Apparently the only good wizard is one that throws fireballs....

[Warior4356]

I joined a group that is just starting up and made a fairly basic wizard. Focusing transmutation and conjuration, with a plan to take incantrix. I send my spell book to our gm and the first thing I hear back is "you are a F***ing moron. You have banned evocation, you just lost the only thing wizards are good at." (Not those words but the intent was there.))

I try to explain my plan to use buffs, CC and crowd control (See Treantmonklvl20's guide to playing god) but I get ignored.

I am honestly not sure what I am asking at this point, I just was looking for some help, with my character, the gm, or something? I don't really know....

The books we are allowed are core (The phbs and dmg) and anything forgotten realms. Beyond that is approval only. We are playing at 3rd level and here is most of a character sheet(http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=651359), I was planning on finishing tonight, but I am thinking about metaphorically ripping it up at this point, but the party needs a wizard.

Anyways thanks in advance for any suggestions or advice.

EDIT:My spell list, or most of it, I had to remove spells from spell compendium so its incomplete. http://pastebin.com/4F1eWsSF Also banned schools are evocation, enchantment, and then either necro or illusion at 6th for incantrix.

[gooddragon1]

I joined a group that is just starting up and made a fairly basic wizard. Focusing transmutation and conjuration, with a plan to take incantrix. I send my spell book to our gm and the first thing I hear back is "you are a F***ing moron. You have banned evocation, you just lost the only thing wizards are good at." (Not those words but the intent was there.))

I try to explain my plan to use buffs, CC and crowd control (See Treantmonklvl20's guide to playing god) but I get ignored.

I am honestly not sure what I am asking at this point, I just was looking for some help, with my character, the gm, or something? I don't really know....

The books we are allowed are core (The phbs and dmg) and anything forgotten realms. Beyond that is approval only. We are playing at 3rd level and here is most of a character sheet(http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=651359), I was planning on finishing tonight, but I am thinking about metaphorically ripping it up at this point, but the party needs a wizard.

Anyways thanks in advance for any suggestions or advice.

EDIT:My spell list, or most of it, I had to remove spells from spell compendium so its incomplete. http://pastebin.com/4F1eWsSF

I have a bad feeling that your DM may get upset when you start solving encounters with one or two spells.

I also have the familiar feeling of inexperience. I used to think: Why would you ever discard a card to draw a card in Magic: The Gathering? Then much later I realized how powerful it is to be able to get rid of a land card you don't need for something you do.

Maybe your DM is hoping to convince you that evocation is better so that you won't trivialize his game. Or maybe they genuinely do not understand how powerful it is to be able to force enemies to move how you want them to. Or how insanely powerful polymorphing the fighter into a Giant or Hydra can be. Seriously, if you want to show him why transmutation is crazy good, show him what happens to the fighters stats when polymorphed into a fire giant. Or better yet, a 7 headed hydra (because you can do that from the moment you get the spell at 7th level).

[SirNMN]

I joined a group that is just starting up and made a fairly basic wizard. Focusing transmutation and conjuration, with a plan to take incantrix. I send my spell book to our gm and the first thing I hear back is "you are a F***ing moron. You have banned evocation, you just lost the only thing wizards are good at." (Not those words but the intent was there.))

I try to explain my plan to use buffs, CC and crowd control (See Treantmonklvl20's guide to playing god) but I get ignored.

I am honestly not sure what I am asking at this point, I just was looking for some help, with my character, the gm, or something? I don't really know....

The books we are allowed are core (The phbs and dmg) and anything forgotten realms. Beyond that is approval only. We are playing at 3rd level and here is most of a character sheet(http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=651359), I was planning on finishing tonight, but I am thinking about metaphorically ripping it up at this point, but the party needs a wizard.

Anyways thanks in advance for any suggestions or advice.

EDIT:My spell list, or most of it, I had to remove spells from spell compendium so its incomplete. http://pastebin.com/4F1eWsSF

he is wrong and there are plenty of good blasting spells that aren't evocation for damage even if those are the only ones he cares about. if books you can use are you going to be allowed use the collegiate wizard feat ?
wizard have all 0 level they can cast so I never bother to write them down :vaarsuvius:

for level 1 spells I would recommend take from illus color spray, and from conj a summon monster and shield if he like blaster you will see Magic missile, and from neco ray of enfeeblement

for level 2 spells maybe protection from arrows, detect thoughts is the most broken spell out side of combat, acid arrow to show that you can do damage, blur, false life, and bear's endurance or bulls strength, Pyrotechnics after a ray of enfeeblement says they have no strength :xykon:

hope that helps

[Andezzar]

Try to find out if the DM is scared of an optimized wizard and tries to steer you away from it in a roundabout way, or if he is genuinely ignorant of what a wizard can do besides throwing fireballs. If it is the latter just tell him that he should wait and see how bad you'll do. If it is the former just tone it down.

If you want to be sneaky, don't be a specialist but an Elven Generalist. (Nearly) all the benefits of specialization and no banned schools.

[nedz]

I joined a group that is just starting up and made a fairly basic wizard. Focusing transmutation and conjuration, with a plan to take incantrix. I send my spell book to our gm and the first thing I hear back is "you are a F***ing moron. You have banned evocation, you just lost the only thing wizards are good at." (Not those words but the intent was there.))
These are the two most powerful schools and you are aiming for, what is generally regarded as, a broken PrC.

I try to explain my plan to use buffs, CC and crowd control (See Treantmonklvl20's guide to playing god) but I get ignored.
Some people have to learn the hard way.

[Warior4356]

Try to find out if the DM is scared of an optimized wizard and tries to steer you away from it in a roundabout way, or if he is genuinely ignorant of what a wizard can do besides throwing fireballs. If it is the latter just tell him that he should wait and see how bad you'll do. If it is the former just tone it down.

If you want to be sneaky, don't be a specialist but an Elven Generalist. (Nearly) all the benefits of specialization and no banned schools.

Sadly we only get two prestige classes and alternate class features count as one of our two.

Also I am fairly sure he is genuinely ignorant, saying I had no utility or ability to help in combat. After talking to him he relented, saying that if I can convince the rest of the party I wont be useless they he will let it run. Also he keeps using an example of when I was playing an useless bard that did no damage. Except the useless bard wont combats with glitter dust, then just sat back and watched the party take a stomp and win the fight he was going to have to intervene with and win it. But no its because the fighter rolled well and got lucky, not my 50% miss chance.....

I apologies in advance if this is getting a bit ranty, I am still somewhat pissed about more or less being called stupid.

[gooddragon1]

Try to find out if the DM is scared of an optimized wizard and tries to steer you away from it in a roundabout way, or if he is genuinely ignorant of what a wizard can do besides throwing fireballs. If it is the latter just tell him that he should wait and see how bad you'll do. If it is the former just tone it down.

If you want to be sneaky, don't be a specialist but an Elven Generalist. (Nearly) all the benefits of specialization and no banned schools.

I disagree with surprising the DM. If you show full disclosure by showing what happens to stats with polymorph it will show that you care about the game (resolves the worry behind the potential attempt to dissuade you from breaking his game) and you show something that they might not have thought about if they genuinely don't know. It shows good faith and allows them to plan a better game.


Sadly we only get two prestige classes and alternate class features count as one of our two.

I'm sure you'll manage to struggle through...

But hey, he wants damage?

500 Explosive Runes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/explosiveRunes.htm) on postage stamps+Readied action dispel magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dispelMagic.htm)+Invisible (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/invisibility.htm) Flying (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/fly.htm) Skeleton Warrior (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/animateDead.htm)

1d20+5 to dispel and you need a 16 to succeed. that means you fail 50% of the time on average. 250 runes go off. Let's assume they make every saving throw. 6*3.5=21 average damage/2=10.5 or 10 damage*250 runes=2500 damage. With 3rd level and below spells (well animate dead is 4th level for you I guess).


You may choose to automatically succeed on dispel checks against any spell that you have cast.

[Warior4356]

I disagree with surprising the DM. If you show full disclosure by showing what happens to stats with polymorph it will show that you care about the game (resolves the worry behind the potential attempt to dissuade you from breaking his game) and you show something that they might not have thought about if they genuinely don't know. It shows good faith and allows them to plan a better game.

I think he would reply to the effect, "You might be somewhat useful then but until then you would not be useful, and a detriment to the party who would be lacking in power, and all die because of you."

[Andezzar]

Sadly we only get two prestige classes and alternate class features count as one of our two.I'm pretty sure you will be fine with Generalist Wizardry, possibly Spontaneous Divination and only wizard levels. Metamagic reducers are great but not necessary.


I think he would reply to the effect, "You might be somewhat useful then but until then you would not be useful, and a detriment to the party who would be lacking in power, and all die because of you."Polymorph is not the only tool in his box.

[Bullet06320]

I had DM once call me stooooopid for banning evocation, he changed his mind when my 8th level conjuror beat down his BBEG in one round with summoned huge skeletons on our first meeting
ruined the plot with one well placed spell, LOLOLOL

[gooddragon1]

I think he would reply to the effect, "You might be somewhat useful then but until then you would not be useful, and a detriment to the party who would be lacking in power, and all die because of you."

Look at my above post if he's worried about damage ;)

Just attach the stamps to arrows and detonate maybe two or three at a time with dispel magic. Or six :/. (Have your skeleton carry them in a bag (dispel needs line of sight to affect something, but even if he did your skeleton is what will be detonated)). If that does happen, make sure to say "Zanen" (not sure if I'm spelling that right) as you use your battlefield control and other strategies to great effect.

This statement makes me think you're starting at level 1.

I don't have experience in that level range I admit.

[Warior4356]

Mmmmm, I like the ideas. I just need to come up with a good way to get a shot. Also what 3 schools would people recoment banning?

[Bullet06320]

I usually ban illusion and enchantment, then bounce back n forth with either necromancy or evocation

sometimes all 4 depending on the build

[Florian]

@Warior4356:

Take your time and find out what level of optimization and what exact game style will be going on with this particular group and the gm.
Playing a GOD Wizard is most of the time a very good choice, but you´ll also need a group that accepts that its presence in the party will substantially alter the feel and tempo of the game.

If it comes down to "No prep time, just kick in the door and kill everything in sight", then both you and the other players will be frustrated by non-compatible tactics.

[gooddragon1]

Mmmmm, I like the ideas. I just need to come up with a good way to get a shot. Also what 3 schools would people recoment banning?

Not sure about the schools, but if by getting a shot you mean shooting the arrow with the runes at it, you can just aim at the 5 foot square they are standing in. That's AC 10 (medium creature basically, I know there's rules for this in the SRD, just not where those rules are).

[ExLibrisMortis]

Up to what level will you be playing? Will you be using greater shadow evocation to emulate contingency, or limited wish, or planar binding, or nothing at all? Will you use planar binding to get minions, or do you need animate dead to get permanent allies?

Ban either Illusion or Necromancy, based on the answers to questions like that. Enchantment and Evocation you already have, you can't ban Divination or Abjuration, and you shouldn't ban Conjuration and Transmutation (as you said).

[oxybe]

look man.

look.

Poly-freaking-morph

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/remorhaz.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/treant.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hydra.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/wyvern.htm

Remorhaz is, huge (reach!), has improved grab (at +23!), can swallow whole and deal 2d8+12 points of bludgeoning damage plus 8d6 points of fire damage per round from the remorhaz’s gizzard. bananas. a solid 21 bludgeon + 28 fire average, per round. it can hold 4 medium creatures in it's belly.

Treant has all the plant trait goodies:Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects), poison, sleep effects, paralysis, polymorph, and stunning in addition to not being subject to critical hits, DR, is huge (reach!) an adequate AC and can cast because they have hands and mouths. plus they deal double damage to objects and are equipped with a 29str score.

Hydra goes MULTIATTACK, LOL! that that's it. it's all you really need to know. 7 attacks man. 7 attacks.

Wyvern is another option, if only for the initial/secondary 2d6 con poison set at fort DC 17.

all of which are available at level 7, when polymorph comes online.

polymorph is a dumb spell. so much dumb.

but it's a potent dumb.

[gooddragon1]

look man.

look.

Poly-freaking-morph

...

polymorph is a dumb spell. so much dumb.

but it's a potent dumb.


Stinky Cheese: spells that are broken, broken, broken.


Level 4:
-Polymorph: far better than any other spell of its level, and many higher-level spells. The things you can do with this are ridiculous. It's completely broken, so much so WotC has given up on trying to fix it. Just don't use it.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?104002-3-5e-The-Logic-Ninja-s-Guide-to-Wizards-Being-Batman



Level 2:
-Alter Self: give yourself +6 natural armor, or flight, for 10 min/level with a level 2 spell? Like all the polymorph spells, way too good for its level--not so broken you probably shouldn't use it in a game, though. Combine with the Otherworldly feat for even more cheese.

Level 8:
-Polymorph Any Object: the worst of the lot. Turn yourself into a gold dragon and gain its INT score plus everything else? Come on. Most broken spell in the game.

Level 9:
-Shapechange: CL up to 25 HD monsters. Gain their (Su) special qualities and attacks as well as the (Ex) ones. Completely and utterly ridiculous, as a more powerful Polymorph of course must be. Don't use this.

Complete Series
-Craft Contingent Spell: Brokenly good. The limiting factor on Contingency is that wizards can only have one. With this spell, a wizard will have one for any situation that could conceivably harm him. Don't take it as a player and don't allow it as a DM.

-Gate: so many abuses. So very many. For example, Gate in creatures that can cast Wish as a (Su) ability and make them give you free wishes.

Incantatrix: The classic uber PrC of 3.5--Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil has defense, this has offense and general utility. Not one, not two, not three--four totally overpowered abilities: Metamagic Effect, Cooperative Metamagic, Metamagic Spell Trigger, and Practical Metamagic. And another fistful of non-broken but *good* abilities on top of that. Get an item that boosts your Spellcraft checks (make one yourself) and you're in wizard heaven.

[Beheld]

You definitely want Color Spray on your level 1 list. As a level 3 Wizard you are going to face lots of things that still just lose to Color Spray, and when something does only have 4HD, Color Spray is often better than Glitterdust. Also you are probably going to want offensive spells in your lower level slots because you are still at the point where you need those slots for offense as the day drags on.

As far as your DM goes... Honestly, never attribute to malice what can by attributed to ignorance, he's probably not trying to dissuade you from being too powerful by lying, he's probably just genuinely ignorant. Tell him, actually, my conjuration and illusion spells will contribute significantly to combat and do things that no one else can do.

Also, do you have a Rogue in the party? Sometimes people forget that you also need to kill the things once you get to that point, and Rogues do the absolute most damage to people blinded or blinded and stunned, they can be flask throwing rogues, archer rogues, or melee rogues, just so long as they try to get multiple attacks, and then attack the stunned or blinded enemies.

As far as banning schools, Definitely ban Evocation and Enchantment. Enchantment is for some really minor buffs and for some complete game breaking Dominates and charms, and for some not as good save or dies. You really don't need it. As for the third, Necromancy and Illusion are your two choices. For the most party Necromancy is the weird everything school, Illusion is a power school, but most of it's power is front loaded, if you can still cast spells you learned before banning, just get Greater Invis, Greater Mirror Image, and Silent Image on your list before you ban it and you have most of what you need.

[Elkad]

I've played with a similar DM.
Make sure you have something to do after you lay down your BFC so you are "still contributing", even if the "fight" should just be watching the fighter you Enlarged and Hasted mop up blind and stunned enemies.
Reserve feat, elf longbow, a combat familiar or summon to push around, etc.

And there is a pretty good chance you'll frustrate your DM if he thinks combat is all about hitpoints. No matter how well your current favorite spell is working, don't just chain it at everything.
I mixed it up a lot. One fight I'd overuse tactical teleports, the next I'd summon a bunch of fiendish apes, the next I'd just buff the party to high heaven, etc.

[MisterKaws]

I disagree with surprising the DM. If you show full disclosure by showing what happens to stats with polymorph it will show that you care about the game (resolves the worry behind the potential attempt to dissuade you from breaking his game) and you show something that they might not have thought about if they genuinely don't know. It shows good faith and allows them to plan a better game.



I'm sure you'll manage to struggle through...

But hey, he wants damage?

500 Explosive Runes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/explosiveRunes.htm) on postage stamps+Readied action dispel magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dispelMagic.htm)+Invisible (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/invisibility.htm) Flying (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/fly.htm) Skeleton Warrior (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/animateDead.htm)

1d20+5 to dispel and you need a 16 to succeed. that means you fail 50% of the time on average. 250 runes go off. Let's assume they make every saving throw. 6*3.5=21 average damage/2=10.5 or 10 damage*250 runes=2500 damage. With 3rd level and below spells (well animate dead is 4th level for you I guess).

You can choose to take 1 in any check you make, just take 1 for all of it.


Not sure about the schools, but if by getting a shot you mean shooting the arrow with the runes at it, you can just aim at the 5 foot square they are standing in. That's AC 10 (medium creature basically, I know there's rules for this in the SRD, just not where those rules are).

Unless the square they're in is moving around(What the...), the AC is 5 for 0 dex.

[Chronos]

I'm actually not seeing a problem here. Rather, this seems like almost an ideal situation. You get to do awesome stuff that you know is making a difference, so you're not feeling left out, and meanwhile your DM thinks that what you're doing is irrelevant, and so doesn't feel overshadowed. I can't see any problems arising until and unless the DM learns better, and at that point you just have another discussion with him to go from there.

[Andezzar]

You can choose to take 1 in any check you make, just take 1 for all of it.Please quote that rule.

[Âmesang]

My last group was like this since I had built my spellcaster primarily for utility. I mean, anyone can do damage — I wanted to do the things the others couldn't, like greater teleport, fly, protection from energy, locate object, Rary's interplanar telepathic bond, &c., &c.

Admittedly it's not easy when you're not playing a wizard and your spell selection is very limited, but I wanted to do as much as I could and not just blast everything in sight; that's why her damage spells are basically limited to disintegrate (since it can also destroy large objects, walls of force, and forcecages) and cone of cold (though I've been thinking of giving her the fiery version, Keraptis' flamecone, just 'cause I like named spells, but since she'll soon pick up the archmage ability, "mastery of elements," well…). Her other offense spells are essentially greater invisibility (rogues love this, no?), the occasional enervation, dimensional anchor to trap teleporting foes, and the always popular Evard's black tentacles. Telekinesis is fun, too, especially considering what's in theaters right now, ha ha.

The chaotic-evil in me hopes you can pour through the books and pull up some fine spell combinations to prove that wizards are good for more than just blasting… but the lawful-good in me would prefer, as a DM, to have my player sit down with me and explain how his character works so I can be prepared (not only for proper challenges, but for good opportunities to show his stuff).

Granted, I like to think I'm a bit more open minded than Warior's DM. :smalltongue:

(I like the evocation school 'cause explosions are cool, but really I think the only spell any wizard would "need" is contingency — admittedly I gave up on giving my character the shadow spells 'cause I figured, with my group, it'd cause too many headaches trying to explain how it'd all work and I didn't need the stress. I do kind of miss my "celestial shadow eagles" with the Hover feat, though. I'd have used "fiendish ravens" for flavor, but they lack reach.)

[MisterKaws]

Please quote that rule.

I don't specifically remember where it's at, but if you take a look, every place where it would count as something good, it's mentioned, like when you're subject to friendly spells, you can just "fail" your saves on purpose, that's also why curse of Lycanthropy is considered an insta-ban, because you can do legendary/paragon/behemoth/dire/advanced animal lycanthropy cheese, all in a single spell.

It also works fluff-wise, you're basically just using an "incomplete" cast of dispel to stir the runes and make them activate.

Oh, forgot to mention something: If you really want to show the usefullness of transmutation as early as possible, try to cheese alter self, best races for cheesing it are Duskling for fey(MoI, so pretty hard), Dragonwrought Kobold for Dragons(RotD, hard to get through, bonus points if you can get loredrake for the earliest ultimate magus entry possible), Elans for aberration(EPH, easy to get thru if someone is using psionics), and the otherworldy feat with a valid race for the instant DMG-to-the-face native outsider(This is FR, so it's already approved).

[nedz]

Please quote that rule.

From here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#savingThrow)

Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw

A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic can suppress this quality.
But that doesn't quite cover this.

Targeted Dispel

You automatically succeed on your dispel check against any spell that you cast yourself.

Area Dispel

You may choose to automatically succeed on dispel checks against any spell that you have cast.

So nogo on a Targeted Dispel, but an area ...
Can't do this on Skill checks or Caster level checks

... bear with me I'm still looking.

Nope — I can find no such rule.

[ericgrau]

I joined a group that is just starting up and made a fairly basic wizard. Focusing transmutation and conjuration, with a plan to take incantrix. I send my spell book to our gm and the first thing I hear back is "you are a F***ing moron. You have banned evocation, you just lost the only thing wizards are good at." (Not those words but the intent was there.))

I try to explain my plan to use buffs, CC and crowd control (See Treantmonklvl20's guide to playing god) but I get ignored.

I am honestly not sure what I am asking at this point, I just was looking for some help, with my character, the gm, or something? I don't really know....

The books we are allowed are core (The phbs and dmg) and anything forgotten realms. Beyond that is approval only. We are playing at 3rd level and here is most of a character sheet(http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=651359), I was planning on finishing tonight, but I am thinking about metaphorically ripping it up at this point, but the party needs a wizard.

Anyways thanks in advance for any suggestions or advice.

EDIT:My spell list, or most of it, I had to remove spells from spell compendium so its incomplete. http://pastebin.com/4F1eWsSF Also banned schools are evocation, enchantment, and then either necro or illusion at 6th for incantrix.
I think it's a matter of hard head vs hard head. Narrow forum ideas vs narrow DM. It is a pretty dumb idea to ban evocation in core + limited books. Especially at level 3 with no spell compendium. I can see how you would have a hard time justifying your plans with your limited options remaining when overall your level 3 options are severely limited; there's not much evidence left to justify with. At best you can say your remaining spell options are good but you still banned half your good spells. Crowd control is good. Most buffs are mediocre except haste and greater invisibility, which you can't cast yet.

Do you have a party cleric? Try banning abjuration instead. Do you have a bard or someone else who will get haste and/or illusion spells? Then you can ditch transmutation and/or illusion. And even without another caster illusion isn't 100% essential. It can be nice but you have other nice spells you can cast instead without losing much. If you really can't ban 2 of these then ban necromancy. Enchantment is usually fine to ban.

Evocation spells to take: shocking grasp, burning hands and flaming sphere. Take magic missile by level 5, but I wouldn't prepare it just yet. Magic missile or empowered magic missile is a nice backup tactic; not a main tactic. Ditch the first 3 spells later but at level 3 they're good. You may want false life for hp if you use the first two. Color spray and sleep are ok but at level 3 they're already losing usefulness while these evocations are getting better. Yes you should suck it up and take fireball. Get crowd control too, but fireball is worth taking at least until level 8 or so when SR comes up, if not later too. Fire resistance is a joke and fire immunity is rare btw; SR is the big concern. Later wall of force is a must. Resilient sphere is also a "must" but there are lots of other awesome 4th level spells too.

4th level is the spell level to show off conjuration to your DM if you want to do that. Greater invisibility and stoneskin are nice too. Polymorph is nice but tag allies and have the book-keeping and number calculations done before game. Or it will only give everyone headaches and only prove what a jerk you are about making your point. Questionable explosive runes tactics are also a jerk move, both because the rules are questionable and because it'd be bad form even if it wasn't questionable.

Also since I think the treantmonk guide misses them or doesn't emphasis them enough, web and sleet storm are awesome crowd control. Grease is severely over-rated. Glitterdust is nice but not as good as web. Web also combos nicely with flaming sphere and burning hands. Empowered ray of enfeeblement is amazing. If you want to show off what you can do without damage then that is your #1 option at level 5. Between it and false life is why I say to ban necromancy only as a last resort; perhaps even considering banning illusion first. Right now your best cc option is web and ideally you want to combo that with flaming sphere/burning hands so it's only a start if you want to make a point.

Anyway not only is all this a good idea for a strong build, but also if you compromise a little then maybe you can convince the DM that there are some awesome non-damage spells too.

[NuclearCommando]

My players had a mindset like that, but that was because they were quite new to the game, so it was excusable. I spent an entire lunch time talking to them about how horrifically broken non evocation casters could get, and at the end, they were pretty convinced about it.

I suggest you just calmly talk it out, give him a few mechanical scenarios and show how any optimized wizard deals with it. Compare that to evocation specialists, and watch as his face melts and he bans wizards entirely.

[ericgrau]

I spent an entire lunch time talking to them about how horrifically broken non evocation casters could get, and at the end, they were pretty convinced about it.

I suggest you just calmly talk it out, give him a few mechanical scenarios and show how any optimized wizard deals with it. Compare that to evocation specialists, and watch as his face melts and he bans wizards entirely.
Is using broken moves and getting wizards banned to make a point really the answer?

Play with PO instead of TO, and show him that there are some good non-damaging crowd control spells too. Don't use broken cheese moves with questionable rules.

[Pluto!]

@OP

Who cares?

Just play the game.

Going out of your way to make a point is petty and the actual value of your contributions playing party support aren't well quantitatively measured, so you're just going to get frustrated talking past each other about something that's really stupid to get worked up over.

[P.F.]

@Warior4356:

Take your time and find out what level of optimization and what exact game style will be going on with this particular group and the gm.
Playing a GOD Wizard is most of the time a very good choice, but you´ll also need a group that accepts that its presence in the party will substantially alter the feel and tempo of the game.

If it comes down to "No prep time, just kick in the door and kill everything in sight", then both you and the other players will be frustrated by non-compatible tactics.

This. If you try to plan to use these tactics, you are going to need a party that appreciates and supports you. It doesn't matter that you're technically using the best strategy if the other players aren't having fun.

For example, the fighter will generally appreciate enlarge person, but if he's stacked into WF/WS/Greater-Specialization-type feats he might resent being turned into a pyrohydra and having to leave off his favourite magic sword.

Battlefield control works well in large open-area combats with some existing obstacles/hazards ... in a small dungeon setting you could find yourself struggling to line up an AoE that affects more than one goon and doesn't get in the way of other party members or subject them to friendly fire. Your friends may remember being annoyed that they had to wait for you to dismiss your spell before they could get to the other bad guys on round 5 more than they appreciate that the bad guys couldn't get to them on rounds 2-4.

The same goes for summoning. It doesn't matter how well your summons fight; they aren't going to be appreciated if they are blocking the archer's line-of-sight or the beatstick's line-of-charge or the rogue's line-of-escape. And, the more summoning you do the longer it will take you to manage them, both on your turn as you direct and roll for them, and in general bookkeeping of hit-points, status effects, spell durations, and so on.

For that matter, your party might get tired of waiting for you to prepare different spells every time you get a new piece of information, or looking up the descriptions of your spells every time you want to cast something. Your DM may get tired of nonstop knowledge-checks fishing for hints about which spells to prepare, or of looking up the descriptions of every spell you cast because she wants to read them for herself.

Especially at low levels, theoretically optimal spells can still be unwieldy, ineffective, impractical, or underwhelming.

On the other end of the spectrum, even non-direct-damage spells which are too effective can overshadow other party members, trivialize the DM's prepared challenges, or simply make the game seem ridiculous. Incantrix is easily the worst offender for these sorts of problems, so tread carefully on this side as well.

In my experience a surprise scry-and-die will work exactly once, after which all enemies will have some sort of defense against scrying and/or teleportation ... that also goes for any other spells which your DM may have undervalued.

Yes, the rules say you can do all sorts of game-breaking things, but most DM's don't want to turn their campaign into the Tippyverse and will both resent you for trying to do so and try to prevent it from happening, by fiat/banhammer if necessary.

Probably you want to strike a balance between highly optimized personal protection/battlefield control and mid-optimized buffing/blasting/debuffing. Basically, an effective God-wizard needs to operate with all appropriate subtlety and finesse, while still having the option to break out the big guns for a do-it-yourself-Deus-ex-machina rescue when absolutely necessary.

[Beheld]

I think it's a matter of hard head vs hard head. Narrow forum ideas vs narrow DM. It is a pretty dumb idea to ban evocation in core + limited. Especially at level 3. I can see how you would have a hard time justifying your plans with your limited options remaining when overall your level 3 options are severely limited; there's not much evidence left to justify with. At best you can say your remaining half spells are good but you still banned half your useful spells. Crowd control is good. Most buffs are mediocre except haste, which you can't cast yet.

Do you have a party cleric? Try banning abjuration instead. Do you have a bard or someone else who will get haste and/or illusion spells? Then you can ditch transmutation and/or illusion. And even without another caster illusion isn't 100% essential. It can be nice but you have other nice spells you can cast instead without losing much and it isn't essential. If you can't ban 2 of these then ban necromancy. Enchantment is usually fine to ban.

Evocation spells to take: shocking grasp, burning hands and flaming sphere. Take magic missile by level 5, but I wouldn't prepare it just yet. Magic missile or empowered magic missile is a nice backup tactic; not a main tactic. Ditch the first 3 spells later but at level 3 they're good. You may want false life for hp if you use the first two. Color spray and sleep are ok but at level 3 they're already losing usefulness while these evocations are getting better. Yes you should suck it up and take fireball. Get crowd control too, but fireball is worth taking at least until level 8 or so when SR comes up, if not later too. Fire resistance is a joke and fire immunity is rare btw; SR is the big concern. Later wall of force is a must. Resilient sphere is also a "must" but there are lots of other awesome 4th level spells too.

4th level is the spell level to show off conjuration to your DM if you want to do that. Greater invisibility and stoneskin are nice too. Polymorph is nice but tag allies and have the book-keeping and number calculations done before game. Or it will only give everyone headaches and only prove what a jerk you are about making your point. Questionable explosive runes tactics are also a jerk move, both because the rules are questionable and because it'd be bad form even if it wasn't questionable.

Also since I think the treantmonk guide misses them or doesn't emphasis them enough, web and sleet storm are awesome crowd control. Grease is severely over-rated. Glitterdust is nice but not as good as web. Web also combos nicely with flaming sphere and burning hands. Empowered ray of enfeeblement is amazing. If you want to show off what you can do without damage then that is your #1 option at level 5. Between it and false life is why I say to ban necromancy only as a last resort; perhaps even considering banning illusion first. Right now your best cc option is web and ideally you want to combo that with flaming sphere/burning hands so it's only a start.

Anyway not only is all this a good idea for a strong build, but also if you compromise a little then maybe you can convince the DM that there are some awesome non-damage spells too.

You can't ban abjuration, because Incantatrix doesn't allow that. Evocation offers little to nothing, a spell spent on Burning hands or shocking grasp is a waste if it could have been spent on Color Spray or Silent Image, A spell spent on Flaming Sphere is a super waste compared to Glitterdust. Glitterdust kills people when the rogue attacks them, Web prevents them from being involved in the fight, if there is only one enemy, casting Web ain't great. But sometimes Web is super useful, and when it is, under absolutely no circumstance should you burn down your own spell for an extra 2d4 fire damage. If casting a second level spell for 2d4 fire damage was a good idea you would live in a different universe. Fire resistance is not a joke, and both Fire resistance and Immunity are much more common than Ericgrau wishes they were. Flaming Sphere is 2d6 damage per round, Reflex Negates, even if they fail the save, that's an average of 2 damage to something with FR 5 and average zero to something with FR 10.

Now, even though there aren't any devils at CR 3 (only, 1, 2, 5, and 6), still CR 3 is already filled with creatures who are going to laugh at you for casting Flaming Sphere, much less Burning Hands.

Immune: Xorn, Flamebrother Salamander, Steam Mephit, Magma Mephit, Fire Mephit, Magmin, Hellhound, Fire Elemental, Red Dragon, Brass Dragon, Gold Dragon
FR 10: Juvenile Tojanida, Formian Warrior, Assassin Vine, Arrowhawk, Animated Objects (Hardness)

So right off the bat, 17/70 CR 3 monsters just straight up ignore you if you cast Flaming Sphere, as compared to glitterdust which blinds all but the Ooze, which you just walk away from. There are also two incorporeal monsters, and two monsters with SR, but since Glitterdust is SR: No, and in corporeality effects both spells, that's not a point in favor of Flaming Sphere. Monsters also have higher Ref saves than will saves at this level, and if you do manage to do average 7 damage to some of these monsters, their care factor is pretty low. Glitterdust should add at least 4d6 damage, if not 6d6 damage on the round you cast it to the Rogues attacks, and again each round.

Heck, first level illusion spells outperform flaming sphere, since you can silent image into passivity the animated objects, the skeletons, the zombies, and the Vermin. You can walk away from the plants and Ooze, and you can Color Spray everything else and get at least what you could get out of Flaming Sphere (it at least blinds and stuns for 1d4 rounds everything except, Fiendish Centipede, Huge Snake, Dire Wolf and Ape, Ethereal Filcher, Ettercap, Howler, and Cockatrice, and those it still stuns for one round. Some things it renders unconscious/blinded/stunned for 2d4 rounds, so you can coup de grace them).

I mean, no matter what spells you prepare, you probably won't do much to an Allip or a Shadow, but that's life when super low level, even magic missile doesn't do much to those. Hope you have some magic weapons before you face them.

I mean Elementals are immune to Stun, so you will only be blinding them and then pointing the DPS at the (rogue can't SA them), but aside from that you'd rather have level 1 illusion spells than level 2 Evocation spells. Swarms exist, so someone should carry around acid flasks, but one uncommon enemy type is a poor reason to ban an actually good school over evocation.

Grease is overrated, unless you have a rogue, then it works like as either a prone effect or a death effect enemies choice (if they can't fly). Definitely ban evocation super mega hard, if you could ban evocation twice you would do it.

[mostholycerebus]

I find, the higher your initiative level is, the less you need to worry about 'being on the same page'. When you lay down a wall, or Sleep the BBEG, or take out all the mooks, the party will see it and adapt.

[tomandtish]

This. If you try to plan to use these tactics, you are going to need a party that appreciates and supports you. It doesn't matter that you're technically using the best strategy if the other players aren't having fun.

For example, the fighter will generally appreciate enlarge person, but if he's stacked into WF/WS/Greater-Specialization-type feats he might resent being turned into a pyrohydra and having to leave off his favourite magic sword.


P. F. has hit on the most important thing here, and what is often the root problem in most player conflicts.

In the end, this is a game and it is supposed to be fun. And if one or more people aren’t having fun then something is wrong.

Since it sounds like the DM is ignorant of what an optimized wizard can do, I’d suggest asking them to run a one-shot for you and the rest of the group so you can show them your playstyle (honestly, this is always a good idea when bringing a new person into an existing group). This allows everyone to see what you can do and how you play, and allows you to do the same for them. You can even make the wizard use the concepts as for the campaign, so they’ll know what to expect.

Because that’s often the biggest problem in roleplaying: different expectations. It’s why the paladin and the thief clash, and why the player of the CE character wonders why everyone hates him.

Once you’ve done the one-shot, everyone has an idea of what to expect from everyone else. Do the playing styles mesh? Then you’re good to go. If not? Then it’s decision time. Can someone (not necessarily you) change? Are they willing to? Or would they feel more comfortable somewhere else?

Note: I say not necessarily you, because it might be that most of the rest of the group likes the changes and it is one holdout who doesn’t. I’ve seen that happen before (usually from whomever has been the leading light in play up to that point).

[NuclearCommando]

Is using broken moves and getting wizards banned to make a point really the answer?

Play with PO instead of TO, and show him that there are some good non-damaging crowd control spells too. Don't use broken cheese moves with questionable rules.

That's not what I said. I said talk to him about it, and inform him that no, evocation wizards are in fact the least optimized wizards.

[nedz]

That's not what I said. I said talk to him about it, and inform him that no, evocation wizards are in fact the least optimized wizards.

You assume he will listen, better to demonstrate the point perhaps ?

I don't know the DM, but he sounds quite opinionated — based on the OP's comments.

Though not by using cheese, that will just get the cheddar banned — and the point will be missed, just standard spells.

[NuclearCommando]

You assume he will listen, better to demonstrate the point perhaps ?

I don't know the DM, but he sounds quite opinionated — based on the OP's comments.

Though not by using cheese, that will just get the cheddar banned — and the point will be missed, just standard spells.

Good point, I suppose I didn't consider how opinionated the GM sounded. But honestly, at that point, just play the way you like and ignore his insults is all I can suggest. Using cheese ends up antagonizing the GM, but if you just play evocation, you might not enjoy it. And I don't have any experience with GMs like that to figure out some other suggestion that would work.

[Nifft]

You're starting at level 3?

My one suggestion would be to take the Fiery Burst feat, if possible, so you can show that you're "actually contributing" during all those rounds where the fight is already won and you're just waiting for your meat-shields to finish hacking through the HP of your foes (who are already stunned / asleep / blind / otherwise incapacitated).

This might make the DM and the players feel like you're playing the same game they are, rather than allowing them to contribute to your inevitable victory.

[DarkSonic1337]

You could show him the amount of damage that 1 casting of haste accomplishes and compare that to fireball. Instead of saying "your monsters miss 50% of the time if I blind them" say "your monsters average 50% less damage if I blind them."


That did the trick when I was explaining buffer/debuffers to a lot of players. You are increasing your PARTY's damage and mitigating damage to your party, it's just a lot of people don't understand probability is something you can manipulate.

[Douglas]

It sounds like your GM is both ignorant of a wizard's non-evocation potential and likely to downplay anything you do accomplish in game because, let's face it, the enemy actions that didn't happen because of you are a lot less memorable than the enemy kills that did happen because of party damage dealing.

I suggest that you offer to run some trial combats with your GM. He generates some typical encounters of various types, and the party fights each encounter twice - once with you playing an evocation blaster wizard, and once with you playing your transmuter/conjurer. The rest of the party is identical in each run, with full resets of everything before each encounter. Record and compare party resources spent, hp, spell slots, and consumables, for blaster vs controller runs of each encounter. If he agrees and runs it fairly, this should definitively settle the issue. The down side is that running such a trial could easily take an entire gaming session on its own, and he and your party might not be willing to put that much effort into the debate.

Short of trial combats, I doubt you'll be able to convince him unless something spectacular - and spectacularly memorable - happens in game that you can forever after point to as an example of your controller wizard inarguably doing something amazing.

[Chronos]

On the Explosive Runes trick, even if you can't choose to auto-fail your dispel check, you can choose to cast the Dispel Magic at a lower caster level. Exactly how low is up to some debate, but you can certainly cast it at CL 5, which will still leave it failing against most of your Explosive Runes.

Besides, what matter if it only triggers half of them, instead of all? You can still pile on as much damage as you choose, that way.

[ericgrau]

You can't ban abjuration, because Incantatrix doesn't allow that. Evocation offers little to nothing, a spell spent on Burning hands or shocking grasp is a waste if it could have been spent on Color Spray or Silent Image, A spell spent on Flaming Sphere is a super waste compared to Glitterdust.
...

Once you get to level 3-4 the burning hands is often enough to kill on a failed save, if not at least damage on a passed save. There are more foes immune to color spray than there are immune to fire. Plus if you can't tell a magma mephit is fire immune and you cast flaming sphere instead of web it's you're own fault. And really, baby dragons and mephits? Every single one of those fire immune foes is a super rare low level DM choice. While stun immune foes like zombies are not. Likewise the flaming sphere is very likely to kill a foe from 1 spell, while the glitterdust is a matter of save luck. Shocking grasp is likewise often a 1 shot no save kill starting at level 3. Finally burning hands and flaming sphere get even better with web, making them head and shoulders above glitterdust at this level.

I pick web over glitterdust because it helps a great deal even on a passed save and has a larger area. Once a foe is delayed 2-3 rounds he might as well be killed because he won't help his allies and then after his allies are gone it'll be 4v1. The only reason to even flaming sphere him is if he is a big bad and will be trouble by himself. Even then you basically killed all his minions with one spell because while he is delayed the party will easily take out his minions. Did this to an owlbear once. On a passed save. Meanwhile another character had to deal with save after save on his glitterdusts. Web has always fared far better for me.

Don't even know where to begin on silent image. It doesn't work as well as you say in combat. Have you tried it in a RAW fight with saves? Run any numbers at all?

4v4 in a "challenging" shadow fight EL 7 vs party level 5 a single magic missile reliably takes out half its health in one round. An empowered one 3/4 of its health. In a "routine" EL 7 vs party level 7 fight that changes to 3/4 health and dead in one round. Everyone else better have scroll/oil of magic weapon (25/50 gp) or a +1 weapon (2,000 gp out of 9,000 gp for something that's otherwise nearly useless) and even then it's about 1/4 of its health per round on average. I hope the casters don't give up against the special foes as the fighters that easily damaged the other foes for them will be pretty miffed. If you don't have magic missile then another higher damage spell that's reduced to half effectiveness is almost as good.

[Warior4356]

In terms of optimization allowed, I need to be careful whit not doing anything obvious. Also cheese wise, if it makes sense with the spirit and letter of the rules and in actuality he will allow it, like I don't think greater shadow evocation for contingency would work.

And to everyone who is saying just play, to actually play I need to convince the rest of the party it will be useful. Ive talked to 3 out 6 and they were okay but they were the easy ones.

That reminds me of one other question, I was banning evocation and enchantment, but losing illusion or nerco really hurts. How bad is not specializing? Or if I do which one is better to ban, since I have to ban 3?

[mabriss lethe]

I suggest rethinking bringing an incantatrix to the table for this GM. In your shoes, I'd probably go for a generalist wizard. I know that specialists are strictly better, but that's not the point. If your DM honestly doesn't realize the power your proposed build has to wreck encounters..... well... Things will be more fun for everyone at the table if you tone things down a bit. If you're feeling froggy, use your 2 PrC choices for Loremaster and (maybe)Archmage. Not because they're particularly good, but because they do offer a bit more than Wiz 20, don't lose caster levels, and are right in the DMG.

As for play style, "give in" to the way the DM thinks it should go. Add an evocation or two to your spellbook to keep him happy. Just because it's in your spellbook doesn't mean you have to prepare it all the time, or to the exclusion of better options. (Though having access to the occasional blasting spell is still useful, even to a god wizard.) Early on set up a "compromise" play style. Hit your enemies with BFCs and other goodies and then decide to become "useful" with a little blasting. Maybe pick up a wand of fireball. As time goes on, slowly switch your tactics around, and blast less and less.

[Warior4356]

I suggest rethinking bringing an incantatrix to the table for this GM. In your shoes, I'd probably go for a generalist wizard. I know that specialists are strictly better, but that's not the point. If your DM honestly doesn't realize the power your proposed build has to wreck encounters..... well... Things will be more fun for everyone at the table if you tone things down a bit. If you're feeling froggy, use your 2 PrC choices for Loremaster and (maybe)Archmage. Not because they're particularly good, but because they do offer a bit more than Wiz 20, don't lose caster levels, and are right in the DMG.

As for play style, "give in" to the way the DM thinks it should go. Add an evocation or two to your spellbook to keep him happy. Just because it's in your spellbook doesn't mean you have to prepare it all the time, or to the exclusion of better options. (Though having access to the occasional blasting spell is still useful, even to a god wizard.) Early on set up a "compromise" play style. Hit your enemies with BFCs and other goodies and then decide to become "useful" with a little blasting. Maybe pick up a wand of fireball. As time goes on, slowly switch your tactics around, and blast less and less.

I was going to play a very toned down incantrix. Also do I really ban illusion enchantment and necromancy?

[ericgrau]

Average Monster HP:

CRHP
1/44
1/26.59
112.24
221
327


Note that the EL for 4 foes = CR + 4, except that 2 CR 1/2 or 4 CR 1/4 foes = EL 1. This is why damage works well at low level. If you can almost always deal ~15 damage with a flaming sphere at level 3 (on average), it's a reliable auto kill of your share from 1 round's worth of effort in what was supposed to be a difficult fight. Vs. hoping he fails his save. And hoping he isn't immune if you were dumb enough to prepare 100% non-damaging spells rather than a mix of cc and damage.

[Blackhawk748]

Don't even know where to begin on silent image. It doesn't work as well as you say in combat. Have you tried it in a RAW fight with saves? Run any numbers at all?

4v4 in a "challenging" shadow fight EL 7 vs party level 5 a single magic missile reliably takes out half its health in one round. An empowered one 3/4 of its health. In a "routine" EL 7 vs party level 7 fight that changes to 3/4 health and dead in one round. Everyone else better have scroll/oil of magic weapon (25/50 gp) or a +1 weapon (2,000 gp out of 9,000 gp for something that's otherwise nearly useless) and even then it's about 1/4 of its health per round on average. I hope the casters don't give up against the special foes as the fighters that easily damaged the other foes for them will be pretty miffed. If you don't have magic missile then another higher damage spell that's reduced to half effectiveness is almost as good.

Silent Image is amazing against unintelligent foes, as they dont actually get a Save, and that is RAW. My favorite tactic is to just make a wall around a few of the mooks. Now i just cut the encounter in half. Also ive seen it used to create Wraiths, which do not make noise and simply harass the opponent, or at least make you look significantly more powerful than you are.

Also remember that statistically Will saves are the lowest saves on most creatures.

[nedz]

And to everyone who is saying just play, to actually play I need to convince the rest of the party it will be useful. Ive talked to 3 out 6 and they were okay but they were the easy ones.

It's your character, why do you need to convince them of anything ?

If you're a Wizard then you get to choose your spells - so choose them.

[Warior4356]

Average Monster HP
CR|HP|
1/4|4|
1/2|6.59|
1|12.24|
2|21|
3|27|

Note that the EL for 4 foes = CR + 4, except that 2 CR 1/2 or 4 CR 1/4 foes = EL 1. This is why damage works well at low level. If you can almost always deal ~15 damage with a flaming sphere at level 3 (on average), it's a reliable auto kill of your share from 1 round's worth of effort in what was supposed to be a difficult fight. Vs. hoping he fails his save. And hoping he isn't immune if you were dumb enough to prepare 100% non-damaging spells rather than a mix of cc and damage.

Okay well I don't want do blasting, I could take a conjuration or something for a little damage.

[ericgrau]

Silent Image is amazing against unintelligent foes, as they dont actually get a Save, and that is RAW. My favorite tactic is to just make a wall around a few of the mooks. Now i just cut the encounter in half. Also ive seen it used to create Wraiths, which do not make noise and simply harass the opponent, or at least make you look significantly more powerful than you are.

Also remember that statistically Will saves are the lowest saves on most creatures.
First paragraph: Do you have a reference? I don't see it in the rules.

Second paragraph: Nope, statistically it isn't. That info I do have.


Okay well I don't want do blasting, I could take a conjuration or something for a little damage.
That's fine if that's what you want but it's going to be rough at level 3. Tough it out for 2 more levels then make your point to your DM. I mean you still have a little, but without even spell compendium it's tough.

[P.F.]

In terms of optimization allowed, I need to be careful whit not doing anything obvious. Also cheese wise, if it makes sense with the spirit and letter of the rules and in actuality he will allow it, like I don't think greater shadow evocation for contingency would work.

And to everyone who is saying just play, to actually play I need to convince the rest of the party it will be useful. Ive talked to 3 out 6 and they were okay but they were the easy ones.

You just need one second-level spell which you can point to as being "as good as flaming sphere" and two first-level spells which you can cast "instead of magic missile."

So tell them something like, "Sure, I won't do evocations, but instead of flaming sphere I'll cast acid arrow, it's almost as good, works on fire-immune things, and still prevents trolls from regenerating." There are plenty of "almost-as-good" non-evocation spells you can point to.

If you think you can get approval, I would consider the Fiery Burst reserve feat suggestion. It will weaken your build overall, but just prepare pyrotechnics and you've got yourself a magical attack roughly equivalent to having cast flaming sphere, but usable an unlimited number of times.

Color spray is a good candidate to list as being "almost as good as burning hands," although the HD limitation is a more obvious problem than the low damage caps on 1st-level direct damage spells.

Alternately, could you simply select other banned schools to start, and ban evocation when you take Incantrix instead?

[ericgrau]

You just need one second-level spell which you can point to as being "as good as flaming sphere" and two first-level spells which you can cast "instead of magic missile."

So tell them something like, "Sure, I won't do evocations, but instead of flaming sphere I'll cast acid arrow, it's almost as good, works on fire-immune things, and still prevents trolls from regenerating." There are plenty of "almost-as-good" non-evocation spells you can point to.

If you think you can get approval, I would consider the Fiery Burst reserve feat suggestion. It will weaken your build overall, but just prepare pyrotechnics and you've got yourself a magical attack roughly equivalent to having cast flaming sphere, but usable an unlimited number of times.

Color spray is a good candidate to list as being "almost as good as burning hands," although the HD limitation is a more obvious problem than the low damage caps on 1st-level direct damage spells.

Alternately, could you simply select other banned schools to start, and ban evocation when you take Incantrix instead?
Touch attacks are hard at level 3. Meaning you'll be at 1/3 damage on average. That's not almost as good; that's scary bad. I'd stick with alternatives like web, glitterdust, and color spray. If you run into an immune foe with no opposable surfaces to web... well crud you really are hosed I don't see anything great as a backup. Ok prepare or scroll a bull's strength since that's at least ok. Don't do enlarge person at low level except in a buff round. Maybe scroll it. It boosts the enemy's damage too through -2 AC so the net gain is pitiful.

[Blackhawk748]

First paragraph: Do you have a reference? I don't see it in the rules.

Second paragraph: Nope, statistically it isn't. That info I do have..

Sorry, i was remembering wrong. Its from All About Illusions Part 4. What it actually is is that Unintelligent creatures cant Auto Disbelieve.

Also seriously? The only types i can think of that have Will saves as their highest would be Undead and Aberrations. Yes Outsiders and Dragons have good Will saves but their Wis usually isnt as high as their Con.

[Florian]

It's your character, why do you need to convince them of anything ?

If you're a Wizard then you get to choose your spells - so choose them.

You know that in a social game, you´re getting thrown out by common consensus faster than you can say "But RAW..."?

[Beheld]

Once you get to level 3-4 the burning hands is often enough to kill on a failed save, if not at least damage on a passed save.

...

Likewise the flaming sphere is very likely to kill a foe from 1 spell, while the glitterdust is a matter of save luck.

Yeah... no. Burning hands is never, at any level, going to kill level appropriate monsters on a failed save. Flaming Sphere might kill one several rounds after you are dead.


There are more foes immune to color spray than there are immune to fire.

Actually, no. There are only 16 CR 3 monsters in the SRD of 70 that are immune to color spray, as compared to the 17 that ignore Flaming Sphere. Where Color Spray actually wins the fights with most of the other monsters, Flaming Sphere does not, at all. And like I said, of those 16 monsters, four can be beaten by walking away (plants, an ooze), and eight can be beaten by silent image (mindless). That still leaves four intelligent undead you actually need to deal with with your second level spells, but that's life.


And really, baby dragons and mephits? Every single one of those fire immune foes is a super rare low level DM choice. While stun immune foes like zombies are not.

Uh... They are all CR 3 enemies. For a level 3 party. Whatever metric you use to declare some CR 3 enemies "common" and others "rare" is completely arbitrary, and almost certainly based on your own subjective preferences and personal anecdotes.


Finally burning hands and flaming sphere get even better with web, making them head and shoulders above glitterdust at this level.

No, burning hands and Flaming sphere make Web worse. Because they take time you could have used to fire arrows into them and turn it into much less burning damage. I'll pass.


I pick web over glitterdust because it helps a great deal even on a passed save and has a larger area. Once a foe is delayed 2-3 rounds he might as well be killed because he won't help his allies and then after his allies are gone it'll be 4v1.

Unless you know, you are facing one CR 3 foe, in which case you did nothing, and you would have been better off casting Glitterdust so the Rogue can alpha strike it.

It sounds like you personally play with a lot of very large numbers of very weak enemy encounters, which is why you think CR 3 enemies are rare, and that flaming sphere kills things. So it looks like you just have a very specific type of combat you can build for in your games, but that isn't particularly applicable to games that feature parties facing CR 3 opponents (or higher) at level 3.


Don't even know where to begin on silent image. It doesn't work as well as you say in combat.

It does against Mindless creatures. I mean, intelligent creatures you can still use it to do lots of things, but against Mindless creatures, it is basically just a free win.


Average Monster HP:

CRHP
1/44
1/26.59
112.24
221
327


Note that the EL for 4 foes = CR + 4, except that 2 CR 1/2 or 4 CR 1/4 foes = EL 1. This is why damage works well at low level. If you can almost always deal ~15 damage with a flaming sphere at level 3 (on average), it's a reliable auto kill of your share from 1 round's worth of effort in what was supposed to be a difficult fight. Vs. hoping he fails his save. And hoping he isn't immune if you were dumb enough to prepare 100% non-damaging spells rather than a mix of cc and damage.

See this is what I am talking about, you showed a table saying that CR 3 enemies have on average 27HP, and claimed that is why you can do 15 damage with a flaming sphere an reliably auto kill. But 1) 17 monsters will probably take no damage at all, 2) of those that do take damage, they get a reflex negates, so you really aren't better when they make their saves than a glitterdust caster, 3) They are more likely to make the Ref save than the Will save, 4) even if you do hit them, you do average of 7 damage per hit. You would have to force 3 failed saves, which probably takes about 5 rounds before you would be likely to do 15 or more damage. If the monster is still alive at 5 rounds, something is wrong. The fight should be over much shorter than that at low levels. 5) Obvious point, 15 damage doesn't kill many CR 3 enemies, and many of them will have abilities that allow them to avoid your flaming spheres (IE dragons that are not immune will fly by, Scorpions will pick you up in their claws and eat your face both of which might prevent you from doing damage, by killing you, or by forcing you to burn yourself along with him and kill yourself).

TL;DR sounds like you have a very specific kind of encounter you prepare for which would make fireball the bomb, but that isn't the only kind of encounter that exists, most people probably face a variety of encounters, including monsters with CR above their level, and group fights with monsters with CR at their level, not just piles of minions to be blasted through.

[Warior4356]

You know that in a social game, you´re getting thrown out by common consensus faster than you can say "But RAW..."?

Exactly my problem.

[Blackhawk748]

Put it in MMO terms, you are the Support, they are the Tanky DPS or just the DPS. You make them better.

[nedz]

Exactly my problem.

Hmmm, IDK then.

It does strike me as unusual that you have to justify spell selection like this.

[Beheld]

First paragraph: Do you have a reference? I don't see it in the rules.

You get a save when you interact with illusions, if you create an illusion of a wall, there is no reason for a mindless creature to interact with the wall in the first place, so it will just continue doing nothing, or return to doing nothing. An intelligent creature might try any number of methods to get past a wall that might constitute interacting, but mindless creatures don't, because they are mindless, they follow the arbitrary commands they have been given.

"Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions."

So if it wasn't punching the wall before you got there, it has no reason to start after you leave. It literally cannot even remember you were there before the wall.

Also, though it doesn't work on Vermin, you should definitely have the odd scroll of Command Undead in case you run into free minions.


Second paragraph: Nope, statistically it isn't. That info I do have.

At low levels, will saves are on average lower than reflex saves.

[MisterKaws]

If this game wasn't core+limited, and had at least the complete series, race series and spell compendium, you could do equal, if not better crowd control with evocation only, but it really seems to be impossible to not be a blaster with evocation on core.

[Pluto!]

Why do you need group consensus to play your character?

Do they need you to formally approve theirs?

[nedz]

If this game wasn't core+limited, and had at least the complete series, race series and spell compendium, you could do equal, if not better crowd control with evocation only, but it really seems to be impossible to not be a blaster with evocation on core.
Some goes with Conjuration and Blasting. Actually which books are the Orbs in ?

Why do you need group consensus to play your character?

Do they need you to formally approve theirs?

My thoughts entirely.

[Blackhawk748]

Some goes with Conjuration and Blasting. Actually which books are the Orbs in ?


Complete Mage or Arcane i believe

[Warior4356]

Complete Mage or Arcane i believe

Both of which are not allowed except on specific approval.

[nedz]

Complete Mage or Arcane i believe

Arcane, but I was hoping that they might also have been in something FR — since those books are open. I don't have any FR books so I can't really assess if they might be available.

[ericgrau]

You get a save when you interact with illusions, if you create an illusion of a wall, there is no reason for a mindless creature to interact with the wall in the first place, so it will just continue doing nothing, or return to doing nothing. An intelligent creature might try any number of methods to get past a wall that might constitute interacting, but mindless creatures don't, because they are mindless, they follow the arbitrary commands they have been given.

"Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions."

So if it wasn't punching the wall before you got there, it has no reason to start after you leave. It literally cannot even remember you were there before the wall.

Also, though it doesn't work on Vermin, you should definitely have the odd scroll of Command Undead in case you run into free minions.



At low levels, will saves are on average lower than reflex saves.
That definition of interact sound's like DM's call. I've seen DMs do the polar opposite too. Personally I'd be in between if uncontrolled, or if controlled it'd depend on the command wording of the probably clever caster.

Ah at low levels will saves are lower, by 1-2 points. http://www.dandwiki.com/w/images/4/45/Savesatvariouscrs.jpg

That doesn't mean they fail their save.

The other illusion save rules and duration create further weaknesses compared to other spells. Really it's better outside of combat and a so-so fall-back in combat.

[Tvtyrant]

What is actually effective and what appears effective are often unrelated. Your group has a specific interpretation of what is effective, my suggestion is to lean in. Cast a fireball once in a blue moon, toss out a scorching ray or magic missile from time to time.

You are playing the second strongest class and taking the second strongest prc for it, I doubt it will overtly hurt your power to keep evocation and blast from time to time.

[eggynack]

What is actually effective and what appears effective are often unrelated. Your group has a specific interpretation of what is effective, my suggestion is to lean in. Cast a fireball once in a blue moon, toss out a scorching ray or magic missile from time to time.

You are playing the second strongest class and taking the second strongest prc for it, I doubt it will overtly hurt your power to keep evocation and blast from time to time.
I just don't see the point in leaning into it. What benefit is there to making the party think you're doing things that the DM thinks are effective? Seems really similar in value to doing things that the party thinks are ineffective, and doing that has the benefit of being what the OP wants to do. It just feels like the overall goal of appearing to be a standard wizard is a rather empty one.

As for the larger question of evocation's value, it's a decent school but not because of frigging burning hands and flaming sphere. Those damage totals are occasionally enough to take down foes, but not high enough to do so consistently, and the line between success and failure is a harsh one. The advantage of something like color spray is that its success case is defined solely by that one save, while a blasting spell has its success based also on enemy HP and damage roll parameters, and the advantage of something like grease is that its fail case is still having an impact. The real value of evocation is in its occasional non-blasting spells, like resilient sphere or sending. Also, as a sidenote, the orbs are in the spell compendium as well, for whatever that's worth.

[Beheld]

That definition of interact sound's like DM's call. I've seen DMs do the polar opposite too. Personally I'd be in between if uncontrolled, or if controlled it'd depend on the command wording of the probably clever caster.

Ah at low levels will saves are lower, by 1-2 points. http://www.dandwiki.com/w/images/4/45/Savesatvariouscrs.jpg

That doesn't mean they fail their save.

The other illusion save rules and duration create further weaknesses compared to other spells. Really it's better outside of combat and a so-so fall-back in combat.

Like I said, at low levels will saves are lower, so Glitterdust is better than Flaming Sphere, since Glitterdust has a greater chance of effecting the enemy, and has a huge effect, whereas Flaming Sphere doesn't work of 17/70 creatures, doesn't kill the ones it does work on, and is also negated by a reflex save. The fact that you could perhaps, 5 rounds later accomplish something is not particularly helpful right now, so reflex negates for 7 damage is very ineffective.

If you mean Illusions, then once again, I can only continue to point out that it doesn't matter whether they will make the save, because they never get the save. Seeing an illusion is not interacting with it, interacting with an illusion is interacting with it. So mindless creatures that explicitly according to the rules have no memory respond to an illusory wall appearing in front of them by no longer doing anything at all in that direction, never interaction with the illusion, and being effectively beaten by sealing them in a small room that you aren't in.

"Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief ): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion. For example, if a party encounters a section of illusory floor, the character in the lead would receive a saving throw if she stopped and studied the floor or if she probed the floor."

Is the mindless creature with no memory and no ability to think studying the wall? Why? How? Is it interacting with the wall? No? So then it doesn't get a save.

[nedz]

Also, as a sidenote, the orbs are in the spell compendium as well, for whatever that's worth.

Yes we know: I was trying to find them in an open book. :smallsigh:
Ed: the lesser Orbs are in MinH, though not the 4th level ones. They're even called Orb of X, lesser :smallconfused:

By the sounds of it the OP has to just not ban the evocation school rather than actually use it ?

It's should just be a minor inconvenience for a Wizard.

Personally I'm more surprised that Incantatrix is allowed - the DM does sound green :smallbiggrin:

Other than that we are being asked to advise on the internal dynamics of a group — and I'm not sure we can help here really.

[eggynack]

Yes we know: I was trying to find them in an open book. :smallsigh:
I was also. Dunno if it was mentioned specifically whether that book was banned, so I just brought it up under the assumption that it may have not been.


By the sounds of it the OP has to just not ban the evocation school rather than actually use it ?
Does he strictly have to do anything? It sounds like he can just play this "suboptimal" wizard, and either prove himself or continue to be faced with a weird lack of understanding of his power.


It's should just be a minor inconvenience for a Wizard.
I dunno. He's banning three schools, cause incantatrix, so I guess that'd be enchantment, necromancy, and for the third it'd probably have to be illusion. Losing illusion is pretty far from minor by my reckoning.


Other than that we are being asked to advise on the internal dynamics of a group — and I'm not sure we can help here really.
Pretty much. The only feasible solutions are usually, "Talk to them," or, "Leave," and the former seems to already be done and the latter seems an overreaction.

[nedz]

Does he strictly have to do anything? It sounds like he can just play this "suboptimal" wizard, and either prove himself or continue to be faced with a weird lack of understanding of his power.
Who knows ?

It sounds like they've never seen a Wizard played well. I've seen Wizards played at T5 - Magic Missile and Fireball only, no metamagic even. The class has a very low floor.


I dunno. He's banning three schools, cause incantatrix, so I guess that'd be enchantment, necromancy, and for the third it'd probably have to be illusion. Losing illusion is pretty far from minor by my reckoning.

Well he doesn't have to ban three until he PrCs out - he could dump Evo at that point, by which time their view might have changed.

[eggynack]

Well he doesn't have to ban three until he PrCs out - he could dump Evo at that point, by which time their view might have changed.
I guess that makes sense, cause he should probably be banning enchantment and necromancy anyway. He'd only really have to change the order. Honestly though, in this situation I'd probably want to ban evocation out of spite, or in a misguided attempt to prove something.

[Vizzerdrix]

Everyone has an " I banned evocation" story and what worked for them. Here is what worked for me. I just told the DM that I was afraid of catching the party in the fireball and didn't want to limit their flanking, so I was going to buff and do summons instead. The group went from being upset that I wasn't a fireball machine to happy I wasn't blowing them up with the mooks.

[Warior4356]

Yea I redid my spells and added some direct damage and "Offencive" Spells to my list while keeping enchantment and evocation banned. The gm was happy. I am just down to one last choice, do I take conjuration or transmutation as my specialty? Also, alter self/polymorph will not allow me forms I have not personally seen, or make a check on the right knowledge, I roll low and I don't get what I want.

[ryu]

Yea I redid my spells and added some direct damage and "Offencive" Spells to my list while keeping enchantment and evocation banned. The gm was happy. I am just down to one last choice, do I take conjuration or transmutation as my specialty?

Depends. Early or late game focus? Conjuration tends to be better early while transmutation is better later. You'll be powerful at all stages either way, but this is about how you manage relative power curves throughout the game.

[Beheld]

Yea I redid my spells and added some direct damage and "Offencive" Spells to my list while keeping enchantment and evocation banned. The gm was happy. I am just down to one last choice, do I take conjuration or transmutation as my specialty?

I recommend Conjuration. Conjuration has some of the best AoE save (or no save) Battlefield Control at each level, Transmutation has some good effects, but usually single target, or buffs.

At level 2 you get an extra Glitterdust or Web, and 3 you get an extra stinking Cloud, at level 4 you get Solid Fog or Black Tentacles, at level 1 you only get Grease.

As compared to Transmutation gets you: Haste or Blink, Enlarge Person, and two polymorph spells (Alter Self and Polymorph). Which are... Uggh. Polymorph spells either suck or you feel dirty using them, and there is no middle ground. I would say look at those lists and ask yourself which of those two lists you want to have at least one of every day. If you really like buffing, go a head, but for me I prefer to save or lose enemies.

[DarkSonic1337]

Are alternative class features still on the table? Because Conjurer specialist's "Abrupt Jaunt" is a pretty nice one. Conjuration is also where you find a lot of the battlefield control which seems to be what you want to do. All you lose is your familiar.

I know familiars are pretty useful....I just don't like them. :p

[Warior4356]

Are alternative class features still on the table? Because Conjurer specialist's "Abrupt Jaunt" is a pretty nice one. Conjuration is also where you find a lot of the battlefield control which seems to be what you want to do.

No as we are only allowed two prestige classes, and they count as one.

[DarkSonic1337]

What prestige class are you taking besides incantatrix? You do know you are already taking one of the strongest prestige classes in the game right?

[Beheld]

What prestige class are you taking besides incantatrix? You do know you are already taking one of the strongest prestige classes in the game right?

Yeah this sort of, I'd gamble Abrupt Jaunt for levels 3-15 versus the potential to have Archmage from 15-20. Not a lot of games that start at 3 make it to 16 with the same character, much less the same rules. I've played with a lot of DM who had houserules limiting character creation, and almost universally after gaming with me for 5-10 sessions, they changed their minds and decided in future games to broadly expand character creation options. (Probably doesn't hurt that I often host and let people look at my books.)

[Warior4356]

Yeah this sort of, I'd gamble Abrupt Jaunt for levels 3-15 versus the potential to have Archmage from 15-20. Not a lot of games that start at 3 make it to 16 with the same character, much less the same rules. I've played with a lot of DM who had houserules limiting character creation, and almost universally after gaming with me for 5-10 sessions, they changed their minds and decided in future games to broadly expand character creation options. (Probably doesn't hurt that I often host and let people look at my books.)

I see what you are saying, but I don't know if this dm would A. allow that. Or B. If the gamble is worth it. But that does look really really tasty.....

[ryu]

I see what you are saying, but I don't know if this dm would A. allow that. Or B. If the gamble is worth it. But that does look really really tasty.....

If you really want to avoid things at low levels and can't jaunt there's always good old fashioned flight effects. Alter self is a fun person for this by the way. Truly one of the greatest low level transmutations. There are entire handbooks dedicated to showing off cool uses for this one spell. Do you have any idea how rare that is for something so low level?

[Warior4356]

I can only alter self if I have seen the creature in the game. So no winged elfs, no merfolk none of that.

[ryu]

I can only alter self if I have seen the creature in the game. So no winged elfs, no merfolk none of that.

So what you're saying is you have to wait for mid levels for access to teleport, and adequate divination spells to use it properly? Make no mistake such ''limitations'' are only short term. There is no actual way the DM can prevent you from finding any save immediately declaring they don't exist, and that way leads to madness, katana obsession, madness, one of the most horrible things archived in the lore of this forum, and madness. Oh and in case I forgot to mention it also leads to madness.

[Andezzar]

I can only alter self if I have seen the creature in the game. So no winged elfs, no merfolk none of that.Just claim you have seen them in a book and roll the appropriate knowledge skill, maybe aided by spells. But since you are a wizard there isn't much to do with skill points besides concentration and possibly spellcraft, so you might as well invest in knowledge skills. Knowledge devotion is also a nice feat for someone with lots of knowledge skills.

[ryu]

Just claim you have seen them in a book and roll the appropriate knowledge skill, maybe aided by spells. But since you are a wizard there isn't much to do with skill points besides concentration and possibly spellcraft, so you might as well invest in knowledge skills. Knowledge devotion is also a nice feat for someone with lots of knowledge skills.

Use magic device to share ranks with your familiar thus allowing it to use relevant spell items for extra relevant actions per turn. It's so powerful the game designers deliberately made that a cross class skill so people would be less likely to notice it.

[Âmesang]

It always bugged me that sorcerers didn't get Use Magic Device as a class skill since it sounds like it's right up their alley — using their inborn, natural talent for magic to manipulate items in ways they normally wouldn't be allowed.

…or in the rare event that its the cleric who gets offed and there's no one else around to rez' him. Assuming said cleric can scribe scrolls.

[Quertus]

I've played under DMs with a similar mindset in 2e, where you earned individual xp. Say the party consists of yourself, a buffing caster, and 2 identical fighters, one of whom you buff, one you don't. You fight a 100 hp monster worth 1000 xp. The buffed fighter deals the monster 93 damage; the unbuffed fighter deals the other 7. The buffed fighter earns 930 xp; the unbuffed fighter earns 70 xp. You earn 0 xp, because you did not contribute.

On the flip side, I've played 3.x in groups that focus on save or die, save or fail, or stat drain. If you are dealing damage in one of those groups, you really aren't contributing. :(

So be glad you're playing 3.x, where at least you'll earn xp for your unappreciated contribution.

[Warior4356]

Use magic device to share ranks with your familiar thus allowing it to use relevant spell items for extra relevant actions per turn. It's so powerful the game designers deliberately made that a cross class skill so people would be less likely to notice it.

Thats..... Thats really clever! What familiars can use wands and such though?

[MisterKaws]

Thats..... Thats really clever! What familiars can use wands and such though?

Imps and quasits, I think, maybe Coure eliadrins too, though they'd have problems wielding wands of normal size.

[nedz]

Imps and quasits, I think, maybe Coure eliadrins too, though they'd have problems wielding wands of normal size.

Ravens too, well they can speak.

[Elkad]

Thats..... Thats really clever! What familiars can use wands and such though?
Raven
Lots of Improved Familiars (Imp, Quasit, Mephit, etc)

Basically it needs speech and a way to hold the object.

[Endarire]

What about a Human Conjurer (opposte Enchantment/Evocation initially then Illusion @6 once you scribed into your spellbook the most useful level 1-3 Illusion spells - assuming your GM rules Incantatrix opposition like that)?

Unless you're quite certain you're reaching level 16 or higher, you can safely take Abrupt Jaunt (Player's Handbok II). Otherwise, finish your build with Spellguard of Silverymoon. With Spellguard, you can cast any spell as a full round action via Selective Spell. Yes, even if doing so would normally take a year.

[MisterKaws]

With Spellguard, you can cast any spell as a full round action via Selective Spell. Yes, even if doing so would normally take a year.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned combining this with Geas or epic spells?

[LoyalPaladin]

Some people have to learn the hard way.
Normally I feel like this is poor table etiquette that will only spawn problems for the players. But, in this case at least, it won't be that harmful. Besides, you still get decent blasting spells from other schools. Who needs fireball when you can cast acid orb, lesser and disintegrate?

[SirNMN]

If you want to be sneaky, don't be a specialist but an Elven Generalist. (Nearly) all the benefits of specialization and no banned schools.

where is this from?

[nyjastul69]

where is this from?

Races of the Wild, page 157.

[Agincourt]

Normally I feel like this is poor table etiquette that will only spawn problems for the players. But, in this case at least, it won't be that harmful. Besides, you still get decent blasting spells from other schools. Who needs fireball when you can cast acid orb, lesser and disintegrate?


Races of the Wild, page 157.



Unless you're quite certain you're reaching level 16 or higher, you can safely take Abrupt Jaunt (Player's Handbok II). Otherwise, finish your build with Spellguard of Silverymoon. With Spellguard, you can cast any spell as a full round action via Selective Spell. Yes, even if doing so would normally take a year.

People are ignoring the OP's book limitations. Orb spells do not appear in an approved book. The "Races of" books are also not approved. Player's Handbook II is not approved.

We can help the OP, but listing irrelevant options won't do that.

[nedz]

I try to explain my plan to use buffs, CC and crowd control (See Treantmonklvl20's guide to playing god) but I get ignoredSome people have to learn the hard way.Normally I feel like this is poor table etiquette that will only spawn problems for the players. But, in this case at least, it won't be that harmful. Besides, you still get decent blasting spells from other schools. Who needs fireball when you can cast acid orb, lesser and disintegrate?

I didn't mean it spitefully, it's just that showing by example can be educational. It doesn't always work of course.

[Andezzar]

People are ignoring the OP's book limitations. Orb spells do not appear in an approved book. The "Races of" books are also not approved. Player's Handbook II is not approved.Where is the list of approved books? It certainly isn't in the first post.

[Elkad]

Where is the list of approved books? It certainly isn't in the first post.

Actually it is. He does say "phbs", so possibly including PHB2.


...The books we are allowed are core (The phbs and dmg) and anything forgotten realms. Beyond that is approval only.

[Andezzar]

You quoted the relevant part "beyond that is approval only". So our suggestions are not irrelevant as the OP can seek approval for those. I have not read that approval was denied and if Incantatrix is allowed chances are that elven Generalist and the orb spells will too.

[MisterKaws]

You quoted the relevant part "beyond that is approval only". So our suggestions are not irrelevant as the OP can seek approval for those. I have not read that approval was denied and if Incantatrix is allowed chances are that elven Generalist and the orb spells will too.

Incantatrix is allowed for the same reason the DM thinks transmutation is crap, he's just an amateur, so he fears what he doesn't know and the orbs will probably get disallowed too.

[Doctor Despair]

I noticed some jabber about broken classes, so has he considered going Dweomerkeeper? Or if he'd prefer to have less math, he could always take the good old standby of Ur Priest into Mystic Theurge for ninth level arcane and divine spells.

[MisterKaws]

I noticed some jabber about broken classes, so has he considered going Dweomerkeeper? Or if he'd prefer to have less math, he could always take the good old standby of Ur Priest into Mystic Theurge for ninth level arcane and divine spells.

Complete divine is also forbidden.

[Andezzar]

Complete divine is also forbidden.It has not been approved yet. Or did I miss a post by the OP?
Claiming that it has been forbidden has no basis in what the OP wrote as far as I can tell.

[MisterKaws]

It has not been approved yet. Or did I miss a post by the OP?
Claiming that it has been forbidden has no basis in what the OP wrote as far as I can tell.

His DM is the type who will simply forbid anything that's out of his comfort zone, and his comfort zone is basically PHB+FR probably just because his campaign is FR-based.

[nedz]

His DM is the type who will simply forbid anything that's out of his comfort zone, and his comfort zone is basically PHB+FR probably just because his campaign is FR-based.

You don't know that.

I once played in a game where all PrCs were banned because they were OP, blah, ..., Flangey, blah; but someone managed to talk the DM into letting them play an Ur Priest :smalleek:

With nieve DMs: you can't really predict anything.

[Agincourt]

You don't know that.

I once played in a game where all PrCs were banned because they were OP, blah, ..., Flangey, blah; but someone managed to talk the DM into letting them play an Ur Priest :smalleek:

With nieve DMs: you can't really predict anything.

I agree to some extent, but good advice acknowledges that there is at least the possibility that these books will remain banned. When making recommendations, it is quite silly to comment that the DM is being dumb because abrupt jaunt is way better than anything an evocation specialist can do, when there is a distinct possibility that the DM will look over the ACF and say, "not a chance."

So, if you're going to make a recommendation outside of the approved list, 1) tell the OP where he can find it; 2) give the OP arguments as to why his DM should approve it; and 3) a backup plan if the DM remains adamant. It's unfair to the OP to give incomplete advice that sets him up to fail.

[nedz]

I agree to some extent, but good advice acknowledges that there is at least the possibility that these books will remain banned. When making recommendations, it is quite silly to comment that the DM is being dumb because abrupt jaunt is way better than anything an evocation specialist can do, when there is a distinct possibility that the DM will look over the ACF and say, "not a chance."

So, if you're going to make a recommendation outside of the approved list, 1) tell the OP where he can find it; 2) give the OP arguments as to why his DM should approve it; and 3) a backup plan if the DM remains adamant. It's unfair to the OP to give incomplete advice that sets him up to fail.

Fair points, which is why I have avoided such advice.

Your second point is tricky because we don't know what flawed reasoning is present in the DM's mind. E.g. in the game I mentioned above all Wizards had to take a level of Fighter (or similar) to avoid them being too weak :smallconfused: For Wizard read any full caster, though Druids and Clerics were banned because plot.

[Pex]

Damage spells don't need to kill a monster outright. It's enough that the damage the damage spell does plus the damage another party member does kills the monster. Spells that do kill/incapacitate a monster outright are great. Of course use them, but they don't always work no matter how awesome they are. When they do, terrific.

[SirNMN]

Races of the Wild, page 157.
thanks
do you know if this works with half elves? because they are Elven Blood. if it count they I will be chaning up on of my builds

[Beheld]

Damage spells don't need to kill a monster outright. It's enough that the damage the damage spell does plus the damage another party member does kills the monster. Spells that do kill/incapacitate a monster outright are great. Of course use them, but they don't always work no matter how awesome they are. When they do, terrific.

The problem is that Flaming Sphere does 7 damage reflex negates, where glitterdust is reflex negates, but also blinds them, and if they are blind, then the rogue gets a bonus 7 damage (at least) per attack, and more than one attack per round.

Blinding people does more to help the team kill things fast then doing 7 fire damage a round reflex negates.

[P.F.]

The problem is that Flaming Sphere does 7 damage reflex negates, where glitterdust is reflex negates, but also blinds them, and if they are blind, then the rogue gets a bonus 7 damage (at least) per attack, and more than one attack per round.

Blinding people does more to help the team kill things fast then doing 7 fire damage a round reflex negates.

Blinding people also prevents them from doing damage to the party, so it has a defensive function as well. However, Flaming sphere lasts for multiple rounds and can be directed to change targets; glitterdust only works (or doesn't work) once; both are save negates. Glitterdust can also has potential friendly fire, whereas flaming sphere can be hurled into the middle of a melee without any ill effects.

Don't get me wrong, I still think that overall glitterdust is a better spell, but I think it's mostly better because it's more versatile.

[ryu]

Blinding people also prevents them from doing damage to the party, so it has a defensive function as well. However, Flaming sphere lasts for multiple rounds and can be directed to change targets; glitterdust only works (or doesn't work) once; both are save negates. Glitterdust can also has potential friendly fire, whereas flaming sphere can be hurled into the middle of a melee without any ill effects.

Don't get me wrong, I still think that overall glitterdust is a better spell, but I think it's mostly better because it's more versatile.

You say that last thing like it's minor. Some of the best spells in the entire game are good specifically because they're versatile or at least widely effectively applicable.

[Telok]

Not a lot of games that start at 3 make it to 16 with the same character, much less the same rules.

Twice, in the last 25 years. Both campaigns lasted about a year of real time. I ran one that would have met that criteria for at least one character but he decided to play in the black lake that absolutely everything else in the lich's dungeon refused to even go near.

[Beheld]

Blinding people also prevents them from doing damage to the party, so it has a defensive function as well. However, Flaming sphere lasts for multiple rounds and can be directed to change targets; glitterdust only works (or doesn't work) once; both are save negates. Glitterdust can also has potential friendly fire, whereas flaming sphere can be hurled into the middle of a melee without any ill effects.

Don't get me wrong, I still think that overall glitterdust is a better spell, but I think it's mostly better because it's more versatile.

Uh... Yes, flaming sphere can do 7 damage reflex negates every round for three whole rounds. But you know, since if you cast Glitterdust everything will be dead by then, and if you cast Flaming Sphere you will be doing 7 fire damage reflex negates every round... Who cares?

Glitterdust's potential for friendly fire is literally zero, you would have to deliberately choose to include an ally in the AoE because you thought it was worth it to do that to get the enemies that includes. I mean it's great in theory that you can put Flaming Sphere in a melee, but, and I cannot stress this enough, it does 7 fire damage reflex negates. Glitterdust does 7-10 extra damage on 1-5 attacks per round from the SA if they fail their save, effects multiple people, and provides defense.

Glitterdust does more damage than Flaming Sphere. Yes it also does more defense, and yes it also is significantly more front loaded in what it does, which is a good thing, but I can build a Rogue right now off the top of my head that does 9d6 extra damage a round if you cast glitterdust, so the ability do do a whole 6d6 damage over three rounds is just super unimpressive.

[torrasque666]

Glitterdust's potential for friendly fire is literally zero, you would have to deliberately choose to include an ally in the AoE because you thought it was worth it to do that to get the enemies that includes. I mean it's great in theory that you can put Flaming Sphere in a melee, but, and I cannot stress this enough, it does 7 fire damage reflex negates. Glitterdust does 7-10 extra damage on 1-5 attacks per round from the SA if they fail their save, effects multiple people, and provides defense.


10ft radius spread is quite the area. I'm honestly trying to think of the last time I saw a dungeon that had rooms larger than 20ft square, and wasn't​ a boss room. You're assuming that the caster can manage to go before the rest of his team (not always a guarantee, especially at lower levels) and that they are not going to do what their job description says and beat the enemies' faces in with their various pointy sticks. Because if they manage to get in front of you, either you're casting a different spell that you had prepared, you're plinking away with that dinky crossbow every wizard seems to have, or you're firing Glitterdust at your allies who (if they are the fighters and/or rogues) probably have a bad will save. If they fail that will save, well.... a rogue that deals that extra 7 points of damage but misses half the time vs a 7 point reflex negates... seems even to me.

[Andezzar]

It's not just the rogue that deals more damage, if the enemies are hit by glitterdust. It is everyone that needs to hit rolls. Blinded creatures lose their DEX to AC. They also have a lot more trouble hitting back, so it is less likely that the party members are put down before they can deal damage.

Also neither spells nor sneak attack can compensate bad tactics.

[ryu]

10ft radius spread is quite the area. I'm honestly trying to think of the last time I saw a dungeon that had rooms larger than 20ft square, and wasn't​ a boss room. You're assuming that the caster can manage to go before the rest of his team (not always a guarantee, especially at lower levels) and that they are not going to do what their job description says and beat the enemies' faces in with their various pointy sticks. Because if they manage to get in front of you, either you're casting a different spell that you had prepared, you're plinking away with that dinky crossbow every wizard seems to have, or you're firing Glitterdust at your allies who (if they are the fighters and/or rogues) probably have a bad will save. If they fail that will save, well.... a rogue that deals that extra 7 points of damage but misses half the time vs a 7 point reflex negates... seems even to me.

Oh pardon him for assuming his allies weren't stupid. In what group is it not common practice to at least talk about what spells are being prepared and the various actions that are obviously horrible tactical moves? There's being unoptimized, and then there's just not even putting in the effort to spend five minutes talking with your team.

[Beheld]

10ft radius spread is quite the area. I'm honestly trying to think of the last time I saw a dungeon that had rooms larger than 20ft square, and wasn't​ a boss room. You're assuming that the caster can manage to go before the rest of his team (not always a guarantee, especially at lower levels) and that they are not going to do what their job description says and beat the enemies' faces in with their various pointy sticks. Because if they manage to get in front of you, either you're casting a different spell that you had prepared, you're plinking away with that dinky crossbow every wizard seems to have, or you're firing Glitterdust at your allies who (if they are the fighters and/or rogues) probably have a bad will save. If they fail that will save, well.... a rogue that deals that extra 7 points of damage but misses half the time vs a 7 point reflex negates... seems even to me.

If the enemies are not literally against the wall, and medium or smaller size, and my allies are not adjacent to them, I can hit enemies without hitting any allies. You can waste as much extra area blowing it into a wall as you want, so a 20ft by 20ft room I could drop it in a corner and effect a quarter of the room. I'm pretty sure absent literal idiots or people who act to spite their own teammate I can avoid hitting allies with a glitterdust. If the room is 10ft by 10ft then any remotely sentient ally is going to let me glitterdust the who freaking room before entering.

But honestly, if I did have a big dump barbarian, I wouldn't even care about blinding him if it hit all the enemies, since the rogue is the one I care about, and in basically no situation is the rogue going to run in there. If the rogues wins init, he's not going to charge into melee damage for one sneak attack, he's going to take a full attack from range for 2-3 sneak attacks. If the enemies beat the rogue and I in init, then he's not going to charge into melee and make one attack that doesn't even SA, he's going to delay until I cast glitterdust, and then get to full attack from range and get multiple Sneak Attacks.

But as I said before, I can almost certainly always target glitterdust to not hit allies. For me to not be able to you would basically need the enemy to appear in the middle of us, and me to have to some reason I can't delay my action till after my party goes, and then I back up and cast glitterdust so that it doesn't hit anyone on my team.

[animewatcha]

Okay, so you have limit of 2 "prestige classes" but i don't see a limit on the base classes from what i read in the thread ( might have missed it ). Why not try a different a approach. Wizard / druid / mystic theurge / arcane hierophant . Greenbound summoning. Summon nature's ally 3 to summon 1d4+1 greenbound animal that wall of thorns everywhere and entangle. You start dropping web here. grease there. Sometimes the group has to be shown 'forcefully' like I had to pull out a modified charger build ( limited sources and went dungeoncrasher-non-spiked-chain instead of frenzied bezerker ) to prove a couple of points ( pounce which argued for half the night and 2H-fighting versus TWF on pounce ). It was a good thing my group doesn't do the massive damage rules.

[Florian]

You guys are amazing! Instead of listening to the OP and the concerns about breaking the game and getting into trouble with the gm and group, you go on and on about how your notions of how to play a wizard are the right ones, always, and the group has to be force-fed that knowledge.

Somehow, this reads like the prep talk of a Paladins of Mystqa convention ...

@Flaming Sphere vs. Glitterdust.

As Flaming Sphere only eats up your move action later on, get a Wand of it, fire it up, then Glitterdust and mop up your now blind targets with the sphere and your trusty crossbow. End of story.

[Andezzar]

As Flaming Sphere only eats up your move action later on, get a Wand of it, fire it up, then Glitterdust and mop up your now blind targets with the sphere and your trusty crossbow. End of story.Why would you need to buy a wand or use another spell slot when you could just as easily mop up the blinded opposition with the crossbow alone? the other spell slot could be used for glitterdust in the next encounter.

[ryu]

You guys are amazing! Instead of listening to the OP and the concerns about breaking the game and getting into trouble with the gm and group, you go on and on about how your notions of how to play a wizard are the right ones, always, and the group has to be force-fed that knowledge.

Somehow, this reads like the prep talk of a Paladins of Mystqa convention ...

@Flaming Sphere vs. Glitterdust.

As Flaming Sphere only eats up your move action later on, get a Wand of it, fire it up, then Glitterdust and mop up your now blind targets with the sphere and your trusty crossbow. End of story.

If they're already blind why bother with another spell? That's easy picking for anyone competent in melee to beat the tar out of without additional resources? Also it's not so much about a specific way of playing wizards as a core tenet of all team strategy. Namely that any given person should understand their place and role in some coherent plan instead of tripping over each other. This applies for all team games from sports, to tabletop games, to video games, and for that matter anything involving teams that isn't a game too. That's being a functional being.

[Florian]

Why would you need to buy a wand or use another spell slot when you could just as easily mop up the blinded opposition with the crossbow alone? the other spell slot could be used for glitterdust in the next encounter.

Because a Wand is cheap as dirt and at 3rd, you don´t have too many options where to spent your money on. Wand and crossbow at the same time = double the damage and apparently, this particular gm wants to see some damage done.

Edit: Heck, fire off the wand as often as possible as it doesn´t scale along, fire it every round, empty it before level 4...

[ryu]

Because a Wand is cheap as dirt and at 3rd, you don´t have too many options where to spent your money on. Wand and crossbow at the same time = double the damage and apparently, this particular gm wants to see some damage done.

Edit: Heck, fire off the wand as often as possible as it doesn´t scale along, fire it every round, empty it before level 4...

At levels where glitterdust is a mainstay combat opener wands are certainly not cheap enough that I'd buy one I didn't expect to have any practical effect. Even if you must buy some wands surely you could think of a better spell than flaming sphere? Something that actually does things? Doesn't even have to be the best spell. Just has to not get beaten out of a job by a few seconds of in-game time passing in a won fight.

[Andezzar]

Yes, wands are cheap, but it still is an unnecessary expenditure of resources. That money could have gone to something worthwhile. I'm not saying that wands in general are bad, but that it is inefficient to spend money on ending an already trivial encounter just a bit quicker.

[yellowrocket]

At levels where glitterdust is a mainstay combat opener wands are certainly not cheap enough that I'd buy one I didn't expect to have any practical effect. Even if you must buy some wands surely you could think of a better spell than flaming sphere? Something that actually does things? Doesn't even have to be the best spell. Just has to not get beaten out of a job by a few seconds of in-game time passing in a won fight.

I see where he's going with it. It allows the spell slots to prepared for better things while still having a tool to deal damage as the dm thinks should happen. It's a functional idea, and allows for the versatility in the wizard we here on the board have come to expect, nay demand from someone playing a wizard.

[ryu]

I see where he's going with it. It allows the spell slots to prepared for better things while still having a tool to deal damage as the dm thinks should happen. It's a functional idea, and allows for the versatility in the wizard we here on the board have come to expect, nay demand from someone playing a wizard.

And that's a thing. It's just that even at this level you have better options for doing that. Even in core I doubt anyone is going to argue you can't find a better damage spell to put in a wand. Like I said you don't even need a stellar example like that brutal level one enchantment which is most of the reason not to ban the school in low level games. Just pick something, anything, that reasonably performs a purpose.

[Florian]

And that's a thing. It's just that even at this level you have better options for doing that. Even in core I doubt anyone is going to argue you can't find a better damage spell to put in a wand. Like I said you don't even need a stellar example like that brutal level one enchantment which is most of the reason not to ban the school in low level games. Just pick something, anything, that reasonably performs a purpose.

Not entirely true. If I were to venture a guess, then this is going to be your basic dungeon environment, because that is something new and inexperienced gms seem to gravitate to.
Spamming your basic Flaming Sphere has the very simple advantage of you being able to block all the exits and hallways with it. Its reach is medium and you don´t actually have to move it around for it to be effective as a very simple form of BFC. Something running away? It must pass the sphere...

Now, for wands being dirt cheap, you´ll buy a couple with 5-10 charges at the max and burn through them before you level up. Playing up to expectations, that should be Flaming Sphere, Magic Missile and Melf´s Acid Arrow.

[ryu]

Not entirely true. If I were to venture a guess, then this is going to be your basic dungeon environment, because that is something new and inexperienced gms seem to gravitate to.
Spamming your basic Flaming Sphere has the very simple advantage of you being able to block all the exits and hallways with it. Its reach is medium and you don´t actually have to move it around for it to be effective as a very simple form of BFC. Something running away? It must pass the sphere...

Now, for wands being dirt cheap, you´ll buy a couple with 5-10 charges at the max and burn through them before you level up. Playing up to expectations, that should be Flaming Sphere, Magic Missile and Melf´s Acid Arrow.

Partially charged wands now? Really? And don't even get me started on BFC. At these levels grease is still likely a hilariously powerful option and so is web. Do we even need to go into third level or have I made my point? Flame sphere is just not a very good spell. It's manifestly below standard to the point where I can find level one spells that do better jobs of what you suggest.

[nyjastul69]

thanks
do you know if this works with half elves? because they are Elven Blood. if it count they I will be chaning up on of my builds

Yes, it works for half-elves.

Edit: Ask your DM if this works. I allow it, others might not.


People are ignoring the OP's book limitations. Orb spells do not appear in an approved book. The "Races of" books are also not approved. Player's Handbook II is not approved.

We can help the OP, but listing irrelevant options won't do that.

I wasn't answering a question asked by the OP.

[Andezzar]

Yes, it works for half-elves.

Edit: Ask your DM if this works. I allow it, others might not. No need to backpedal. The first answer is correct:
To take an elf wizard substitution level, a character must be
an elf about to take her 1st, 3rd, or 5th level of wizard.
Elven Blood: For all effects related to race, a half-elf is considered an elf.

[nyjastul69]

No need to backpedal. The first answer is correct:

Yeah, I wasnt sure about the 'effect' wording. I know there is no game definition of 'effect'. Do half-elves have the elf subtype? Not that it matters, I'm just curious.

[yellowrocket]

Partially charged wands now? Really? And don't even get me started on BFC. At these levels grease is still likely a hilariously powerful option and so is web. Do we even need to go into third level or have I made my point? Flame sphere is just not a very good spell. It's manifestly below standard to the point where I can find level one spells that do better jobs of what you suggest.

It matters because he's expected to use that type of spell. It wasn't the most optimal option. I don't think we're even in disagreement about the use of other spells. It's the simple fact that when you're expected to fill a turn or two, or need to finish off a creature, or simply play blaster for a moment a wand of a spell that you aren't going to prepare as a regular spell is an option that might be favorably looked upon by the OPS dm.

[Beheld]

You guys are amazing! Instead of listening to the OP and the concerns about breaking the game and getting into trouble with the gm and group, you go on and on about how your notions of how to play a wizard are the right ones, always, and the group has to be force-fed that knowledge.

Uh... No. First off, no one is saying that their notions of how to play a Wizard are the right ones, people are arguing about whether Glitterdust or Flaming Sphere is better, and whether Glitterdust or FLaming Sphere does more damage.

Secondly, the OP stated absolutely zero concerns about breaking the game. You made that up 100% in your own head. What he said is the DM wants him to do damage and he doesn't want to do damage. That's it. He never said anything about being concerned about breaking the game, nor does he need to be, because Wizards casting save or lose spells like Color Spray and Glitterdust is never going to break the game.

[Blackhawk748]

It matters because he's expected to use that type of spell. It wasn't the most optimal option. I don't think we're even in disagreement about the use of other spells. It's the simple fact that when you're expected to fill a turn or two, or need to finish off a creature, or simply play blaster for a moment a wand of a spell that you aren't going to prepare as a regular spell is an option that might be favorably looked upon by the OPS dm.

I say screw Flaming Sphere and get a wand of Scorching Ray, its just a better spell.

[ryu]

I say screw Flaming Sphere and get a wand of Scorching Ray, its just a better spell.

Now see this guy gets what I was saying. If you want to put a damage spell in a wand at least pick one of the decent ones.

[Blackhawk748]

Now see this guy gets what I was saying. If you want to put a damage spell in a wand at least pick one of the decent ones.

I play Blaster Sorcs, and Scorching Ray is my go to spell. Its also solid in a wand, as 4d6 damage will outlast that Crossbow for quite awhile.

[ryu]

I play Blaster Sorcs, and Scorching Ray is my go to spell. Its also solid in a wand, as 4d6 damage will outlast that Crossbow for quite awhile.

That's what I mean. Scorching ray is actually somewhat legitimately competitive for its level. Flaming sphere isn't.

[Florian]

There´re enough good blasting choices. I mainly picked Flaming Sphere because of the discussion FS vs. Glitterdust...

[ryu]

There´re enough good blasting choices. I mainly picked Flaming Sphere because of the discussion FS vs. Glitterdust...

Honestly I think the entire conversation would've gone faster if we'd immediately pointed out that flame sphere was weak as a damage spell and brought something more commonly good for the damage role within the level for comparison. Before that happened the natural response was for people to point out reasons flame sphere is bad or responding to people defending it. This is how tangents happen.

[LudicSavant]

you are a F***ing moron. You have banned evocation, you just lost the only thing wizards are good at." (Not those words but the intent was there.))

http://psych.colorado.edu/~vanboven/teaching/p7536_heurbias/p7536_readings/kruger_dunning.pdf

[Platymus Pus]

Build an optimized evocation character.
Start throwing fireballs in the middle of fights and nuking the party with 1-2 fireballs.
Evocation is better after all, he won't mind.

[LudicSavant]

Once you get to level 3-4 the burning hands is often enough to kill on a failed save No, it isn't. Even if you're in an easy game where you never fight anything with a CR higher than your level, the mean hp for CR3 monsters is around 27hp. The mean damage of a level 3 Burning Hands spell is 7.5 damage, if they fail the save. That's not a 1-shot. That's four shots if they fail all saves and don't have any kinds of resistances, and you have to be within 15 feet for all of those rounds.

If you factor in Reflex saves, it's less than that. If you have 18 in your casting stat, you've still only got a DC15 save, and the mean Reflex save is around +4 at CR3, which means enemies succeed half the time. That means that your expected damage per casting goes down to around 5hp. (7.5 mean * (.75) save factor - (.5) rounding factor) = 5.125. In order to take out the mean stats CR3 enemy using no special abilities or anything, you need to cast that 6 times.

6 times is not one time.

Also, that's an average enemy, which means roughly 50% have more. Enemies who rely on hp for their defense tend to have more (such as a Dire Wolf with 45hp or a Large Animated Object with 52hp). Enemies with less tend to have special abilities that can be relied on for defense, such as the Ethereal Marauder using an improved version of Ethereal Jaunt. Either way there's a fair chance that Burning Hands will be even less effective than the "mean stats" projection.



Shocking grasp is likewise often a 1 shot no save kill starting at level 3.

In what possible world is 3d6 damage melee attack a "1 shot no save kill" at level 3?

It seems to me like you're exaggerating. A lot.

[Beheld]

No, it isn't. Even if you're in an easy game where you never fight anything with a CR higher than your level, the mean hp for CR3 monsters is around 27hp. The mean damage of a level 3 Burning Hands spell is 7.5 damage, if they fail the save. That's not a 1-shot. That's four shots if they fail all saves and don't have any kinds of resistances, and you have to be within 15 feet for all of those rounds.

...

In what possible world is 3d6 damage melee attack a "1 shot no save kill" at level 3?

It seems to me like you're exaggerating. A lot.

If you read between the lines of his posts, it seems pretty conclusive that he only plays campaigns where people fight large numbers of mooks in every fight. So at level 3 he expects to be facing at least four CR 1/3 enemies in every fight, instead of ever facing a single CR 3.

As I said to him, that is one kind of valid EL encounter, but by no means the only one.

[Crustypeanut]

Probably joining the thread late..

But I had a similar issue with my old group back when I was playing a wizard. I didn't ban Evocation, but I was playing a Conjurer and thus didn't really pack any evocation spells - my teammates were kinda miffed that "I didn't do much", but when I saved everyone's asses by summoning numerous celestial hawks (we were low level), they appreciated it. Plus the whole 'I CHOOSE YOU, CELESTIAL PIDGEY!" thing I yelled when I summoned 'em went over well with the group's sense of humor.

I had to explain to them that I was saving my spells for when they were -needed-. And they weren't needed previously. Plus I was helping with ranged touch attacks.. even if I missed most of the time. And my house centipede familiar bit someone once!

This particular group never really grasped how powerful non-blasty spells were for the most part - they were smart guys, but they preferred killings things brutally over disabling/debuffing/etc.

At least until, after I started DMing, that one of the new guys brought in a Dwarf Witch and kept them all buffed with Fortune/Cackle, enemies debuffed with Misfortune/Cackle, and slept my BBEG with a hex during a massive mutiny aboard a ship. Although none of them except that one guy ever really played an arcane caster, even after that, they understood that a well timed spell/debuff could do wonders. Most of them still only played shootyblasters or smashyfaces though.

(This was Pathfinder, btw)

[SirNMN]

Oh pardon him for assuming his allies weren't stupid. In what group is it not common practice to at least talk about what spells are being prepared and the various actions that are obviously horrible tactical moves? There's being unoptimized, and then there's just not even putting in the effort to spend five minutes talking with your team.

it might just be my group but we have never had the cleric or wizard discuses what they were preparing for that day

[ryu]

it might just be my group but we have never had the cleric or wizard discuses what they were preparing for that day

Really? Is there at least general knowledge of preferences within the team? Communication is important to prevent people getting in each other's way, sometimes in spectacularly horrible fashion.

[Florian]

Really? Is there at least general knowledge of preferences within the team? Communication is important to prevent people getting in each other's way, sometimes in spectacularly horrible fashion.

That level of meta-gaming may be quite unique to 3E era D&D. Other systems or, more likely, gamers socialized with certain systems look at that kind of meta-gaming with some disdain.
There actually has to be no talk between the players and every sort of information sharing and planing has to happen between the characters and is subject to in-game matters.

Before you cry out at that, remember that neither D&D nor PF are the top selling games in a lot of parts in the world in the last decades.

[P.F.]

it might just be my group but we have never had the cleric or wizard discuses what they were preparing for that day

Or had the fighter/barbarian decide that they would have more fun if they subordinate themselves to the casters.

In a recent game I also had the problem that when my ninja is invisible and with a readied sneak attack, the AoE'ers don't know which squares need to be excluded. I can only imagine how well it would go over if you accidentally glitterdust the party rogue instead of just blasting the bad guy.

Now, a party will certainly do better if they work as a team than if each player acts with total disregard of his or her teammates.

[ryu]

That level of meta-gaming may be quite unique to 3E era D&D. Other systems or, more likely, gamers socialized with certain systems look at that kind of meta-gaming with some disdain.
There actually has to be no talk between the players and every sort of information sharing and planing has to happen between the characters and is subject to in-game matters.

Before you cry out at that, remember that neither D&D nor PF are the top selling games in a lot of parts in the world in the last decades.

So talk in character or notice patterns in character! It's only ''metagaming'' if it makes use of knowledge that isn't plainly available your character. That's not even slightly gray on the poor behavior scale. It's expected that people have some understanding what their teammates will do/are likely to do if for no other reason than to prevent accidentally getting them killed. Your enemies are being controlled by the person behind the screen. Your teammates are on your side of it, so work with them.

[Blackhawk748]

it might just be my group but we have never had the cleric or wizard discuses what they were preparing for that day

That is definitely your group. If my group has a prepared caster, it is very much discussed


That level of meta-gaming may be quite unique to 3E era D&D. Other systems or, more likely, gamers socialized with certain systems look at that kind of meta-gaming with some disdain.
There actually has to be no talk between the players and every sort of information sharing and planing has to happen between the characters and is subject to in-game matters.

Before you cry out at that, remember that neither D&D nor PF are the top selling games in a lot of parts in the world in the last decades.

Its metagaming to ask the Cleric or Wizard what spells they're prepping? Im sorry, my Fighters like to know what the casters have available, because some of them may be buffs.

[Beheld]

That level of meta-gaming may be quite unique to 3E era D&D. Other systems or, more likely, gamers socialized with certain systems look at that kind of meta-gaming with some disdain.
There actually has to be no talk between the players and every sort of information sharing and planing has to happen between the characters and is subject to in-game matters.

Before you cry out at that, remember that neither D&D nor PF are the top selling games in a lot of parts in the world in the last decades.

"Hey big fat guy who I inexplicably travel with every single day, remember how yesterday I cast a spell that made the enemies blind in an area? And the day before I cast a spell that made enemies in the area blind? Today I prepared a spell that makes enemies in the area blind. The same one. Also please don't charge at giant scorpions, because I can put them in a box and they won't leave the box, and that's way better than watching you get eaten."

It's not metagaming for a party that allegedly works together and spends most of their time together and fights challenges together to talk about tactics, or very briefly mention what spells they can cast that day.

[DarkSonic1337]

Franky if my teammates did not take the time to sit down with me and discuss tactics while I'm taking my HOUR to prepare spells I would leave the team (completely in character). Maybe I'd roll up a new character and we'd repeat until either the other players "get it" or I find a new group.

You don't trust your life to someone who won't share their abilities and won't take yours into consideration.

In my current group we even discuss what moves we're going to be using in what order when we're expecting a tough fight (or have "known unknowns" like knowing there will be enemies in a room of approximate area up ahead)...and we do it telepathically because I felt that telepathic bond is actually a decent spell to permanency.

[Andezzar]

"Hey big fat guy who I inexplicably travel with every single day, remember how yesterday I cast a spell that made the enemies blind in an area? And the day before I cast a spell that made enemies in the area blind? Today I prepared a spell that makes enemies in the area blind. The same one. Also please don't charge at giant scorpions, because I can put them in a box and they won't leave the box, and that's way better than watching you get eaten."

It's not metagaming for a party that allegedly works together and spends most of their time together and fights challenges together to talk about tactics, or very briefly mention what spells they can cast that day.QFT.

I really miss a like button on this forum.

Also "Hey big fat guy who I inexplicably travel with every single day, do you want to become even bigger and and fatter and sprout extra heads so that you can wreak even more havoc?"

[Warior4356]

Dear lord I have created a monster....

I added a few damage and direct attack spells to my spell book and the gm was happy, also no matter how good your case I am not taking the evocation school. Additionally classes or prestige classes, the limit is 2 plus base class.

If I might ask another question, to interrupt the argument on damage vs non-damage. This is my spell list and my prepared spells can I get some input?

Spellbook: http://pastebin.com/WtVwbKuk

Char sheet, with spells at the bottom: http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=651359

If you have other suggestions, let me know but my gm is rather strict so I need a good argument and a good rp reason for anything.

[Andezzar]

The spellbook link does not work.

A wizard knows all level 0 spells, not just four.

No Alter Self? Does the DM really insist on having seen the creatures during a game session? If so how does he handle other preexisiting knowledge that the characters should have? Who are their parents? What have they done yesterday?

For Corrosive Grasp you have to get too close to the enemy for my taste.

Protection from Alignment is really useful as it blocks mind control from creatures of any alignment.

Not really relevant yet, but make sure you have Rope Trick by level 9 (or 5 if you have a rod of extend spell).

[Platymus Pus]

Make a knowledge check for every monster ever, once you get your knowledge check high enough.

[Blackhawk748]

For Corrosive Grasp you have to get too close to the enemy for my taste.

Its a "defensive" weapon. I once took it on a Sorceress and when an Illithid tried to grapple her it got a face full of acid. Its a good deterrent as it lasts for rounds/level IIRC.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Make a knowledge check for every monster ever, once you get your knowledge check high enough.Also, spend your downtime visiting menageries and using divinations and libraries to study monsters you want to emulate. Summon them, Planar Bind them, and pay others to let you study them and their monstrous minions.

"Screw the unfair rules; I have money."

[Elkad]

it might just be my group but we have never had the cleric or wizard discuses what they were preparing for that day

I'm more likely to discuss it with the other casters than with the barbarian, but it does come up. Definitely not every day though.
And PvP is always in the back of my mind, so nobody gets the full list.

[prufock]

If you have other suggestions, let me know but my gm is rather strict so I need a good argument and a good rp reason for anything.
Remember that all the best evocation spells can eventually be had through the illusion school, so I wouldn't jump to ban that one.

Spell selection looks solid, though I would probably replace corrosive grasp with Ray of Enfeeblement for low levels; 1d6+1 STR damage with no save is nice. It's not quite damage, but is a "direct attack" spell.

As for second level spells, acid arrow is pretty decent, but you could instead take Kelgore's Grave Mist (area cold damage and fatigue) and Winter's Blast feat (delaying Iron Will for later). Kelgore's is probably better overall than acid arrow, and the reserve feat gives you at will (limited) direct damage.

[Andezzar]

Remember that all the best evocation spells can eventually be had through the illusion school, so I wouldn't jump to ban that one.Aren't those only semi-real unless you jump though other hoops?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Aren't those only semi-real unless you jump though other hoops?Contingency doesn't care if it's only semi-real, since you can choose to accept the full effects on yourself.

[zergling.exe]

Contingency doesn't care if it's only semi-real, since you can choose to accept the full effects on yourself.

I believe RAW you auto succeed on your own illusions, as you know they aren't real and thus don't get a saving throw against it at all.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I believe RAW you auto succeed on your own illusions, as you know they aren't real and thus don't get a saving throw against it at all.But you can choose to forgo your saves and allow anything you cast to affect you. I believe this is the case even with immunities, as the elf/sleep effect example in the PHB shows.

[zergling.exe]

But you can choose to forgo your saves and allow anything you cast to affect you. I believe this is the case even with immunities, as the elf/sleep effect example in the PHB shows.

As Curmudgeon's argument goes (it is Curmudgeon's right?): If you know the illusion is real, you get no saving throw; if you get no saving throw, you cannot choose to fail your save by default.

[Beheld]

As Curmudgeon's argument goes (it is Curmudgeon's right?): If you know the illusion is real, you get no saving throw; if you get no saving throw, you cannot choose to fail your save by default.

While I really don't want to support people casting partially real Contingencies that are 100% real in their actual games. I do want to point out that is not actually what it says.

The only line in question addressing that says "A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw." Which is not the same thing as "get's no saving throw." If you are choosing to willingly accept the result of the spell, that doesn't mean you can't fail a save that you might otherwise not need to take.

I mean, harmless spells are already spells you don't need to take a saving throw for, but can if you want.

FYI, the line about failing a save is: "Voluntarily Giving up a Saving Throw
A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a spell’s result. Even a character with a special resistance to magic can suppress this quality." So while special resistance does include elves putting to sleep themselves, it might or might not be people who are aware an illusion is fake.

[Âmesang]

If an elf couldn't put himself to sleep, well… sucks to be him when it comes to cramming at wizard school. :smalltongue:

Bleah, the talk of not going over strategy with one's fellow players (in-game or out) reminded of multi-battles in Pokémon with a CPU partner — one who does not tell you which Pokémon they're using or which attacks they'll be attacking with, thus causing all sorts of problems throughout the battle (especially when Earthquake is involved…).

The beauty of playing with real people is the ability to communicate such knowledge and strategize! 'Twas why I listed my character's stats online so that, if they felt so inclined, they'd know exactly what she could (and couldn't do) and work with it (hopefully).

[Florian]

While I actually do think that shadow permanency is somewhat borked, if not totally effed up, PF does actually have some legit cases the state that you may willfully disbelieve an illusion, especially a shadow-type spell so you get the full benefit or drawback....

[ericgrau]

Dear lord I have created a monster....

I added a few damage and direct attack spells to my spell book and the gm was happy, also no matter how good your case I am not taking the evocation school. Additionally classes or prestige classes, the limit is 2 plus base class.

If I might ask another question, to interrupt the argument on damage vs non-damage. This is my spell list and my prepared spells can I get some input?

Spellbook: http://pastebin.com/WtVwbKuk

Char sheet, with spells at the bottom: http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=651359

If you have other suggestions, let me know but my gm is rather strict so I need a good argument and a good rp reason for anything.


That's fine. Player preferences > all.

But acid arrow is horrid and corrossive grasp are horrid. Since when is 1/3 as effective an acceptable substitute? Let's see if we can do better.

Summon swarm does ok damage combined with a disabling effect. Either on its own isn't great, but together they are nice. The damage alone is still better than acid arrow, because it's automatic damage rather than missing almost half the time with your +3 to hit. Not to mention -4s for firing through allies or into melee. The weak disable on summon swarm is a bonus, unlikely to land be awesome when it does. Igedrazaar's Miasma at least hits an area so you can tag multiple foes at once but it's fort negates which is easily the highest save on any monster who isn't outright immune. Or if you face a lot of undead then there's life bolt. I'd go with summon swarm and/or maybe life bolt if you face a lot of undead. I couldn't find anything good for 1st level so I suppose keeping corrosive grasp is ok for a last resort when you're running out of spells and don't want to use a lousy crossbow.

Level 1: Color spray good (at level 3 anyway), silent image ok. Grease is pretty bad unless your DM doesn't know that monsters can crawl or fight prone and keeps making them provoke instead. Honestly it gets popularity from pointing out certain foes with horrible reflex saves... and ignoring what the spell's effect is when they fail that save. It's ok for delaying foes in a 10 foot corridor though, as are common in dungeons, assuming your party melee doesn't want to go that way.. Enlarge person should never be prepared, but it's good to get a few scrolls. I mean you give the party melee about 25% more damage and his enemies about 30% more damage for a net gain of around -5%. Maybe it's ok since the melee can afford to take some hits but I would never ever ever waste an entire turn just to give someone a net gain of meh. Pop a scroll during the buff round and only if the enemy isn't also a melee bruiser who will benefit just as much from the easier target. Even in a buff round you might consider a scroll of protection from evil instead. If you have an ally that likes to trip or grapple or uses a reach weapon, then enlarge person is more worth it. Likewise enlarge person used only for buffing damage gets popularity from looking at the benefits and not the drawbacks.

Level 2: Web good, glitterdust good.

If you want to buff then create magic tattoo is an awesome buff because it lasts 24 hours. The material cost is a bit of a bummer at level 3 but pretty soon it will be pocket change.

[P.F.]

Dear lord I have created a monster....

:smallamused:


If I might ask another question, to interrupt the argument on damage vs non-damage. This is my spell list and my prepared spells can I get some input?

You might consider getting a scroll of acid arrow and dropping it from your prepared spells. That way you have it if you need it and can free up that daily slot with a utility spell. I know I suggested adding it to your spellbook to assuage your DM's fears about your having no direct damage ... but it requires a touch attack, and when it does hit does an underwhelming average of 10 damage total, spread across two rounds.

Now if you find yourself using it a lot then by all means keep it, but if you're like me you'll more likely find yourself wishing you had an extra cast of web or glitterdust or ffs even color spray or grease, than thinking, "what this encounter needs is an acid arrow to the face." Unless there are literally trolls lurking under most bridges in your campaign setting. Then I take back everything I just said.

[prufock]

Aren't those only semi-real unless you jump though other hoops?
Fully real on a failed will save, with partial effects or no effect on a successful save. They aren't surefire winners, but there's only a handful of them that you really need (forcecage, contingency, wall of force, etc).

[Andezzar]

Fully real on a failed will save, with partial effects or no effect on a successful save. They aren't surefire winners, but there's only a handful of them that you really need (forcecage, contingency, wall of force, etc).
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.You cannot believe an effect that you know to be false.

[ryu]

You cannot believe an effect that you know to be false.

Problem with that is that the enemy doesn't know it's false unless they know what you've cast. That's not a guarantee when fighting almost anything, but a mage with the proper skill setup or a person with intelligently picked magic items. They also don't get a save unless they interact with the object or actively test it to obtain proof. In other words it will work as normal for the majority of opponents.

[Andezzar]

I'm not talking about spells that affect enemies, but about contingency, which was suggested earlier. That one at least should not work. Spells like Fire Shield shouldn't work as Shadow Evocations either.

[ryu]

I'm not talking about spells that affect enemies, but about contingency, which was suggested earlier. That one at least should not work. Spells like Fire Shield shouldn't work as Shadow Evocations either.

You can totally believe in something you have active rational belief to be otherwise false. You just have to decouple your mind from rationality. It happens all the time in our word and even has a known process. That the result literally becomes true if you believe in it reinforces it more than what happens here too. Aren't you terrified now? :smallamused:

[Andezzar]

You can totally believe in something you have active rational belief to be otherwise false. You just have to decouple your mind from rationality. That's not belief, that is a delusion.

[Elderand]

That's not belief, that is a delusion.

Six of one, half a dozen of another.

[ryu]

That's not belief, that is a delusion.

Call it whatever you want. It still isn't the same as active disbelief which is what's require for the illusion not to have effect. Because it actually becomes real when you believe it you can't even call it delusion. Just a very questionable method of arriving at a correct belief. The fact that such situations don't exist in our world is very good thing. We're good enough at driving ourselves insane without reality bending to our beliefs even in specific situations.

[Beheld]

The problem with the Shadow Evocation text is that it provides absolutely no help in clarifying anything. We are talking about a specific spell with a "Will(disbelief)" saving throw. Disbelief has nothing to do with what your actual thoughts are on the subject, they are based on whether you made the saving throw, which goes right back into "needs no saving throw" versus "You can willingly choose to accept the result of the spell".

If someone casts Silent Silent Image and creates a wall in front of you, and then you throw a stone at the wall, you get a saving throw. If you fail the saving throw, you might still believe that they are probably not a level 9 caster so they can't cast wall of stone, so it's probably silent image, and you may run and jump at the wall and find out you are correct, but your belief that the spell was silent image doesn't actually mean you disbelieve in the illusion for the purposes of a Shadow Conjured Wall of Stone, because that is determined by the saving throw you failed.

[Jack_Simth]

While I actually do think that shadow permanency is somewhat borked
... Permanancy is Universal, not Evocation, in both Pathfinder and 3.5. Are you thinking Contingency?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

You can totally believe in something you have active rational belief to be otherwise false. You just have to decouple your mind from rationality. It happens all the time in our word and even has a known process. That the result literally becomes true if you believe in it reinforces it more than what happens here too. Aren't you terrified now? :smallamused:This actually is nothing like that, because you KNOW you're casting a spell, and you KNOW that it will affect you if you believe it will, because that's how the spell works. "It's not real" is 100% wrong, because it IS real, but with the caveat that if you don't think it will work on you, it won't. And since you're casting the spell and you know how it works, there's no reason to think that it won't work as you know it will.

[Nifft]

That's not belief, that is a delusion.

It's a matter of conjugation:

I have true faith.

You believe what you were taught.

She is delusional.

- - -

In a high-powered game, I'd allow a Shadow Contingency to work.

In a low-powered game, it would work correctly 40% of the time (or whatever the % real is).

[ericgrau]

Why is everyone arguing over something that requires level 15 when the OP is level 3?


No, it isn't. Even if you're in an easy game where you never fight anything with a CR higher than your level, the mean hp for CR3 monsters is around 27hp.

You can fight multiple foes in one fight. It's much more common than solo foes actually. 4 CR 1/2 in a routine fight (EL 3) or 4 CR 1 in a challenging fight (EL 5). If you are fighting a solo foe, then [empowered] ray of enfeeblement him. Preparing that spell (or another great single target no save debuff or etc) plus an AOE on the same day works out very well. And this negates everything below the quote so moving on.


I was going to play a very toned down incantrix. Also do I really ban illusion enchantment and necromancy?
This is all moot because your preferences for fun are more important than anything, but if limited to core+forgotten realms I'd probably ban illusion, enchantment and transmutation. It's actually not all that bad since there are lots of very nice spells in the other schools and only a small list of all stars in those 3. Polymorph is the most famous one but it's a huge slow headache to calculate, besides having greatly limited form options in core+FR. Nearly all the major ones in the guides like war troll are gone. Leaving mainly the hydra. Which suffers from the monk's "flurry of misses" on a rogue due to low attack bonus. On a fighter/barbarian/etc., it's an ok buff but still drops their attack bonus and damage a little in exchange for the extra attacks. Outside of abusing polmyorph with splatbook forms, using planar ally for wish, stacking abuse, chain gating, and so forth, there's no spell so super-tremendous that you can't live without in a game that you aren't trying to break in twain.

Again, all moot because play what you want > all. In fact the main point is that there are always alternatives, so pick whatever schools you want then find those alternatives. Want damage without evocation? Ok I'm sticking with summon swarm because it doesn't miss and does ok reliable DOT with a rider. And even if foes are immune to the rider, they aren't immune to the damage so it's always at least so-so (and still better than acid arrow which misses).

I think people could have a lot more fun if they simply took their favorite schools, didn't think that they needed any school, then moved forward without a second thought. A lot more variety in the casters you play plus you really can do great even with whatever you might have lost. I mean "Darn, I'll just have to fall back on my other 472 options"?

[prufock]

You cannot believe an effect that you know to be false.
Can't find any rules source on this. You don't need to make a saving throw if you know it isn't real, but it doesn't say you can't make one. And if you make one, you can choose to fail it.


Why is everyone arguing over something that requires level 15 when the OP is level 3?
Ninth level, actually. You can't get the best evocations yet, but you can still do shadow daylight, wall of ice, wind wall, tiny hut, continual flame, etc, as well as damaging spells if you really want it. So losing evocation hurts a lot less than losing transmutation or abjuration, at least.


You can fight multiple foes in one fight. It's much more common than solo foes actually.
More common in your games, perhaps, but that's not universal. In fact, if you look at the random dungeon encounter tables for level 3, you'll see that single-foe encounters are actually more common. It probably leans further toward multiple foes at higher levels, since there are more options then.

Summon swarm is good, but has the "concentration + 2 rounds" drawback - which means you either concentrate, using up your standard actions in subsequent rounds, or you let the swarm go free for 2 rounds and possibly attack party members. It's only 1d6 per round, but no attack and the distraction, nauseated, and poison riders are nice at low levels. It doesn't scale well though, since the saves for those are low.

[Andezzar]

Can't find any rules source on this. You don't need to make a saving throw if you know it isn't real, but it doesn't say you can't make one. And if you make one, you can choose to fail it.
It's not about saving throws, it is about the fact that such spells have no effect on disbelievers, and I am of the opinion that someone can only knowingly believe a falsehood if he is delusional.
Once again:
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.Contingency is a non-damaging spell, so it does not work unless the caster believes it to be real. Since he knows that he is not casting Contingency but Greater Shadow Evocation, he cannot believe that he is casting Contingency.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Once again:Contingency is a non-damaging spell, so it does not work unless the caster believes it to be real. Since he knows that he is not casting Contingency but Greater Shadow Evocation, he cannot believe that he is casting Contingency.But he does believe he's casting a spell that acts the way he knows it will. He knows how the spell works. If he chooses for it not to affect him, it won't, but he also knows that if he wants it to, it'll give him exactly the effects he wants it to. Otherwise, why would he cast it on himself in the first place?

[Andezzar]

But he does believe he's casting a spell that acts the way he knows it will. He knows how the spell works.If he knows how the spell works, he knows that it won't work on him.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

If he knows how the spell works, he knows that it won't work on him.If he doesn't believe it will, sure.

"I'm casting a spell that will give me a Contingency." One and done.

[Andezzar]

The problem is he knows that it can't give him Contingency.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The problem is he knows that it can't give him Contingency.If you saw that people who believed they could touch a certain stone could be healed of sickness actually got healed, would you believe it could happen? Even if you saw people who didn't believe didn't?

Because that's what we're talking about here.

You have proof that believing makes it so. It happens every time you cast the spell. Why wouldn't you believe it, if you have proof that it works?

[Andezzar]

No you don't have proof that it works. You have the rules that say the spell causes a certain effect and that disbelieving negates the effect. There is no rule saying belief causes the effect.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

No you don't have proof that it works. You have the rules that say the spell causes a certain effect and that disbelieving negates the effect. There is no rule saying belief causes the effect.So don't disbelieve. Duh.

You know that people who believe in it are affected by it. You know it works on people who believe, because that's how the spell works. You have no reason to believe it won't work, so I really don't see what your problem is. You have proof every time you cast the spell, and you have no reason to believe it won't work if you believe it will.

If you want to houserule that it doesn't work, then that's one thing, but so long as you don't actively disbelieve it, there's no reason at all why it wouldn't work.

[edit] Do you know why it wouldn't work on you? You're convinced it won't.

Do you know why it would work on me? Because I know it will.

[Andezzar]

That is circular logic. You don't know that the spell will work unless you cast it at least once. You however do know that the spell will have no effect if you disbelieve it. You can claim that it will work all you want but that does not mean you can believe it. You can delude yourself into thinking that it works but that is not believing it.

At best it is up to the DM if it works. I would not count on it.

I wonder how else you could weaponize such delusions.

[Vizzerdrix]

it might just be my group but we have never had the cleric or wizard discuses what they were preparing for that day

I've been in a group like that. I WAS the caster in a group like that. Got told I was cheating by letting everyone know what I'd prepped, but I've discussed that group several times before.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

That is circular logic. You don't know that the spell will work unless you cast it at least once. You however do know that the spell will have no effect if you disbelieve it. You can claim that it will work all you want but that does not mean you can believe it. You can delude yourself into thinking that it works but that is not believing it.

At best it is up to the DM if it works. I would not count on it.

I wonder how else you could weaponize such delusions.It's only circular logic insofar as it's basically a tautology. "Truth is true," that sort of thing.

If the wizard believes the spell works and it works, then it works, and the wizard has his proof. And since it works on everyone ELSE if they believe it works, the wizard will have no reason to believe it wouldn't. And if it has ever worked on a single wizard in the presence of others, word will get around.

"Oy! If you don't disbelieve, it'll work!"

"How do you know?"

"Old Man Henderson cast it the other day! He might be a bit off his rocker, but he showed it can be done if you think it will!"

"Oh really. I guess that's good enough for me!"

And once anyone else get similar results, you've got it.

It doesn't have to be real. You just have to believe it's real enough.

[Andezzar]

But that first casting does not exist, or at least you cannot prove that it exists.

[Quertus]

But that first casting does not exist, or at least you cannot prove that it exists.

Um... I think plenty of people's games prove that it exists. And plane travel exists. So people from worlds where it works influence worlds where it could work but never has. And get called crazy on worlds where it cannot.

[Beheld]

This whole argument is a non-sequitar, because once again, whether the Shadow Conjured Wall of Stone acts as a Wall of Stone or as x% real wall of stone has nothing at all to do with your character's personal subjective beliefs about whether it is a wall of stone or a silent image spell.

The "disbelief" in the spell text is telling you specifically what happens when you make or fail your saving throw "Will(disbelief)" as laid out in the saving throw line of the text.

And since at this time there has been no argument that the caster cannot choose to willingly accept the spells result as if a failed save or that he can get the save even if he doesn't need it, until that argument is made we are stuck in the same limbo outlined earlier, and arguing about your character's subjective thoughts is not relevant in any way at all.

[prufock]

It's not about saving throws, it is about the fact that such spells have no effect on disbelievers, and I am of the opinion that someone can only knowingly believe a falsehood if he is delusional.

Once again:Contingency is a non-damaging spell, so it does not work unless the caster believes it to be real. Since he knows that he is not casting Contingency but Greater Shadow Evocation, he cannot believe that he is casting Contingency.
Delusion and belief are not as separate as you seem to think. A delusion is a belief made in the face of evidence. So to say that a wizard who believes his own shadow evocation is engaging in delusion isn't an argument that it can't happen.

Nothing, mechanically, contradicts this idea. You don't need to make a save, but nothing says you can't, and you can choose to fail that save, thus believing the spell and allowing it to affect you as if it were real. All other argument is purely fluff, not mechanical.

If you have trouble with the fluff, it may just require broadening your definitions. I can think of a half a dozen ways to flavour this so that there is no contradiction.
- a young wizard with an active imagination who easily accepts illusion
- an absent-minded wizard who sometimes casts the wrong spells, and thus might think the shadow spell is real
- a wizard with a actual psychological delusion that these are real
- a wizard who maintains a philosophy that reality is nothing but an illusion, and we're all the equivalent of brains in vats
- a wizard who knows that these things affect the weak-willed, but is himself weak-willed
- a wizard who is particularly good at managing his own mental pathways

Even in the real world, people do work this way; otherwise "normal" people hold beliefs that are not supported, or are even contradicted, by evidence. People have greater fear of airplane crashes than car crashes, even when they know the statistics. People convince themselves that they made the right choices even when they have negative outcomes. People can misremember events, or absent-mindedly forget things (yes, even things they've just done -- "did I lock the front door or not?"), or have constructed or implanted memories. People can change their beliefs through self-reinforcement. People can get paranoid that there is someone else in their house even when they know they're alone and all the doors are locked. People's perceptions fill in gaps left by their senses. People are pressured into belief by those around them. All real-world psychological concepts that indicate belief even when it should be apparent that such beliefs are unfounded.

It should be no great stretch to apply this to shadow evocation.

[ryu]

Delusion and belief are not as separate as you seem to think. A delusion is a belief made in the face of evidence. So to say that a wizard who believes his own shadow evocation is engaging in delusion isn't an argument that it can't happen.

Nothing, mechanically, contradicts this idea. You don't need to make a save, but nothing says you can't, and you can choose to fail that save, thus believing the spell and allowing it to affect you as if it were real. All other argument is purely fluff, not mechanical.

If you have trouble with the fluff, it may just require broadening your definitions. I can think of a half a dozen ways to flavour this so that there is no contradiction.
- a young wizard with an active imagination who easily accepts illusion
- an absent-minded wizard who sometimes casts the wrong spells, and thus might think the shadow spell is real
- a wizard with a actual psychological delusion that these are real
- a wizard who maintains a philosophy that reality is nothing but an illusion, and we're all the equivalent of brains in vats
- a wizard who knows that these things affect the weak-willed, but is himself weak-willed
- a wizard who is particularly good at managing his own mental pathways

Even in the real world, people do work this way; otherwise "normal" people hold beliefs that are not supported, or are even contradicted, by evidence. People have greater fear of airplane crashes than car crashes, even when they know the statistics. People convince themselves that they made the right choices even when they have negative outcomes. People can misremember events, or absent-mindedly forget things (yes, even things they've just done -- "did I lock the front door or not?"), or have constructed or implanted memories. People can change their beliefs through self-reinforcement. People can get paranoid that there is someone else in their house even when they know they're alone and all the doors are locked. People's perceptions fill in gaps left by their senses. People are pressured into belief by those around them. All real-world psychological concepts that indicate belief even when it should be apparent that such beliefs are unfounded.

It should be no great stretch to apply this to shadow evocation.

Especially when the belief literally renders itself accurate. This is what I was talking about. A person can make this happen with objective viewing third parties and repeatability such that their belief actually does effect reality. Not just for them either. It's not even delusion at that point. Im reminded of a very old saying. If it's stupid, but consistently works well over a long period with no ill side effects, it's not stupid.

[Segev]

My advice would be to ask the DM if his sole concern is that you will not contribute adequately with the build you have. If he says "yes," then assure him that you know what you're doing. Plan to use the batman wizard at every level, and just play effectively. Sleep and color spray at low levels. Party buffs at higher levels. Battlefield control everywhere.

You can let him know what you're planning, and probably should. But don't do it in the sense of "I am trying to prove something." Do it in the sense that you want him to know what to expect.

Be polite.

If he says he has some other problems, ask him for specifics and try to work them out. But don't let him tell you you're "doing it wrong" just because you're not a blaster-mage first and foremost. Take him at his word, communicate clearly, and ask him to just trust you for a few sessions to see how effective your build really can be.

[ericgrau]

Summon swarm is good, but has the "concentration + 2 rounds" drawback - which means you either concentrate, using up your standard actions in subsequent rounds, or you let the swarm go free for 2 rounds and possibly attack party members. It's only 1d6 per round, but no attack and the distraction, nauseated, and poison riders are nice at low levels. It doesn't scale well though, since the saves for those are low.
You don't control the swarm either way. A little warning to the party is nice but mainly you just have to summon it on top of the enemy and 95% of the time it should stay on him. If it doesn't then it's because he died in 1 round with no adjacent monster and the fight is probably almost over anyway, meaning hurting your ally is rarely a big deal as he'll survive without further danger and can be healed soon. I do favor a 2 round duration and not concentrating on it, but concentrating is an option if you're low on spells per day. Yes it is better low level than high, later the OP may want to switch. This also acts as an advantage because it means summon swarm is easy to scroll which the OP may want to do since this is likely to be a backup tactic not a main tactic.

As for encounter types, regardless of DM I'd prepare both single target and multi-target solutions to encounters simultaneously.



Ninth level, actually. You can't get the best evocations yet, but you can still do shadow daylight, wall of ice, wind wall, tiny hut, continual flame, etc, as well as damaging spells if you really want it. So losing evocation hurts a lot less than losing transmutation or abjuration, at least.
So 6 levels away. Assuming he blows one of his best spells on it which is more of a stretch than Mr. Fantastic on a busy day. Otherwise later. When the OP is already hard set on banning evocation so convincing him to ban it is moot. As for whether or not he should then take shadow evocation, it's a 2nd-4th level spell prepared in a 5th level slot with effectively a -1 or -2 metamagic applied to it. So effectively a 1st-3rd level spell prepared in a 5th level slot. At a level when you already have lots of options and benefit minimally from more. I would never prepare nor learn nor consider shadow evocation as significant in any way for any purpose in the OP's build. In a shadowcraft mage build, ok. But I suppose the OP could try to find an NPC that knows it and, if he does, pay the 250 gp to get it in his spell book on the off chance he might some day find a small use for it. And gets advance notice for this use, since it's a horrible idea to prepare it at random. I wouldn't blow 1,125 gp on a scroll nor one of my automatic spells known on it. Well, I might get a scroll for the 1 rare time it finally gets used, but not to copy into my spellbook.

I think it only comes up as often as it does for the sake of a simpler forum argument, not because it's at all a good alternative. Alternatives to the evocation school that aren't nigh-worthless (including nigh worthless compared to evocation spells) are more likely to involve things that aren't evocation spells at all. It can be done, but it makes a messier more complicated theoretical forum argument that's harder to repeat 10,000 times and become widespread.

[prufock]

As for encounter types, regardless of DM I'd prepare both single target and multi-target solutions to encounters simultaneously.
Good advice either way. Some type of area BFCs and multi-target debuffs should be staples in a wizard's arsenal.

[avr]

Oh pardon him for assuming his allies weren't stupid. In what group is it not common practice to at least talk about what spells are being prepared and the various actions that are obviously horrible tactical moves? There's being unoptimized, and then there's just not even putting in the effort to spend five minutes talking with your team.
Actually, lemmings who refuse to discuss tactics other than Charrrge!!! aren't uncommon. Some of them don't want to think about the game, some have bad memories of spending multiple hours planning stuff in Shadowrun rather than doing stuff, some just really want to swing down in to the midst of their enemies on that chandelier.

[P.F.]

Actually, lemmings who refuse to discuss tactics other than Charrrge!!! aren't uncommon. Some of them don't want to think about the game, some have bad memories of spending multiple hours planning stuff in Shadowrun rather than doing stuff, some just really want to swing down in to the midst of their enemies on that chandelier.

Wizard: Now, remember, on your turn, don't charge, stay there and wait until I tell you to charge.
Rogue: He's just gonna charge, bro.
Wizard: Don't charge!
Fighter: **** it, I charge!

...

Wizard: We should make camp here.
Fighter: It's not even noon!
Wizard: We need to wait until I rest and prepare different spells.
Fighter: For ****'s sake, again!?!?
Wizard: I need to prepare spells to use underground.
Fighter: ****! Why can't you just throw fireballs like a normal ****ing wizard!?!?
Wizard: Fireball is unoptimized. I have a different system for choosing spells that should theoretically win more encounters than just casting fireball.
Fighter: Well I don't ****ing care, I'm at full HP and I say we go now!
Rogue: You can just catch us tomorrow, right bro?

[ryu]

Wizard: Now, remember, on your turn, don't charge, stay there and wait until I tell you to charge.
Rogue: He's just gonna charge, bro.
Wizard: Don't charge!
Fighter: **** it, I charge!

...

Wizard: We should make camp here.
Fighter: It's not even noon!
Wizard: We need to wait until I rest and prepare different spells.
Fighter: For ****'s sake, again!?!?
Wizard: I need to prepare spells to use underground.
Fighter: ****! Why can't you just throw fireballs like a normal ****ing wizard!?!?
Wizard: Fireball is unoptimized. I have a different system for choosing spells that should theoretically win more encounters than just casting fireball.
Fighter: Well I don't ****ing care, I'm at full HP and I say we go now!
Rogue: You can just catch us tomorrow, right bro?

And then both of them died, and the wizard went back to the tavern to pick up less suicidal teammates. Everybody knows how the mundanes pushing forward without magical assistance goes. HP gets spent a lot faster than spells in that instance.

[Anlashok]

I feel like fighterman's logic is a bit weak too, because a wizard casting evocations round after round is probably less spell efficient than your BFC wizard.

[torrasque666]

And then both of them died, and the wizard went back to the tavern to pick up less suicidal teammates. Everybody knows how the mundanes pushing forward without magical assistance goes. HP gets spent a lot faster than spells in that instance.
Or, they can abandon the teammate that apparently tries to dictate how the rest of the team operates, including when to rest, and pick up a guy who doesn't make the game revolve around him.

[ryu]

Or, they can abandon the teammate that apparently tries to dictate how the rest of the team operates, including when to rest, and pick up a guy who doesn't make the game revolve around him.

By all means. See how dealing with standard encounters without spell assistance works. After TPKing a few times, any sane person will come to the conclusion that there was a very good reason he was demanding rest and recommending tactics. You seem to be under the impression that this mentality is born out of some desire for control or dominance in the party. No. It was to optimize party success in an environment where the DM doesn't deliberately avoid ever killing or challenging people. If a teammate comes up with a better tactic or strategy they're welcome to make a case for it. If the case is believable the new procedure is tried. If that procedure results in more successful adventuring the person who put it forward is recognized for their intelligent idea.

Same logic in MMO parties and especially forty man raids. No one in the group wants to spend three hours on adventure only to die at the end thus being denied drops and quest completions. In response to that? People actually coordinate.

[animewatcha]

We can talk about different spells and schools all day long. Better application of arguments may be to present a situation ( as well as surroundings as they do play a key role ) and then go from there.

[avr]

Or, the fighter player accuses the wizard player of playing chess using the rest of the party and says that bores the crap out of him, the guy who wants to swing down on chandeliers pushes a different game which supports stunts more than tactics, and it takes fast talking some months later to get them to try PF again. Losing battles does not inevitably lead to tactic change.

And knowing those people the wizard player resolves to employ exclusively lemming-friendly spells like haste if he's playing in such a game in future, and in the current game (he's GMing this time) to ensure that the lemmings won't easily TPK.

The moral of this story is know your friends.

[Beheld]

Wizard: Now, remember, on your turn, don't charge, stay there and wait until I tell you to charge.
Rogue: He's just gonna charge, bro.
Wizard: Don't charge!
Fighter: **** it, I charge!

...

Wizard: We should make camp here.
Fighter: It's not even noon!
Wizard: We need to wait until I rest and prepare different spells.
Fighter: For ****'s sake, again!?!?
Wizard: I need to prepare spells to use underground.
Fighter: ****! Why can't you just throw fireballs like a normal ****ing wizard!?!?
Wizard: Fireball is unoptimized. I have a different system for choosing spells that should theoretically win more encounters than just casting fireball.
Fighter: Well I don't ****ing care, I'm at full HP and I say we go now!
Rogue: You can just catch us tomorrow, right bro?

Just remember kids, when you demand that the other player play a different character that they don't want to play, because you don't like having to think about the game, and your whole party dies because of it, that's you being the good guy because you should be allowed to play your character however you want.

But when they ask you to play your characters with a modicum of self preservation by not deliberately running into their spells, that's them being a mean old meany pants and it is your goddam right to complain and **** talk them because how dare they play a character that you don't want them to play.


Now personally, I have never played with someone who thought "stupid idiot who refuses to coordinate with party" was an essential part of their character concept, so it's never come up for me, but presumably if that is an essential part of their character, perhaps they will find out that the Rogue would rather hang back with the guy who keeps giving him sneak attacks with glitterdust and grease, instead of adventuring with the guy who suggests that he waste actions tumbling to the other side of the Bearded Devil, and then prove to be a greater threat, but still adjacent, and bear the full brunt of the Bearded Devil's attacks.

[Endarire]

Short answer: The team needs to work together in and out of character.

Anything else regarding the OP?

[Elkad]

If the fighter insists on running into my fireball radius, he'd better buy a ring of fire resistance, or we'll be getting a new fighter.

Out of spells (or wrong spells) is different. If the group wants to go on despite me being out of spells, that's fine. I'll just save my Expeditious Retreat (or higher level option) for when it all goes sideways.

[Cosi]

Or, they can abandon the teammate that apparently tries to dictate how the rest of the team operates, including when to rest, and pick up a guy who doesn't make the game revolve around him.


Or, the fighter player accuses the wizard player of playing chess using the rest of the party and says that bores the crap out of him, the guy who wants to swing down on chandeliers pushes a different game which supports stunts more than tactics, and it takes fast talking some months later to get them to try PF again. Losing battles does not inevitably lead to tactic change.

This is a bad attitude. There's no reason that the Wizard should be the one to change. Why is his enjoyment of the game (which comes from solving a tactical puzzle) be treated as less important than the a Barbarian's (which comes from hitting things with an axe)?

There is an idea in discussion of D&D (and other RPGs) that it is somehow "wrong" to treat the game as a game and to enjoy it from that perspective. The idea that the only way to enjoy a role-playing game is through role-playing is (IMHO) actively bad for the game as a whole. If the "game" part of "role-playing game" isn't important, then mechanics aren't important and the game suffers significantly from bad design.


Short answer: The team needs to work together in and out of character.

Yup. The solution should be for people to talk and formulate an overall strategy. Maybe the Wizard plays a War Weaver instead. Maybe the Barbarian plays a switch hitter like a Swift Hunter instead. The idea that it's cheating to have a plan is just bizarre.

[torrasque666]

This is a bad attitude. There's no reason that the Wizard should be the one to change. Why is his enjoyment of the game (which comes from solving a tactical puzzle) be treated as less important than the a Barbarian's (which comes from hitting things with an axe)? Its not that it should be treated as less important but that if the majority (and assuming a gaming group of 4 players and a DM, that's 3 or 4 out of 5) of the group is the "kick in the door, stab the thing in the face" type of player, then its unfair to them to force them to stop simply because one idiotplayer either burned his daily allotment of abilities too soon or is too specialized in one aspect to (in that player's mind) adequately contribute to the story if they don't stop. Just as if the majority of the group (again, 3 or 4 out of 5) is calculating and tactical, it is unfair to them to have to continue when unprepared in order to accommodate the kicky-stabby player.

[Beheld]

Its not that it should be treated as less important but that if the majority (and assuming a gaming group of 4 players and a DM, that's 3 or 4 out of 5) of the group is the "kick in the door, stab the thing in the face" type of player, then its unfair to them to force them to stop simply because one idiotplayer either burned his daily allotment of abilities too soon or is too specialized in one aspect to (in that player's mind) adequately contribute to the story if they don't stop. Just as if the majority of the group (again, 3 or 4 out of 5) is calculating and tactical, it is unfair to them to have to continue when unprepared in order to accommodate the kicky-stabby player.

I like how you can't resist calling a Wizard an idiot for running out of spells, even though the entire party may have died without him for 4-5 straight encounters, now he is an idiot for failing to pick a class within infinite resources and then die with the rest of them against strong opponents.

[torrasque666]

I like how you can't resist calling a Wizard an idiot for running out of spells, even though the entire party may have died without him for 4-5 straight encounters, now he is an idiot for failing to pick a class within infinite resources and then die with the rest of them against strong opponents.
I didn't mention a wizard in that specific quote. If I had, it would have referred to a Wizard who burns too many spell slots in the first or second encounter of the day and then demands rest, simply be cause he played poorly, even though there might also be any number of characters in that same party who do use daily resources who did not. My principal would also apply to a low-level Barbarian who only has 1 rage a day, or any sort of psionic character, or a healer, or a DMM using cleric who needs their TU attempts, or any other player who uses a limited resource poorly and then demands that the rest of the team stop what they are doing to accommodate them. And conversely, a character who does have infinite use abilities and insists on charging ahead when in a party with dailys.

I made no mention of classes, only playstyles. I didn't even mention spells.

[ryu]

I like how you can't resist calling a Wizard an idiot for running out of spells, even though the entire party may have died without him for 4-5 straight encounters, now he is an idiot for failing to pick a class within infinite resources and then die with the rest of them against strong opponents.

Keep in mind also that 4-5 encounters is the expected normal stopping point for a day. That's an explicate assumption of the assumption just like what CR of encounters is considered Kosher. Going beyond that is exceptional rather than the norm.

[Melcar]

I have not read all the replies for this, but I would simply ask your DM to let you play your wizard and ask him to adjust the difficulty acordingly. Tell him that this is what you want to play, and that he should at least give you a chance to prove your build works.

[Itsjustsoup.com]

Why not Compromise?

Take only Fireball. In a scroll.

Then.


Play your wizard the way you want.

Sounds like you might needum new GM.

[Deeds]

8 pages of debate, really?

Look, most people agree that Wizards are Tier 1 for one very good reason: their versatility. Compare the Wizard to it's direct cousin, the Sorcerer. At level 6 a standard Wizard has at least four level three spells in his spellbook plus any additional level three spells he scribed. The wiz can then prepare
at least 2 spells plus an additional spell for his INT modifier. The wizard has the luxury to prepare a BFC spell, an AoE damage spell, and a buff spell (stinking cloud, fireball, and haste respectively.) At level 6, the Sorcerer chooses a single level 3 spell and calls it a day (I'd personally pick haste/fly.)

The point is that a Wizard isn't using his full potential if he decides to ignore entire blocks of his spell list. I'm not talking about school specialization I'm talking about ignoring damage, BFC, buff, debuff, mobility, or any combination of spells. Don't forget that there are spells for out of combat as well such as Suggestion, Fly, Clairvoyance, etc.



I have not read all the replies for this, but I would simply ask your DM to let you play your wizard and ask him to adjust the difficulty acordingly. Tell him that this is what you want to play, and that he should at least give you a chance to prove your build works
Ditto.

[yellowrocket]

Wondering if the op had played with this dm yet.

I would like to know how things turned out.

[danzibr]

Some people have to learn the hard way.
While I read later posts and the OP changed his build to appease the DM, yeah, I'd say this.

Wondering if the op had played with this dm yet.

I would like to know how things turned out.
Me too.

[P.F.]

While I read later posts and the OP changed his build to appease the DM, yeah, I'd say this.

My impression was that rather than change the build, he put some non-evocation direct damage spells in his spellbook and said, "see, I can contribute" and the DM left it at that.


Wondering if the op had played with this dm yet.

I would like to know how things turned out.

Same.

[atomicwaffle]

(Haven't read all the replies)

Am I the only one who thinks this DM sounds VERY inexperienced? I mean, if I were teaching a high school level class on DMing for future DMs around the world, the VERY FIRST LESSON would be; Wizards, and What They are Capable of.

As a DM, if you handed me this character sheet, id probably look at it, raise an eyebrow, look at you, smirk, and be like 'lets make this work.'

As a DM, I would be extremely happy because id know there is a more experienced player with the group.

[Nifft]

(Haven't read all the replies)

Am I the only one who thinks

I know exactly how you could get an answer to this question.

[Florian]

I know exactly how you could get an answer to this question.

*Laughs*
Yeah.

[Warior4356]

My impression was that rather than change the build, he put some non-evocation direct damage spells in his spellbook and said, "see, I can contribute" and the DM left it at that.



Same.

That is correct, and I completly forgot this thread existed lol. 3 pages since I last saw it wow!

[avr]

This is a bad attitude. There's no reason that the Wizard should be the one to change. Why is his enjoyment of the game (which comes from solving a tactical puzzle) be treated as less important than the a Barbarian's (which comes from hitting things with an axe)?

There is an idea in discussion of D&D (and other RPGs) that it is somehow "wrong" to treat the game as a game and to enjoy it from that perspective. The idea that the only way to enjoy a role-playing game is through role-playing is (IMHO) actively bad for the game as a whole. If the "game" part of "role-playing game" isn't important, then mechanics aren't important and the game suffers significantly from bad design.
If not enough of your friends like a tactical game, then you compromise on what you want or there's no game. So long as the compromise crosses the bar of 'bad gaming', numbers are in fact power.

Demanding that people not compromise in order to improve demand for good game design seems oddly out of touch.

[ryu]

If not enough of your friends like a tactical game, then you compromise on what you want or there's no game. So long as the compromise crosses the bar of 'bad gaming', numbers are in fact power.

Demanding that people not compromise in order to improve demand for good game design seems oddly out of touch.

If all I wanted from the game was a social experience with friends, we all have access to games which are easier to set up, and also won't require all that pesky thinking making things difficult. This can range anywhere from online gaming on any number of services, to cards of all descriptions, to boardgames, to in-person party games like smash or your favorite racing game of the week.

If it's not offering the payoff of complexity, what the hell is the point of going through all the effort to schedule, play, and run this game? There's easier ways of accomplishing literally any other goal.

It's not that I'm asocial. I've a wide array of hobbies. It's just that complexity is the only thing of value I see in this one above other hobbies that require a similar level of investment. For that matter also many other hobbies that don't require nearly as much effort and time.

[torrasque666]

If all I wanted from the game was a social experience with friends, we all have access to games which are easier to set up, and also won't require all that pesky thinking making things difficult. This can range anywhere from online gaming on any number of services, to cards of all descriptions, to boardgames, to in-person party games like smash or your favorite racing game of the week.

If it's not offering the payoff of complexity, what the hell is the point of going through all the effort to schedule, play, and run this game? There's easier ways of accomplishing literally any other goal.

It's not that I'm asocial. I've a wide array of hobbies. It's just that complexity is the only thing of value I see in this one above other hobbies that require a similar level of investment. For that matter also many other hobbies that don't require nearly as much effort and time.

Because not everybody finds complexity fun, but still want to play, specifically, Dungeons and Dragons. It's a game with a wide variety of play styles available. From a hack and slash dungeon crawl to a campaign of inter planar intrigue involving the gods themselves, from low magic settings to the Tippyverse, from core only to all sources available. The only wrong way to play D&D is a way you don't have fun. If you and your friends have differing play styles.... there's a reason the adage around here is "No gaming is better than bad gaming."

So maybe you wouldn't like this kind of game, but a person like myself, who enjoys partaking in tales of epic heroism with a flexible enough mentality to enjoy most styles of telling that, would have no problem with it.

[Caedes]

Gonna wade into this. (Why... I may never know)

As a DM starting a new campaign I may put a restriction on class type or race to fit along with where/when the players are. But after that, if the player wants to make a Wizard and restrict schools, that is the players decision.

I feel like it is part of my job as a DM to make the game interesting for my players. I am not going to direct them in how they create their character to make them fit in the perfect mold I have envisioned.

Case in point. Everyone roles up a martial class. There is no magic and more importantly no healer. Then the player party get's to tackle that. Will they hire a crummy NPC healer? (Can they even find one?) Will they invest in healing items? That is part of the challenge.

I think that in the grand scheme of things, there is no such thing as a perfect party. And if I wanted to DM a perfect party, I would hand out pre-made PCs with fully written back stories and tell my players to suck it up. But I don't. Because I want my players to challenge me as I challenge them.

You have a weird idea? That is great! You want to try and play a "God Wizard"? Even better. Let's play a game and see where it takes us.

All just my personal opinion. But there it is.

[Beheld]

As a DM starting a new campaign I may put a restriction on class type or race to fit along with where/when the players are. But after that, if the player wants to make a Wizard and restrict schools, that is the players decision.

I feel like it is part of my job as a DM to make the game interesting for my players. I am not going to direct them in how they create their character to make them fit in the perfect mold I have envisioned.

Case in point. Everyone roles up a martial class. There is no magic and more importantly no healer. Then the player party get's to tackle that. Will they hire a crummy NPC healer? (Can they even find one?) Will they invest in healing items? That is part of the challenge.

There are good reasons for DMs to make balance limits. If the DM has put any non-zero amount of work into encounters before the campaign starts, it can be important, and they may have to completely through out all their work.

Encounters that are appropriate for an incantatrix are different than those that are right for a no caster party. Both of those are different than a standard party.

Secondly, it can be really hard to design encounters for parties that are too strong or too weak even if you do all the encounter design after the PCs are made. It's really easy to make encounters for four level 11 PCs, it's basically impossible to make encounters for four level 11 PCs, one of whom is a Wizard who casts Planar Binding. Four level 11 PCs and 49 Glabrezu's is just really hard to balance encounters for.

Likewise, if the DM wants to use monsters out of the MM at their CR at all, then if the party makes a no caster party, they have to burn half/3/4ths of the MM about level 6, because the party can't handle the monsters.

The problem is that when the DM is wrong about balance, he can unfairly limit players, either not allowing them to play classes that are not too strong (Monks are OP! Warlocks are OP! infinite uses! when really both of those classes are really weak.) or can not allow them to play classes that are really strong because he thinks they are too weak (No, you can't cast Color Spray and stinking cloud, because blaster wizards and magic missile and fireball! or No don't play a Druid, we need a fighter!).

[yellowrocket]

Frankly I find all martial parties very easy to design encounters for. Yes it can quickly become a game of who won initiative. Yet when you play smart martial opponents with various degrees of power, tactics, numbers and different huminoid species you can change things enough to make it stay interesting. In a way you make it party against party. A phalanx of goblins with a weak caster behind them in a hallway is a very different encounter than a kobolds using hit and run tactics in the hills.

[gooddragon1]

The simple solution that comes to mind is the polymorph line. It's good for almost any environment.

Polymorph: Now they'll really have something to complain about.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Polymorph: Now they'll really have something to complain about.This needs a motivator, STAT!


http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g111/Lycanthromancer/motivatorf3794846aabd8e3dfacbdcd513be54b0b13e9e4d. jpg