PDA

View Full Version : How do Domain Wizards compare to Specialist Wizards?



Tempest Fennac
2008-04-27, 02:30 AM
Are Domain Wizards (detailed on http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm ) more or less powerful then Specialists? While not being able to chose different spells for the bonus slot could be limiting, I would have thought that not needing to bar any schools (while getting the Domain spells for free) would make up for it to a degree. What does everyone else think about this variant?

Nebo_
2008-04-27, 02:34 AM
If you're allowed to take this, and you don't, you're either stupid or you're a masochist.

Gain: Good things. Lose: Nothing.

Simple, eh?

Talic
2008-04-27, 02:34 AM
Well, it gives you easier access to Wall of Force, but otherwise, a specialist mage has plenty of versatility even WITH the 2 banned schools. Opening up more spells doesn't really improve power... Just let's you gain that power in more ways.

In short: Gain good things for nothing
OR
Gain better things for a small price

It's your call, but I say the decision is one that lets you have a bit of flexibility.

Now Elven Wizard Substitution works favorably with domain wizard, though.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-04-27, 02:36 AM
Depends a lot on the domain. Some are powerful in the right level range, you just have to decide if the spells will be useful every day.

TheDright
2008-04-27, 02:36 AM
I have heard, despite never playing one, that the inability to choose your extra spell at each level is more than made up for by the lack of barred schools.

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-27, 02:38 AM
That is a good point, Sstoopidtallkid. Which Domains would you say are the best in general? In regards to Talic's point, I was thinking more about the fact that some schools of magic which people would normally ban may contain 2 or 3 spells which they would want in regards to versatillity.

Turcano
2008-04-27, 03:43 AM
Which Domains would you say are the best in general?

From a glance, most the actual school domains seem to be decent; which one in particular is the best probably depends on your gaming style. The non-school ones, on the other hand, are pretty lame, and the evocation domain is really lame.

Bag_of_Holding
2008-04-27, 03:48 AM
Domain Wizard variant is a powerful alternative to specialisation. Bonus spell slots that can only be filled with polymorph and its ilks? AND it's free? Yes please :smallbiggrin:

Talic
2008-04-27, 05:02 AM
Ok, for banned schools, the first two are usually Evocation and Enchantment.

Evocation has Wall of Force... and that's about it. Gainable with shadow evocation, later.

Enchantment has a lot of good will save spells... But most don't work with either the protection of a Protection from X or mindblank. And name a spell in enchantment that another will save spell from another school can't work just as well in.

Third, if you're focused specializing, is a bit harder. Either Necromancy or Abjuration are the two main choices, and both kinda hurt. Abjuration costs you Mage Armor, and Dispel Magic, among others. Necromancy costs you a lot of good high power Save-or-Lose spells, most notably Enervation.

Still, you can get by without either. It's a bit rougher, but when you look at the benefit (+3 spells from your school - which should likely be Transmutation, maybe conjuration), you can build a lot of flexibility from those.

Even banning Evocation, Enchantment, and Necromancy, you still have a plethora of defensive magic, combat control, and SoL for all the main areas. Thus, the build is still flexible and versatile, with more casting ability.

As for the spells you can't cast? They're nice, but they're extraneous. You can sacrifice them, with good spell selection, and not lose any power or versatility.

Thus, the notion of giving up versatility is an illusion. There are over 1,000 spells produced for 3.5. If you can't populate a good spell list with only 700 of them? Something's wrong.

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-27, 08:47 AM
That is a good point about the number of spells (don't forget that not everyone has internet access and all the optional books, though). Also, Mage Armour is Conjuraion for some reason (Shield is an Abjuration).

Kurald Galain
2008-04-27, 09:56 AM
I have heard, despite never playing one, that the inability to choose your extra spell at each level is more than made up for by the lack of barred schools.

On the contrary, after looking over it I'd say that the barred schools are more than made up for by the ability to choose your extra spell at each level.

Look at it like this: if you're optimizing, you're not going to need all eight schools, since some of them are superfluous (e.g. both enchantment and necromancy have a lot of save-or-lose spells) or ineffective (evocation, in particular), and you really want to be able to memorize a very good spell in each slot, which in too many cases isn't the domain spell. Focused specialist can be surprisingly effective because of the added amount of spells per day.

If you're not optimizing but playing a flavorful character of your choice, then most of the time you're not going to be using all eight schools anyway, and you'll probably want to be able to pick your favorite spells for every slot, which again in too many cases isn't the domain spell. Focused specialist is likely a bit difficult to play, unless you're really into one particular school.

That said, looking over the domains:
I think the abjuration and anti-magic domains are poor choices because they have too many situational spells that you simply won't be using often enough to memorize every day. Likewise, divination, necromancy, and storm.

The battle domain is decent if you're the party buffer. Not great, but decent.

The cold domain is simply ineffective; it's a blast domain with poorly-chosen blast spells. Likewise, evocation. If you want a blaster, the fire domain offers the best spell selection, with storm as a second choice. In any case you'll probably want a metamagic feat to swap the damage to another element.

The transmutation domain contains several polymorph spells and deserves to be banned for that reason. The other spells in there are too situational.

Conjuration is a solid choice, as is enchantment, and illusion (and its shadow evocation allows you a lot of versatility). If I had to play a domain wizard, I'd pick one of those three.

Chronos
2008-04-27, 10:00 AM
Evocation has Wall of Force... and that's about it. Gainable with shadow evocation, later.Remember, shadow evocation always allows a Will save to disbelieve (which completely negates non-damaging effects) and spell resistance, which means that there's a good chance an enemy can just walk right through your Wall of Force. Which eliminates the point of Wall of Force in the first place.

Evocation also has Wind Wall, Shatter, Sending, and Contingency, too, all of which are nice things to have. Not worth enough to not give up the school, but if you don't have to give up a school, great.

As for the wizard domains, you don't need the best spell from each level for them to be worthwhile. All you need is at least one spell from each level (including metamagicked versions of lower-level domain spells) that you'd be likely to prepare anyway. This is pretty much true for the Conjuration domain or the Transmutation domain, so either of those is basically one free slot per level (the same benefit as specialization) for no cost. Remember, if you're preparing Mage Armor in one of your domain slots, that means that you don't have to prepare it in a normal slot like you probably would have, so that normal slot you would have used for Mage Armor is free for you to put anything at all in.

Talic
2008-04-27, 10:02 AM
That is a good point about the number of spells (don't forget that not everyone has internet access and all the optional books, though). Also, Mage Armour is Conjuraion for some reason (Shield is an Abjuration).

Priority list for Wizards/Arcanes (in order, IMHO):

Spell Compendium
Complete Mage (Yes, before Comp Arc. Spells, Feats, and variants are awesome)
Complete Arcane
Sandstorm
Frostburn
Races of the Dragon
Dragon Magic

If you take that in order, the first 1-3 books will make you strong. The next 4 will give you tasty flavor.

Talic
2008-04-27, 10:10 AM
That is a good point about the number of spells (don't forget that not everyone has internet access and all the optional books, though). Also, Mage Armour is Conjuraion for some reason (Shield is an Abjuration).

Priority list for Wizards/Arcanes (in order, IMHO):

Spell Compendium
Complete Mage (Yes, before Comp Arc. Spells, Feats, and variants are awesome)
Complete Arcane
Sandstorm
Frostburn
Races of the Dragon
Dragon Magic

If you take that in order, the first 1-3 books will make you strong. The next 4 will give you tasty flavor.

On a side note: If you're specializing, you can make decent wizards out of the following schools:


Divination (One banned school? Yes, please. I'll still take spell focus: transmutation, and an extra Div spell at every level is pretty good)
Conjuration (One of the stronger schools of magic, you can never go wrong with this school)
Evocation (Fewer good spells, but you can always find one decent one. Trouble is figuring out what to ditch)
Transmutation (Arguably the strongest, most flexible school. Nuff said)
Abjuration (Good spells at all levels, but not many people want to play that defensive)
Illusion (This school is probably the second most powerful generally, though true seeing kicks it where it counts... hard)

Weak Schools to specialize in:
Enchantment (Many creature types are outright immune to this school, and there's a level 1 spell that insulates you from most of it. In other words, easier to prevent than fire damage.)
Necromancy (there are great spells in this school... But not enough at all levels. Better off specializing in something else, and getting Spell Focus: Necro for the good spells that you DO want)

Kantolin
2008-04-27, 03:48 PM
I don't see why people constantly mention the protection from line as common counters, when you're honestly not terribly likely to run into oodles and oodles of monsters/enemies/NPCs who have them. So sure, taking enchantment marginally increases the chances that your DM will screw you with protection from, but that's not something that happens often enough to merit mentioning it.

Creatures that are flat immune to mind-effecting, now, do come up.

Personally, however, Enchantment's spells tend to be better than any other will save-spells you could opt for. At level 1, you could replace sleep with color spray, but the range of sleep makes it dramatically more useful at that point. Then you get things like dominate, which are strictly better than actually killing your target - getting a buddy for day/level is far, far more useful than killing them.

So while you could replace them, I'd much rather just get a spell per spell level for free and not have to, especially if the vast majority of spells on the domain are spells I would've casted anyway. That frees me up to cherry pick the useful spells from each school.

So eh. Sure, you can probably 'afford to give up' several schools, but you could instead have your cake and eat it too with domain wizards.

Emperor Tippy
2008-04-27, 04:09 PM
If your DM will let you get Domain Wizard it's worth it.

Grey Elf with Elf Generalist Sub Level, Spontaneous Divination Alternate Class Feature, and Domain Wizard is very nice.

Spontaneous Divination + Domain Wizard has the same end effect of specializing in Divination for the cost of a feat instead of a school (and even Evocation is worth more than 1 feat). Add in Elf Generalist and you pick up the nice stuff from that for no loss.

Now if you go Incantatrix and specialized in anything besides Divination to start with you will end up out 3 schools, which is really a bit much (although it is certainly playable). But if you have grabbed Elf Generalist, Spontaneous Divination, and Domain Wizard then you just end up giving up Evocation. And if you take the Evocation Domain you can gain back 2 of the better evocations (Wall of Force and Telekinetic Sphere).

So, basically, in almost every case your better off with Spontaneous Divination + Domain Wizard vs. specializing.

Chronos
2008-04-27, 04:12 PM
I don't see why people constantly mention the protection from line as common counters, when you're honestly not terribly likely to run into oodles and oodles of monsters/enemies/NPCs who have them.Oh, sure, most enemies don't have any magic at all. But most of the mid-to-high outsiders get Protection from <alignment> for free, and any enemy with levels in a spellcasting class (or who has an ally with levels in a spellcasting class) is likely to have it up, since it's only a first-level spell.


Personally, however, Enchantment's spells tend to be better than any other will save-spells you could opt for. At level 1, you could replace sleep with color spray, but the range of sleep makes it dramatically more useful at that point.Don't forget that Sleep has a full-round casting time. Better hope that none of those orcs is smart enough to charge past the guy in full plate with a sword to attack the guy in a dress who's mumbling gibberish.

Cuddly
2008-04-27, 05:41 PM
Specializing is more painful when you have access to fewer books. The more books you are willing to pirate buy, the easier it is to give up schools.

So if all you're working off is core and the SRD, then the domain variant is good. Just pick a domain where you think you'll be using that spell every day.

Kurald Galain
2008-04-27, 06:28 PM
Grey Elf with Elf Generalist Sub Level, Spontaneous Divination Alternate Class Feature, and Domain Wizard is very nice.
Well, yes, but that assumes your DM will let you combine three different alternate versions of the wizard, that come from different books and have contradictory fluff, and top it off with a nonstandard race with an int bonus.

Yes, it's a nice combo, and RAW legal, but note that Spontaneous Divination and being a Grey Elf work fine in any wizard build (including, for some reason, a non-divination specialist), as does taking a lot of spells in some school and then later banning that school with incantatrix.

On the other hand, if you're interested in taking Archmage levels, a good lead-in for that is the Focused Specialist prestige class, which unsurprisingly requires that you're a specialist.

Emperor Tippy
2008-04-27, 06:38 PM
Well, yes, but that assumes your DM will let you combine three different alternate versions of the wizard, that come from different books and have contradictory fluff, and top it off with a nonstandard race with an int bonus.
None of the fluff is contradictory for any of the things I stacked. As for being a non standard race, it's a core race.


Yes, it's a nice combo, and RAW legal, but note that Spontaneous Divination and being a Grey Elf work fine in any wizard build (including, for some reason, a non-divination specialist),
Spontaneous Divination is actually a much better choice for non divination specialists.

as does taking a lot of spells in some school and then later banning that school with incantatrix.
Whether or not you can do that is debatable.


On the other hand, if you're interested in taking Archmage levels, a good lead-in for that is the Focused Specialist prestige class, which unsurprisingly requires that you're a specialist.
Your better off with Elf and just Embrace/Shun some of your worthless proficiencies to meet the feat requirements for archmage.

Eikre
2008-04-27, 06:41 PM
If you have Complete Champion (Which, I'll be fair and say, is a book that pushed the envelope of balence just a bit farther than comfort probably needed), then the fifth-level substitution level for wizards, Spontaneous Divination, coupled with being a Domain wizard, is strictly better than specializing in Divination.

You get the free spells that a Diviner gets. You have to fill those slots with nine pre-selected spells, but it doesn't matter, because you can spontaneously turn them into Divinations. Not just that, though: You don't have to give up a school of magic, just a feat, and you don't have to prepare the divinations. You don't learn an extra divination every level, but you get every single divination spell, even ones on other class lists, open to you, and you don't need to have them in your book anyway. Learn Heighten Spell, and then you can prepare Read Magic in all your slots when you don't have your spellbook.

Neat, right? Only a Master Specialist would choose to do it otherwise.

EDIT: Looks like I got slow-ninja'd. That's what I get for leaving the tab open. Still, I went into detail, the other bloke didn't. Nah-nah-nah!

Talic
2008-04-27, 08:49 PM
To echo Tippy, it's a core race with Favored Class: Wizard, no less.

As for Enchantment being "Better" will saves, meh. For someone to say that most encounters won't have "Prot X" in them, I answer, Almost every caster player uses them.

Why wouldn't caster non-players? Are such NPC's considered idiots? I think not. Most of my pc's have it, so most of my caster NPC's will. It protects against many summoned critters, most enchantment. That's 1.5 schools for a level 1 spell.

I'm not saying Domain wizard is bad. Quite the opposite. It's actually quite good. Tippy's illustrated that (though much like my arguement, it uses two of the better abilities to round out the build, namely, spontaneous divination and generalist wizard).

Further, immune creatures are rather prolific. Low levels? Anything that's not humanoids, or has 5+HD. Add in vermin, undead, constructs, oozes, etc etc. Those are at all levels.Now, constructs and oozes aren't so common... But undead is often a staple enemy, like goblins, orcs, or the like. Vermin are similarly often used as filler.

I prefer not to build my spell list on the assumption of DM kindness. I'd rather build it on a basis of personal effectiveness.

As for Other will Save-or-Lose? There's a reason that the speak with dead spell exists. And dominate does not make something your "buddy". It forces it to comply. Expect the maximum amount of resistance you can possibly get from affected creatures, including evasive answers, incomplete answers, misleading answers, following the letter of your instructions, rather than the spirit, etc etc. I expect any critter you dominate? Likely hates you with the passion of 1,000 burning suns.

Kantolin
2008-04-27, 08:57 PM
Almost every caster player spends either a sorceror spell known or memorizes daily... protection from? Spend a turn in combat to get a +2 AC bonus, as it doesn't last long enough to use otherwise?

Gee. I suppose you play with different everybodies than I do. I'd hammer them as they spent their first turn in combat using a comparatively minor buff.

In addition, if everyone has protection from up, then that means nobody there should cast enchantment spells - they never work. If nobody is casting enchantment spells, then the protection from series stops being quite as relevant. It's a nifty cycle.


And dominate does not make something your "buddy". It forces it to comply. Expect the maximum amount of resistance you can possibly get from affected creatures, including evasive answers, incomplete answers, misleading answers, following the letter of your instructions, rather than the spirit, etc etc. I expect any critter you dominate? Likely hates you with the passion of 1,000 burning suns.

Yes, but even someone simply carrying your things is superior to a blank spot. It's not hard to have someone do a single task for you.

Worst-case scenario, they're 'dead' (or in a situation where it's very easy to make them dead). More likely case scenario, they're giving you some form of aid in the short-term.

So peh. I'm not even suggesting you focus yourself on being an enchanter, just that having an enchantment spell or two can be very useful. You wouldn't memorize dominate when going to Undeadland, but you wouldn't memorize a lot of things when going to undeadland. It's just that specialization gets you an extra spell per level while banning a couple schools, compared to domain wizards which... get you an extra spell per level without banning a couple schools.

It really seems like a no-brainer if you have the option to pick.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-04-27, 09:04 PM
Are such NPC's considered idiots? I think not.

Apparently so. I've been told on more then one occasion that only BBEGs should fight with tactics/make smart spell choices/perform any tactics that involve avoiding death when possible.

Talic
2008-04-27, 09:09 PM
Because nobody can find a way to quicken a level 1 spell? Or persist it? We really must be playing with different groups. (Let's see, Rod of Quicken (lesser), circlet of rapid casting, Belt of battle, DMM Persist, or even extend, or cast before going into a dangerous area. At mid level (10) it lasts almost 2 hours, which is a pretty good window of protection. At upper levels, if you don't want to quicken it, you can summon any of numerous creatures that radiate the more powerful Circle of Protection quite easily.)

As for your "no brainer". Let's see. Bonus spell with no flexibility whatsoever (unless you're a spontaneous diviner), or bonus spell that can be any of over 100 spells?

Or, let's go focused specialist as an example. 1 spell, that's chosen for you, or 3 spells, that you choose yourself? Again, several people down focused spec for the 3 school giveup, but if you can't make an effective list with the absolute plethora of spells out there with 5 schools? Something's wrong.

That "no brainer" is kinda going away. Seems like 2 valid and effective routes to take a wizard.

Talic
2008-04-27, 09:12 PM
Apparently so. I've been told on more then one occasion that only BBEGs should fight with tactics/make smart spell choices/perform any tactics that involve avoiding death when possible.

I know that personally, all MY NPC wizards memorize Magic missile in every slot from level 1 on up. Higher levels are memorized as maximized, empowered, or both. And about a dozen quicken rods, so they can cast them all.

Frosty
2008-04-27, 09:13 PM
You're a fool not to take spontaneous divination. You can spontaneously cast divinations from ANY class, not just the wizard/sorc spell list!! This is HUGE.

Chronos
2008-04-27, 09:24 PM
Yeah, but even with all of the splatbooks out there, you're still likely to prepare Mage Armor, Web, Stinking Cloud, Acid Fog, Maze, Gate, Mage Hand, Haste, Polymorph, Baleful Polymorph, Disintegrate, and Shapechange on any given day. That's most of the Conjuration domain or most of the Transmutation domain right there. And Acid Splash, Summon Monster IV, Wall of Stone, and Summon Monster VII aren't exactly terrible, either. Nor are Expeditious Retreat, Levitate, Reverse Gravity, or Iron Body. Or you could just fill those subpar levels with metamagicked versions of other levels' spells.

Or, of course, you could take some other domain, to get some other spells more to your liking. Including possibly some that aren't normally available to wizards. I've yet to hear of a 5th-level wizard spell that can kill armies as efficiently as Control Winds (storm domain), for instance.

Talic
2008-04-27, 09:40 PM
You're quite right. As a domain specialist, you'll just get LESS of those than a focused specialist will.

The point is, the wizard's strength lies in versatility.

I'd rather personally take 70% of the spells out there, and choose 30 spells...

Than take 100%, and choose 20.

With as many spells as there are, I can get more flexibility and versatility out of the first choice. More spells memorized = More flexibility.

Yes, at character creation, you may choose a domain that you like. From then on out, every day of your adventuring life, those are your bonus spells.

If a transmutation specialist changes his mind based on an encounters he's seen in the area or divination? He'll still have good and relevant spells for any encounter.

The reason domains don't get the flexibility is that they're forced to choose what they get.

And, for the record, "army spells" or, as I call them, "bully spells", they're usually a trap. A lot like fireball.

By the time you can use them, the enemies that they'll kill are too weak to be a relevant CR.

Reel On, Love
2008-04-27, 09:51 PM
Guys, the number of spells doesn't matter. What matters is the really good spells availible. Banned Evocation? Can't cast Radiant Assault. Banned Enchantment? Can't cast Irresistible Dance. Banned Necromancy, god forbid? Can't cast Avasculate, Enervation, Ray of Enfeeblement, etc.

Farmer42
2008-04-27, 10:09 PM
100 lvl1 wizards with magic missile are not, technically, a threat to a lvl 16 party. If those wizards win initiative? I'm willing to bet the non-fighters in the party will choose to disagree. Even without winning initiative, they'll do some serious damage to the party before they're stopped, especially if their leader armed them all with wands of magic missile and may three or four Rods of Quicken tossed in, just to add insult to injury. And thus, you have a nearly unstoppable army. At least until they need to make a save against an anti-army spell.

Frosty
2008-04-27, 10:11 PM
You know what I do if I have a Domain slot I can't make use of that day? I use it to fuel my spontaneous divinations.

Emperor Tippy
2008-04-27, 10:13 PM
100 lvl1 wizards with magic missile are not, technically, a threat to a lvl 16 party. If those wizards win initiative? I'm willing to bet the non-fighters in the party will choose to disagree. Even without winning initiative, they'll do some serious damage to the party before they're stopped, especially if their leader armed them all with wands of magic missile and may three or four Rods of Quicken tossed in, just to add insult to injury. And thus, you have a nearly unstoppable army. At least until they need to make a save against an anti-army spell.

Um, know. It's called the Shield (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shield.htm) spell. Celerity means the level 16 wizard goes first and then casts Shield on themselves. Or deals with the threat in any number of other ways.

Farmer42
2008-04-27, 10:16 PM
Yes, but in order for the wizard to deal with them before they can cause some serious damage, the wizard is likely going to be using one anti-army spell or another, because even though they can cast shield, the rogue, the barbarian, and the fighter can't. The point is that spells designed to eliminate masses of low level characters continue to be useful throughout the game, unless you happen to have a party of entirely casters.

tyckspoon
2008-04-27, 10:27 PM
Yes, but in order for the wizard to deal with them before they can cause some serious damage, the wizard is likely going to be using one anti-army spell or another, because even though they can cast shield, the rogue, the barbarian, and the fighter can't. The point is that spells designed to eliminate masses of low level characters continue to be useful throughout the game, unless you happen to have a party of entirely casters.

Wall of X surrounding the party. No line of effect, no threat. There are a number of ways to protect yourself without necessarily killing the threat.

Emperor Tippy
2008-04-27, 10:28 PM
Yes, but in order for the wizard to deal with them before they can cause some serious damage, the wizard is likely going to be using one anti-army spell or another, because even though they can cast shield, the rogue, the barbarian, and the fighter can't. The point is that spells designed to eliminate masses of low level characters continue to be useful throughout the game, unless you happen to have a party of entirely casters.

Let's see. 16th level. I would be a wizard/incantatrix/archmage. Celerity for my Standard action. I cast Oitluke's Suppressing Field and since its impossible for a level 1 wizard to make the caster level check, none of your magic missiles do a thing.

Then I laugh at you.

Chronos
2008-04-28, 12:27 AM
Or you use your divinations (or heck, even Gather Information or Survival would work for this) to find out about the army of apprentice wizards long before it gets to the point of rolling initiative. Or you're invisible in the first place, so they don't even know you're there. Or you get cover from something mundane like a wall or a tower shield. Really, that army of level 1 wizards wouldn't be a threat to any 16th-level character, even without magic.

What does this have to do with the question at hand, anyway?

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-28, 01:50 AM
What are the prequisites for Spontaneous Divination (if any)? I've never heard of that before.

Frosty
2008-04-28, 01:58 AM
Requirement is: You are a wizard of 5, 10, 15, or 20 level. You trade away the bonus feat. You gain spontaneous divination. Best trade since giving up Fast Movement for Pounce.

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-28, 02:09 AM
Thanks. If you start at a level which isn't a multiple of 5, can it be taken in place of a bonus feat? (I just wanted to check in case it had to be taken when the characer was created). Also, do you need to have learnt how to use the Divination spells in question to use them spontaneously? (I wanted to check due to what you said about Divinations from other classes, as well as the fact that it sounds really powerful).

Bag_of_Holding
2008-04-28, 02:21 AM
Thanks. If you start at a level which isn't a multiple of 5, can it be taken in place of a bonus feat? (I just wanted to check in case it had to be taken when the characer was created). Also, do you need to have learnt how to use the Divination spells in question to use them spontaneously? (I wanted to check due to what you said about Divinations from other classes, as well as the fact that it sounds really powerful).

As long as you sacrifice ONE wizard bonus feat, you're entitled to that class feature. It allows you to cast any divination spells (without having to know them beforehand, it seems) spontaneously.

Tempest Fennac
2008-04-28, 02:22 AM
Thankas for the clarification. Is it me, or is that really overpowered?

Talic
2008-04-28, 05:57 AM
Ok, there is a difference between an effective multi-target spell and an Anti-army spell. Anti Army spells do low to medium damage to large numbers. Why even bother, when you can do better?

Before we continue this debate, let's not forget the absolute absurdity of the encounter you suggested.

1) Such an army (100 level 1 wizards) will find it very difficult to approach a party undetected... Much less a level 16 party.

2) If said group wins initiative... Then a bully spell won't do much either, as the wizard will be dead before he can cast it. Thus, if set up so that the 100 wizards win initiative, it's not an encounter, it's a jerk move by the DM to kill the party wizard, and two or so other PC's.

3) If the wizard does win initiative, any of the following spells, which DO retain higher-level viability, will work just as well as, if not better than, a fireball, or other bully spell:

Shadow Evocation, Greater: Wall of Force. (Blocks LoE)
Mass Invisibility (Removes LoS)
Permanent Image (Wall) (Removes LoS)
Wall of Iron (Removes LoS)
Globe of Invulnerability (Neutralizes Spells)
Antimagic Field (Neutralizes Spells)
Mirage Arcana (Add a structure around party) (Removes LoS)
Wall of Stone (Removes LoS)
Cloudkill (Multi target kill that's still useful against high level targets)
Illusory Wall (Removes LoS)
Black Tentacles (Multi target kill that's still useful against high level targets)
Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser (Neutralizes Spells)
Invisibility Sphere (Removes LoS)
Fog Cloud (Removes LoS)
Obscuring Mist (Removes LoS)

Cleric:
Antimagic Field (Neutralizes spells)
Wall of Stone (Removes LoS)
Obscuring Mist (Removes LoS)

None are Evocation, necromancy, or enchantment. All will nerf the 100 MM barrage.

4) I mean, really... Has any DM ever actually sent 100 level 1 wizards at a level 16 party? Really? C'mon. The logistics of hiding such a force from the party skillmonkey, masking it from divinations cast previously by the level 16 casters? I mean, REALLY? C'mon...

Kurald Galain
2008-04-28, 06:45 AM
None of the fluff is contradictory for any of the things I stacked. As for being a non standard race, it's a core race.
Being a "generalist" contradicts specializing in a domain. Spontaneous divination is effectively making you a divination specialist, which contradicts both of the above.


Your better off with Elf and just Embrace/Shun some of your worthless proficiencies to meet the feat requirements for archmage.
Yeah, and it's debatable whether DMs will let you do that, as well. See, the point is that you're arguing from a pure optimization standpoint - which character will be the most powerful. Whereas I'm thinking about what people may want to play and be allowed to play. "Legal by RAW" is not the same as "allowable in play" - after all, Pun-Pun is legal by RAW.

Every DM I know would veto the embrace/shun trick, and most would also disallow spontaneous divination because it's yet another freebie to a class that's already one of the strongest (and several would ban incantatrix either on grounds of cheese, or it being setting-specific to the forgotten realms). Without these options, the domain wizard becomes a lot less interesting or versatile.


Thankas for the clarification. Is it me, or is that really overpowered?
Well, yes. Losing the 10th level feat as well isn't even a drawback, because by then you'll probably have a prestige class anyway.

Eikre
2008-04-28, 06:46 AM
Thankas for the clarification. Is it me, or is that really overpowered?

Tacky subject.

It's out of Complete Champion, a book that tops off the 3.5 run. I would say, that, yes, it does basically eliminate the choice of what you do with your fifth level, which normally speaks of imbalance. No indecision, you see.

But, those are the signs of the times. If the rest of the party is also pushing the higher limits of their classes (Pounce is also in CC, remember?), then nobody should be unhappy.

Kurald Galain
2008-04-28, 06:53 AM
The point is, the wizard's strength lies in versatility.

I'd rather personally take 70% of the spells out there, and choose 30 spells...

Than take 100%, and choose 20.
QFT.



Guys, the number of spells doesn't matter. What matters is the really good spells availible. Banned Enchantment? Can't cast Irresistible Dance.
That's a trade-off, though. As a wizard, you're going to be very powerful. Not using one of the "really good" spells is going to make you slightly less so, and getting one or two extra spell slots per spell level per day (doubled for ring of wizardry) is going to make you more so. In most campaigns, you won't be casting Otto's Dance anyway, since it's at a higher level than the average campaign ends; whereas the extra slots are usable right from the start.

Of course, dropping Conjuration or Transmutation qualifies as poor planning. But keeping an entire school around just for a single spell is hardly worth it.

Talic
2008-04-28, 07:34 AM
That's a trade-off, though. As a wizard, you're going to be very powerful. Not using one of the "really good" spells is going to make you slightly less so, and getting one or two extra spell slots per spell level per day (doubled for ring of wizardry) is going to make you more so. In most campaigns, you won't be casting Otto's Dance anyway, since it's at a higher level than the average campaign ends; whereas the extra slots are usable right from the start.

Of course, dropping Conjuration or Transmutation qualifies as poor planning. But keeping an entire school around just for a single spell is hardly worth it.

Exactly. Without levels in Archmage for Arcane reach, Irresistable Dance puts you FAR too close to the enemy.

Take that irresistable dance. Great, quite effective. If you get close enough, and make the touch attack.

Now take, say, Disintegrate, Greater Shadow Evocation (Wall of Force), or any of a dozen other highly useful spells that will help the group overcome. Just as good.


As for Generalist Wizard not being thematically cohesive with Domain casting? Generalist wizard isn't about being equally good in all areas. You can take greater spell focus in one school, and still be a generalist.

It's about no restrictions. Never limiting your spell selection. No school of magic is worth ignoring.

Domain fits that theme quite well. Yup.

And please don't fall back on the "Pun-Pun" argument you're using, Kurald. After all, I could use that argument as follows.

After all, Pun-Pun is legal. Getting 1 feat every 3 levels is legal. Both may be legal by RAW, but they shouldn't be "allowable in play".

After all, Pun-Pun is legal. Moving your land speed with a move action is legal. Both may be legal by RAW, but they shouldn't be "allowable in play",

After all, Pun-Pun is legal. Psionics is legal. Both may be legal by RAW, but they shouldn't be...

Ok, ya got me on that last one. :smallamused:

Point is, just because the rules can be used to make ONE thing that's insanely overpowered, doesn't mean that everything that the rules can be used to make is overpowered. If you'd like to make a case that something is unbalanced or inappropriate, I'm all ears for the argument. But saying "pun-pun is legal, and this is legal, so..." well, that doesn't show or prove anything. Except that they're both legal by RAW. It brings absolutely no evidence to the table that shows why THIS ability shouldn't be used.

Kurald Galain
2008-04-28, 07:48 AM
And please don't fall back on the "Pun-Pun" argument you're using, Kurald. After all, I could use that argument as follows.

After all, Pun-Pun is legal. Getting 1 feat every 3 levels is legal. Both may be legal by RAW, but they shouldn't be "allowable in play".

That's a reductio ad absurdum fallacy. DMs generally don't disallow you from getting feats (to my knowledge, no DM does that) and generally do disallow you from using the embrace/shun trick.

Saying "domain wizards are good because you can use them with spontaneous divination and the dark chaos" is like saying "monks are good because they can use diplomancy". Well, except that domain wizards are still quite feasible without those tricks, of course.

Talic
2008-04-28, 08:04 AM
It's not a fallacy. It's pointing out a simple truth. Just because Pun-Pun is bad, and happens to be legal... That doesn't mean anything about anything else is good or bad, if it's legal. I'm simply requesting that you limit the discussion of the points of this particular topic to this topic, and not bring in arguments that amount to, "well, you know who else liked pudding? HITLER."

In other words, the reductio ad absurdum was in response to a Strawman. You attacked the appropriateness of Pun-Pun in a campaign, rather than arguing against domain/spontaneous divination.


That said, the difference between "embrace/shun" and "I like all, but I like this one more" is illustrated above by me. I'll requote it:

As for Generalist Wizard not being thematically cohesive with Domain casting? Generalist wizard isn't about being equally good in all areas. You can take greater spell focus in one school, and still be a generalist.

It's about no restrictions. Never limiting your spell selection. No school of magic is worth ignoring.

Domain fits that theme quite well. Yup.


Domain and Spontaneous Divination is fundamentally different than monk and diplomacy for one reason.

Domain Wizard (divination) has a direct synergy with Spontaneous Divination that a standard wizard does not. Namely, one divination spell at every level to fuel the ability.

Monk has no special ability with Diplomacy that is similar.

The point could have been argued with Warlock and UMD, since warlocks DO have abilities that synergize with UMD. But then your argument would make no sense, because it shows the point Tippy made is valid all along.

Kurald Galain
2008-04-28, 08:08 AM
In other words, the reductio ad absurdum was in response to a Strawman. You attacked the appropriateness of Pun-Pun in a campaign, rather than arguing against domain/spontaneous divination.
Nonsense. I was pointing out that "class X is good because it can be combined with Y", where Y is something that is technically legal but wouldn't be allowed by most DMs, is simply not saying much about class X in practice.

That is, "monks and diplomaNcy" is the exact same situation as "domain wizards and embrace-the-dark-chaos", because most DMs will let you use neither diplomancy nor the dark chaos. Neither says anything about the class. On the other hand, to my best knowledge, most DMs will allow warlocks to use UMD.

Like I said earlier, he's talking about what is the most optimized by RAW, whereas I'm talking about what people may actually want to play and be allowed to play. That's apples and oranges. So stop telling me that oranges are wrong.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-04-28, 08:16 AM
Being a "generalist" contradicts specializing in a domain. Spontaneous divination is effectively making you a divination specialist, which contradicts both of the above.

Being a Generalist means never giving up anything, this fits perfectly fine with a domain. And Spontaneous Divination is absolutely nothing like specializing in Divination. It's like signing a contract with the powers that be to get infinite knowledge whenever you want.

Spontaneous Divination is specifically not compatible with specializing in Divination, because you don't prepare Divination spells at all when you have it.

Being the best Diviner in the game of D&D by a huge margin without dedicating a single spell slot to it isn't specializing in something. It's called Just Being Superior. The point of the ability is that it allows you to completely ignore the Divination school for the rest of your career.

Kurald Galain
2008-04-28, 08:35 AM
Being a Generalist means never giving up anything, this fits perfectly fine with a domain.
That's one way of viewing it. It is also perfectly reasonable to state that if you're so very good at one particular field (i.e. divination), you are by definition a specialist. Looking it up in a dictionary, this fits completely in the definition of "specialist", which so happens to be an antonym of "generalist".

So yeah, it is a completely valid opinion to ban this combination because it is self-contradictory. Just because some people hold a different opinion doesn't make it invalid.

Talic
2008-04-28, 09:38 AM
Nonsense. I was pointing out that "class X is good because it can be combined with Y", where Y is something that is technically legal but wouldn't be allowed by most DMs, is simply not saying much about class X in practice.

That is, "monks and diplomaNcy" is the exact same situation as "domain wizards and embrace-the-dark-chaos", because most DMs will let you use neither diplomancy nor the dark chaos. Neither says anything about the class. On the other hand, to my best knowledge, most DMs will allow warlocks to use UMD.

Like I said earlier, he's talking about what is the most optimized by RAW, whereas I'm talking about what people may actually want to play and be allowed to play. That's apples and oranges. So stop telling me that oranges are wrong.

Ah, now I have a solid argument. A valid one, that is also unsound.

Is it valid? Well, IF most DM's actually will ban domain wizards and spontaneous divination is true, and most monks will not let you use the diplomacy skill is true, then you're correct.

Unfortunately, while the second has been pretty well documented in many threads over the internet, I've yet to see a single topic, other than this one, that supports the first. Further, I've yet to see a single dm that bans either of the above abilities specifically, or the two together. I have seen one that banned complete champion outright, but that's because the first two things from the book he saw were Travel Devotion and Lion Totem Barbarian, so it doesn't really apply here.

Thus, while the second premise has support, your first has been supported neither by commonly seen evidence, nor by sources that you've cited. As both points need to be adequately supported to show an argument with merit, and one is not, the argument is, as yet, unfounded.

Perhaps a poll on Domain Wizard and Spontaneous Divination posted previous to this thread with a significant vote count? That might show a bit of support for "Most DM's don't allow this". Odd though, I never recall being asked.

I mean, as it sounds, it sounds like a more accurate statement would be, "Most of the DM's that Kurald Galain has asked something like this to, which amount to less than less than one tenth of one hundredth of one thousandth of one percent of the total pool of DM's out there, well, most of them wouldn't allow it."

But it's not nearly so convincing when you put undefined statistical information in context.

Kurald Galain
2008-04-28, 10:06 AM
Is it valid? Well, IF most DM's actually will ban domain wizards and spontaneous divination is true, and most monks will not let you use the diplomacy skill is true, then you're correct.
Wow, it's amazing how you keep missing the point. Nice straw man, again. I was talking about the embrace/shun combo as "something DMs will actually ban", not spontaneous divination.

Frosty
2008-04-28, 10:14 AM
and getting one or two extra spell slots per spell level per day (doubled for ring of wizardry) is going to make you more so.

Actually, rings of wizardry do NOT double your bonus slots from extra Int or Specialization AFAIK.

Frosty
2008-04-28, 10:47 AM
Thanks. If you start at a level which isn't a multiple of 5, can it be taken in place of a bonus feat? (I just wanted to check in case it had to be taken when the characer was created). Also, do you need to have learnt how to use the Divination spells in question to use them spontaneously? (I wanted to check due to what you said about Divinations from other classes, as well as the fact that it sounds really powerful).

You do not need to have learnt any divination spells, much less the divination spells in question, although you probably already have one or two by the time level 5 rolls around.

No, you can't give up a future metamagic feats that you'll never get to in order to get this feature. You have to give it up when you get it (so wizards give up their level 5 feat for it usually).

Yes, this is the best thing for wizards since sliced bread. If you're allowed to use it, use it.

Talic
2008-04-28, 10:05 PM
That's one way of viewing it. It is also perfectly reasonable to state that if you're so very good at one particular field (i.e. divination), you are by definition a specialist. Looking it up in a dictionary, this fits completely in the definition of "specialist", which so happens to be an antonym of "generalist".

So yeah, it is a completely valid opinion to ban this combination because it is self-contradictory. Just because some people hold a different opinion doesn't make it invalid.

Ah, THAT's your problem. You're confusing a dictionary definition, out of context, to a reserved game term.

Quite simply, a specialist is highly focused in one area. So much so, that he's forced to neglect other areas, to the point of being incompetent at them. That's the D&D specialist, which ONLY applies to wizards. In D&D you are not a specialist hider. You are not a specialist two handed melee fighter. No, you are a specialist only if you are a wizard, a wizard that chooses a school of magic to focus in, and 1-2 schools of magic to neglect.

If you embrace all schools of magic, and favor one above the others, that's not a specialist. That's a generalist with a preference. I mean, let's look at it this way.

Joe wizard is a generalist. He has no preferred school of magic. He then gets spell focus: transmutation, and greater spell focus: transmutation. Suddenly, his transmutation spells are 10% harder to resist than anything else he has. Is he now a Specialist Wizard? No.

Now, since I'm done arguing theory, let's go to the source on the elf wizard.


Elves are naturally enthralled by the study of magic, and many of history's most famous wizards were elves. Elf wizards typically prefer a general approach to magic, recognizing the value in versatility.

Ok, so here's the question. Is a domain wizard any less versatile than a generalist? Or is it more versatile? Well, let's see... It gets every single spell the generalist gets, and a few extra. Hm. Actually sounds MORE versatile, to me. Seems to fit the flavor listed in the substitution class description. Seems to fit the RAW.

The only thing it doesn't fit, actually, is your warped view of the specialist, wherein anyone that favors one area of magic with his abilities should be irrevocably banned from things requiring a "non-specialist wizard".