.

Sure. You get two Dire Wolves. Your minions hit for an average of five points over what the Greenbound Dire Lion does. But wait! It didn't take a charge for its pair of rakes. Those average seven points each, and are rocking a +15 attack bonus. Also, it still gets wall of thorns and entangle, meaning the Druid effectively didn't spend a 5th level spell slot for his summon nature's ally V. I don't think the Dire Wolves win this one.


bone devil stats are wrong, to hit and damage should be 2 higher for everything, it looks like deceptive summons wasn't included. this changes averages slightly...i was getting the following - bite - 6.2 damage, 2 claws - 2.85, sting - 4.35 damage for an average of 16.25 damage. since there are 2, it would be 32.5 damage from them. not going to double check the rest of the numbers.

No. The assumptions were Malconvoker bonus + Augment Summoning. Malconvoker bonus applies only to damage, and Augment is +2 to attack and damage (varies for secondary weapons). Base is +14/1d8+5. Augment bumps that to +16/1d8+7, Malconvoker bumps it to +16/1d8+9. For reference, the relevant part of Malconvoker:


If your Bluff check to extend the duration of summoning succeeds, the creatures get a +2 bonus on weapon damage rolls and 2 extra hit points per Hit Die (in addition to the bonuses conferred by Augment Summoning).

Emphasis mine.


hp is higher for the devils.

I don't see that at all. Tigers are 120 + 32 from Greenbound, total of 152 each. Devils are 95 + 20 Malconvoker + 20 Augment, total of 135 each.


unless your plan was to use entangle a bunch. don't think that's the best idea at 15th level though.

And wall of ice is? The Bone Devils SLAs are super weak.


at level 16, this changes to heavily favor the malconvoker.

And at level 17, it swings back to favor not being a Malconvoker.


from what i can see, malconvoker is pretty comparable even when it's a spell level behind

It's really not. It tends to get less HP, comparable other defenses (outsiders are solid there), and minor utility. That's not really comparable when you realize that the Malconvoker has spent resources to specialize in this which the other guy could have spent on being a Master Specialist or Red Wizard or whatever.


(if you chose the same monster the malconvoker was summoning it would look like the malconvoker is even ahead when it's a spell level behind).

So if I don't take advantage of being a level ahead, I don't benefit from being a level ahead? While true, I don't find that argument very compelling.


when all builds you mentioned are casting the same level spells, it heavily favors the malconvoker.

Half the time he is ahead of the Cleric. Assuming the Cleric does nothing else to specialize. But he's never ahead of the Druid. At low levels, the free wall of thorns effectively makes the Druid's summons free (or even negative in cost, if he picks d3 or d4+1). At high levels, the raw stats are worse and the utility is just not there (seriously, wall of ice?). A single classed Druid gets more value from one feat (less than half the cost of being a Malconvoker) than the Malconvoker does from his class. Oh and he can PrC. And he can spontaneously cast summon nature's ally, meaning he gets to prepare spells that are good and only summon stuff when it's tactically ideal.


as for options in combat that are better? summons are pretty reliable. if you want to spam save or dies and do nothing half the time, go for it. i don't care what you do in your game.

Summons take 3+ rounds to kill level appropriate enemies, particularly the anemic Malconvoker summons. In that time you could have hit them with enough save-or-dies that they would have failed.

[Grod_The_Giant]

No, it costs you an ACF that replaces abrupt jaunt. Which is kind of insane. Also, by the time summoning is actually good, you can start doing Improved Familiar shenanigans. And Clerics are not exactly feat starved. Remember, our hypothetical Wizard is spending a pair of feats on Spell Focus (Conjuration) and Augment Summoning, one of which the Cleric gets for free and the other of which it doesn't need.
If you're going that route, you'll also get spontaneous summon monster and augment summoning as a bonus feat, don't forget. It's also a greatly superior option in terms of "not getting a book thrown at your head"-- Abrupt Jaunt is hella powerful, and much more likely to be banned. And I'd rate spontaneous summons as being on-par with spontaneous divinations-- both let spell slots do double duty*.

Look... if you want low-level power, go druid-- you'll get the best chassis and beefier early-game summons. Late-game, it's all about the wizard. For versatility, go archivist and get both sets of summon spells.

*Although cleric can certainly get spontaneous summons as well