Spellcaster Killer

[Fastmover]

Hey guys,

My DM is having a group come together and 3 of the guys are munchkins. The last time we played they killed one of my chars. One in particualar likes to choose casters. I'm known for using a sort of "Batman utility belt" way of fighting. Meaning using my surroundings and ropes and such to over come my foes. Obviously I'm a big fan of martial fighting. But I don't think that will work on him when his char gets stronger. I want to create a char that will be able to hold his own against a caster in case he turns on me. We will be starting of low at 3rd level with only a 3 class limit.

[kamikasei]

Firstly: more details plz - edition, houserules in force, source available etc.

Secondly: a better bet than trying to make your characters to police one another would be establishing with the DM in advance that you're playing a cooperative game and that griefing and PvP won't be tolerated. If this guy is wasting time with intra-party shenanigans, have the DM tell him "no". Or walk, yourself.

If we're talking 3.5 then you're at a severe disadvantage, but there's always the possibility that this guy isn't as good as he thinks. Can you describe his past tactics and style of play?

[AmberVael]

Secondly: a better bet than trying to make your characters to police one another would be establishing with the DM in advance that you're playing a cooperative game and that griefing and PvP won't be tolerated. If this guy is wasting time with intra-party shenanigans, have the DM tell him "no". Or walk, yourself.

Well, it's always possible that a bit of PvP is accepted in their group. Nothing wrong with that, as long as they all enjoy it.

[Fastmover]

Yup we are in 3.5.

Well... I'm not really sure on his tactics really... since his first attack fried/melted the dwarfs brain on the inside. I think he was some kind of psychic/wizard or something. I'm not really expecting to be attacked really by my group, I just want to have a chance of avoiding something like that happening again.

[Paul H]

Hi

Best way to kill a caster is with another caster!

If he/she is an arcanist with low con, then go for Con attacks. Poison, Slime Wave etc are good ones.

Arcanists often don't have good grapple checks, so something with Evards' Tentacles is also good.

Warmages are good because all they do is dish damage. They can use Light Armour & have D6 HP

Beguilers no so bad because of Invis. They too can use Lt Armour, have D6 HP, plus plenty of Skill Pts. Aim for Nightmare Spinner, watch them fall to non-lethal damage. Cast Legion of Sentinels, and watch 18 AoO if your 'friends' provoke. (27 if they're flying).

Clerics - well they're the best. Full armour, better HP/BAB/wpns. Silence Spell, (or Anti-Magic Shell), then charge & beat their brains out. Also you're the one with Healing.

Cheers
Paul H

[Hat-Trick]

Warmages can use Medium armor later in the game. If you want to resist the caster's abilities, you want good Saves and possibly no suck at range. Will and Fort are the two that will kill or screw you straight out, so cleric or dragon shaman get those.

[wizuriel]

If you can roll a karsite from tome of magic (LA +2). You won't be able to cast any spells, but will pretty much be immune to magic.


A paladin/hexblade with high charisma and a ring of evasion would also be a huge pain for a caster to deal with.

[Nohwl]

a well played wizard/cleric/druid/archivist/artificer is a huge pain for other casters to deal with too.

[Sinfire Titan]

If you can roll a karsite from tome of magic (LA +2). You won't be able to cast any spells, but will pretty much be immune to magic.


A paladin/hexblade with high charisma and a ring of evasion would also be a huge pain for a caster to deal with.

Azurin Incarnate with Spellward Shirt and Improved Spell Resistance (BoVD)+the Vest from DMG 2= SR 46 at level 20. Karsites can only get SR 31. If you want Spell Resistance, go Incarnate over anything else.


SR sucks though. Healing spells are negated unless you are conscious and take the Standard action to lower SR, and there's enough SR: No spells out there to make it useless. Oh, and Summons ignore SR outright.

[Justin B.]

Cleric - Archer.

Cast Silence on an arrowhead, attached to a shaft that's designed to break off. Leaving the thing inside, making it difficult for him to cast any spells.

Then proceed to pepper him with arrows anytime he makes a gesture of any sort, forcing concentration checks on any spells that he might have metamagic'd.

There are a couple of spells that can hamper this plan, of course, Entropic Shield and Wind Wall. But any cleric worth his Holy Symbol will cast Dispel Magic on the fool wizard first.

[quick_comment]

Paladin/Pious Templar/Warblade/Ruby Knight Vindicator
Between pious templar and a ring of evasion you have mettle and evasion.
With Warblade you have the save replacement maneuvers.
With RKV, you can refresh them with turn attempts.
So you are basically immune to anything requiring a save.

For offense, you have shadow blink + time stands still.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Hey guys,

My DM is having a group come together and 3 of the guys are munchkins. The last time we played they killed one of my chars. One in particualar likes to choose casters. I'm known for using a sort of "Batman utility belt" way of fighting. Meaning using my surroundings and ropes and such to over come my foes. Obviously I'm a big fan of martial fighting. But I don't think that will work on him when his char gets stronger. I want to create a char that will be able to hold his own against a caster in case he turns on me. We will be starting of low at 3rd level with only a 3 class limit.

Firstly, I like your Batman style of fighting. Very creative.

Secondly, I suggest you try ToB, cleric, or druid if you want to go melee, or a wizard, sorcerer, archivist, or artificer if you want to cast.

[herrhauptmann]

I'm actually working on a melee build like this myself, albeit level 12.

First off if you're going melee, take the feat mageslayer, requires 3 ranks in spellcraft, so a melee character can take it by level 3. But now he can't cast defensively within your range, and you'll be a fool to let him escape your range, especially at low levels when he doesn't have any good options for melee (besides Ray of Enfeeblement)
Pierce magical protection/concealment are good ways to give him a good headache. Though the disadvantage of all those is that your effective casterlevel drops by 4 for each feat, so you can never be a caster and use self-buffs. You'll just get them dispelled real easy. Even worse if he uses slashing dispel, now you're debuffed AND took damage for each buff you lost. Also eats up 4 feats to get it, and Pierce concealment can't be used on a regular charge, though there is a pair of boots in MiC that turns a charge into a standard action twice/day.

Witchslayer from ToM, by level 10 you can gain access to it's momentary disjunction.

Occult slayer from ComWar is also nice, again by level 10 immune to pretty much everything mind affecting. With bonus damage against creatures with spells or invocations.

Ranger Favored Enemy: Arcanists. Choose a different combat style as per Dragon 326 (I think, it's listed on Crystal Keep) Strongarm specifically

If he summons a lot, get a Starmetal weapon. It acts as adamant, but deals 1d6 extra damage vs outsiders while on the material plane.

Magebane weapon (MIC),
Dispelling weapon (MIC).
Soulfire armor (BoED)
Synthesete psionic power (in the SRD) placed on an item, can now get blinded or deafened and function normally.

Weapon effects which force Fort or ref saves on their targets can still be useful. Basically the bullrushing enhancement or brutal surge is intended to use against monsters like giants or something else, but the DC is so low that by the time you can get the weapon, monsters can pass on a 5 or higher. Used against a wizard or sorc, especially if he's prestiged, it can still be effective.

Dungeoncrasher fighter Alternate Class Feature.

[woodenbandman]

I suggest asking him or other players why they killed you. Don't refer to your fellow players as Munchkins, its an offensive term used for cheaters. Unless you're actually sure the dude is cheating, be nice.

If you annoyed the guy for no reason, you deserve to be killed. He probably could have talked to you, but if you were at fault, you have to accept that and forgive. PvP only makes people mad and then tears fall and people get kicked out of groups.

[herrhauptmann]

If you annoyed the guy for no reason, you deserve to be killed. He probably could have talked to you, but if you were at fault, you have to accept that and forgive. PvP only makes people mad and then tears fall and people get kicked out of groups.

That's true as well. Did you die because you got stuck in an area effect aimed at an enemy and just failed your save miserably? Or did he specifically target you? If so, why did he do it?

[quick_comment]

You can also go rogue, and get your sleight of hand check up high enough so you can steal his component pouch without him noticing.

No components, no spellcasting (unless he has eschew components)

[Aquillion]

Cast Silence on an arrowhead, attached to a shaft that's designed to break off. Leaving the thing inside, making it difficult for him to cast any spells.

Doesn't work. Arrows are destroyed as soon as they hit their target; hitting someone with an arrow doesn't automatically let you attach it to him or make it 'difficult for him to cast any spells' just because you want it to, no more than (say) the wizard can decide that his fireball blinds you by burning away your eyes, or declare that his acid arrow permanently melts away your skin.

I know it's fun to get creative, but without some feat or ability that says otherwise, hitting someone with an arrow (or any other attack, for that matter) doesn't automatically let you apply other penalties to them beyond reducing their HP; asking for your arrow to 'stick in' the enemy is no different from declaring that you're going to aim for the dragon's neck and cut its head off, bypassing their HP. If you can arbitrarily declare that your arrow sticks in the wizard and gets in the way of his casting gestures, he can just as easily declare that he quickly gouges it out with his knife and drops it, then walks out of the aura to cast the spell... or tosses it back at you before he webs/tentacles your area, so you are the one stuck in your own silence.

Then proceed to pepper him with arrows anytime he makes a gesture of any sort, forcing concentration checks on any spells that he might have metamagic'd.

Concentration checks are ineffective against an optimized wizard, since it's so easy to meet the check to cast defensively.

There are a couple of spells that can hamper this plan, of course, Entropic Shield and Wind Wall. But any cleric worth his Holy Symbol will cast Dispel Magic on the fool wizard first.

No he won't. Not if he's carrying an arrow with Silence pre-cast on it, anyway.

(And if you don't pre-cast it, then counting the turn you waste dispelling you're talking at least two or three turns in which the wizard is free to cast spells at you freely, including a turn when you're stuck inside your own silence after casting it, but before you can attack, when the wizard can gleefully dispel it, or recast any of the spells that make your arrow useless... or, more likely, Solid Fog you and leave you utterly helpless, trapped in your own silence again.)

[quick_comment]

Doesn't work. Arrows are destroyed as soon as they hit their target; hitting someone with an arrow doesn't automatically let you attach it to him or make it 'difficult for him to cast any spells' just because you want it to, no more than (say) the wizard can decide that his fireball blinds you by burning away your eyes, or declare that his acid arrow permanently melts away your skin.

Stirge arrows (AE&Q) do stay attached, and to boot, they do 1 con damage per round.

[Justin B.]

Doesn't work. Arrows are destroyed as soon as they hit their target; hitting someone with an arrow doesn't automatically let you attach it to him or make it 'difficult for him to cast any spells' just because you want it to, no more than (say) the wizard can decide that his fireball blinds you by burning away your eyes, or declare that his acid arrow permanently melts away your skin.

Maybe if he fireballed me directly in the eyes, and perhaps his acid is melting away my skin. Get the cleric to fix that one...

I know it's fun to get creative, but without some feat or ability that says otherwise, hitting someone with an arrow (or any other attack, for that matter) doesn't automatically let you apply other penalties to them beyond reducing their HP; asking for your arrow to 'stick in' the enemy is no different from declaring that you're going to aim for the dragon's neck and cut its head off, bypassing their HP.

A few things here. One, let us just agree that I perfer a simulationist game and you perfer a game more oriented toward the rules. Obviously whether or not my advice is useful will be based on the type of game that person plays.

As for the Dragon, well, smashing through the Dragon's scales will be tough, as well as the dragon not avoiding it to the point where it is not quite a beheading. There are simple ways to rule called shots so they are not as silly as you are mentioning.

If you can arbitrarily declare that your arrow sticks in the wizard and gets in the way of his casting gestures, he can just as easily declare that he quickly gouges it out with his knife and drops it, then walks out of the aura to cast the spell... or tosses it back at you before he webs/tentacles your area, so you are the one stuck in your own silence.

I wouldn't exactly call it "arbitrary" considering that is what actually happens when you shoot someone with an arrow. In fact, I would say it's more arbitrary to say that the arrow is shattered into nothingness after it strikes.

Also, I'm not saying the stuck arrow interrupts his gestures, I'm simply saying the arrowhead with silence would still be inside of him.

Pulling it out requires a heal check, and wastes an action. If he tosses it back, that's another action, and then casting the web is yet another action. Lest it is quickened or something. All of which is time that he is not casting, worth the investment if you ask me.

Concentration checks are ineffective against an optimized wizard, since it's so easy to meet the check to cast defensively.

Fair enough point, though for a well buffed Cleric it may become more difficult for the caster to meet the concentration check.

No he won't. Not if he's carrying an arrow with Silence pre-cast on it, anyway.

(And if you don't pre-cast it, then counting the turn you waste dispelling you're talking at least two or three turns in which the wizard is free to cast spells at you freely, including a turn when you're stuck inside your own silence after casting it, but before you can attack, when the wizard can gleefully dispel it, or recast any of the spells that make your arrow useless... or, more likely, Solid Fog you and leave you utterly helpless, trapped in your own silence again.)

Turn 1: Dispel
Turn 2: Silence on Arrowhead
Turn 3: Fire at Wizard.

So, inbetween turn 2 and 3 the Wizard has known to cast Dispel on the Cleric to interrupt the Silence effect? Wizards are intelligent, but that's precognition or metagaming. The dispel may not even be necessary, if the Wizard has no anti-arrow buffs up (a wizard with the level of optimization you're talking about may have very well banned evocation altogether, since you seem to be talking Batman tactics.)

All this, though, assumes that you have a party backing you up and also taking some of the Wizards attention. Which greatly increases the chances of getting off the arrow. If the Wizard is focused directly on the cleric, he may be able to do some of these things, Solid Fog seems the best bet, but honestly, how would he know to cast the Solid Fog after the Silence has been put on the arrow?

Your argument relies on a few assumptions: 1) That the Wizard is winning initiative every round. Yes, a wizard can do this with cheese if he puts his mind to it, but most don't. 2) The Wizard magically knows which spells are going to be cast against him, and the best way to counter them. 3) The Wizard is focused entirely on the Cleric.

I'm simply giving general advice that would be applicable in the most situations, including the one the OP mentioned. In fact, in that scenario, it's very unlikely that the Wizard will even have arrow-protection spells up, let alone knowing exactly how to screw the other persons tactics.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

So, inbetween turn 2 and 3 the Wizard has known to cast Dispel on the Cleric to interrupt the Silence effect?

If you Dispel the wizard, it is likely that he will temporarily retreat to rebuff rather than hang around for another round while you cast Silence and shoot at him.

[Justin B.]

If you Dispel the wizard, it is likely that he will temporarily retreat to rebuff rather than hang around for another round while you cast Silence and shoot at him.

Sure is. But temporarily retreating out of Longbow range is difficult without magic, especially in a single turn. Not to mention, the Cleric probably will not cast the Silence, if the Wizard retreats.

Just like if the Wizards starts recasting his spells, the Cleric may do something else.

Why are we under the assumption that Wizards are the only combatants smart enough to use reactionary tactics?

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Sure is. But temporarily retreating out of Longbow range is difficult without magic, especially in a single turn.

Dimension Door. Teleport. Plane Shift.

Why are we under the assumption that Wizards are the only combatants smart enough to use reactionary tactics?

Right now, the Cleric is being proactive and the wizard is being reactive.

[Justin B.]

Yes, but the Cleric is not a robot programmed with a series of instructions.

It may very well be the the Wizard is being proactive in other areas while the Cleric is setting this off. I never claimed the strategy was foolproof, merely it was workable.

[Aquillion]

A few things here. One, let us just agree that I perfer a simulationist game and you perfer a game more oriented toward the rules. Obviously whether or not my advice is useful will be based on the type of game that person plays.

As for the Dragon, well, smashing through the Dragon's scales will be tough, as well as the dragon not avoiding it to the point where it is not quite a beheading. There are simple ways to rule called shots so they are not as silly as you are mentioning.

I wouldn't exactly call it "arbitrary" considering that is what actually happens when you shoot someone with an arrow. In fact, I would say it's more arbitrary to say that the arrow is shattered into nothingness after it strikes.

Also, I'm not saying the stuck arrow interrupts his gestures, I'm simply saying the arrowhead with silence would still be inside of him.

Pulling it out requires a heal check, and wastes an action. If he tosses it back, that's another action, and then casting the web is yet another action. Lest it is quickened or something. All of which is time that he is not casting, worth the investment if you ask me.

It's not that I'm gamist and you're simulationist, it's that you're just inventing whatever rules will help you kill a wizard, without letting him do the same thing.

Why would pulling the arrowhead out require a heal check? The wizard doesn't mind taking a nasty clumsy dagger cut -- it's 1d4 damage. Why wouldn't sticking the arrow in him require a roll? Why wouldn't there be another roll when he removes it to see whether it breaks or not?

Fair enough point, though for a well buffed Cleric it may become more difficult for the caster to meet the concentration check.

What buffs increase the difficulty of casting defensively?

Turn 1: Dispel
Turn 2: Silence on Arrowhead
Turn 3: Fire at Wizard.

So, inbetween turn 2 and 3 the Wizard has known to cast Dispel on the Cleric to interrupt the Silence effect? Wizards are intelligent, but that's precognition or metagaming. The dispel may not even be necessary, if the Wizard has no anti-arrow buffs up (a wizard with the level of optimization you're talking about may have very well banned evocation altogether, since you seem to be talking Batman tactics.)

The wizard sees you casting a spell on the arrowhead. Figuring out that you're up to something is not hard (although, again, he's more likely to just cast a spell that incapacitates or kills you outright. Solid Fog or Black Tentacles means you're trapped with your own arrowhead, unable to get rid of it, fire it, or cast.)

All this, though, assumes that you have a party backing you up and also taking some of the Wizards attention. Which greatly increases the chances of getting off the arrow. If the Wizard is focused directly on the cleric, he may be able to do some of these things, Solid Fog seems the best bet, but honestly, how would he know to cast the Solid Fog after the Silence has been put on the arrow?

Nobody said this was the entire party fighting the wizard. If you're going to go that route, why wouldn't the wizard have a party backing him up, too?

Your argument relies on a few assumptions: 1) That the Wizard is winning initiative every round. Yes, a wizard can do this with cheese if he puts his mind to it, but most don't. 2) The Wizard magically knows which spells are going to be cast against him, and the best way to counter them. 3) The Wizard is focused entirely on the Cleric.

Uh, you don't roll initiative every round. And the question was specifically against an optimized wizard, so it's likely he will aim for a good initiative check -- but whether he succeeds or not is unimportant, since you're wasting at least two rounds.

Aside from dispelling the arrow (which is purely reactive based on something obviously suspicious you did in front of him) none of this is based on knowing your tactics. Black Tentacles or Solid Fog are common sense when you're up against someone carrying a bow; they're generic wizard spells. The very first thing the wizard does if you dispel his buffs is either replace his defense against ranged attacks, or do something to you so you can't ranged attack him with the big obvious bow you're carrying.

I'm simply giving general advice that would be applicable in the most situations, including the one the OP mentioned. In fact, in that scenario, it's very unlikely that the Wizard will even have arrow-protection spells up, let alone knowing exactly how to screw the other persons tactics.

But you're wasting a round or two, and you're carrying a big obvious bow. So he will have arrow-protection spells up by the time you actually get around to shooting at him, especially when he sees you visibly enchanting an arrow that you're carrying.

[Farlion]

Play a female bard, seduce him and coup de grace him when he least expects it.

Cheers,
Farlion

[Justin B.]

Instead of a long argument where each one of us counters each others newest tactics for countering the other, let me just point out that sticking an arrow into something does require an attack roll to ensure that you hit said target. Everything else it just a matter of how arrows work.

As well, pulling arrows out is nasty business, you would want to make a heal check so as to not make a mess of things.

That's just me using a predetermined mechanic to simulate a realistic condition. There's no precedent for that in the rules, however, so feel free to disregard as you like.

[Flickerdart]

Instead of a long argument where each one of us counters each others newest tactics for countering the other, let me just point out that sticking an arrow into something does require an attack roll to ensure that you hit said target. Everything else it just a matter of how arrows work.

As well, pulling arrows out is nasty business, you would want to make a heal check so as to not make a mess of things.

That's just me using a predetermined mechanic to simulate a realistic condition. There's no precedent for that in the rules, however, so feel free to disregard as you like.

But "making a mess of things" by the 3.5 rule set doesn't mean "you lose CON every round because you're bleeding out", it means "you take damage". How much damage? A dagger cut, as was said before. 1d4 damage. That won't even make you flinch.

[Yucca]

What buffs increase the difficulty of casting defensively?

I think he's saying that a well built and buffed cleric/archer would deal enough damage to make the check quite high. (DC 10+damage+spell level)

If the archer readies an action to shoot as soon as the wizard starts casting, then casting defensively won't help since it's not an AoO.

Whether or not it's the best use of your std. action is a different discussion, but it would make it much more difficult for the wizard to get a spell off.

[Epinephrine]

I'm daring to suggest monk...

They've got all good saves, they get evasion, as well as SR, and they can have ludicrous touch AC. If you can't be hit with ranged touches, can shrug off half the spells via SR, and have solid saves it's a good start. Of course, eevryone will point out the weakness of monks, but they do have a few nice abilities.

Anything else that similarly offers a chance to avoid ranged touches, grants some solid saves, and might include a decent amount of SR should also be looked at.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

I'm daring to suggest monk...

Let's see...

They've got all good saves

Orb of Fire

they get evasion

Orb of Fire

as well as SR

Orb of Fire

and they can have ludicrous touch AC

Quickened True Strike plus Orb of Fire

Note that Orb of Force can be replaced by many other spells, such as Solid Fog, Black Tentacles, etc. Basically things that don't allow saves.