Is "defensive casting" the reason casters are "overpowered" in 3e?

[taltamir]

I think this deserves its own thread since it was derailing another thread.

The ability to cast defensively is a major difference between 2E and 3E, and one of the primary reasons why casters in the 3E are overpowered, whereas in 2E they're not.

My argument is that this is simply false.
Defensive casting doesn't do anything at all to overpower casters.
1. You can five foot step then cast a spell, it is safer then defensive casting since you cannot fail and don't provoke.
2. You shouldn't be in melee, and since you are intelligent, you probably are not going to be in melee.
3. Even if you are in melee and use defensive casting successfully, it doesn't do anything to "overpower" you. If anything, the fact you don't automatically succeed in casting a spell when threatened, and might actually draw an AoO is a silly extremely situational penalty that is severe, unreasonable, and so easily avoided it is not an issue.

[Yukitsu]

No. If you have to defensive cast, you're doing it wrong.

I suppose you could argue that not automatically failing at melee casting is too forgiving though.

[clockworkmonk]

you pretty much got why defensive casting is not overpowered.

What makes casters overpowered is the spell list.

[Crow]

The problem is that the spells only require 1 standard action to cast in most cases.

[Kurald Galain]

Not the reason, but an important contribution.

From the "changes between 2E and 3E thread",

The biggest things that helped the Wizard (and to lesser extent, other casters):
- Combined XP tables without alterations to on what levels they get stuff; 3.5 Wizards just grow in power VASTLY faster than their AD&D counterparts.
- Defensive Casting: Being next to someone is no longer any kind of a problem for casting spells
- Concentration-skill: Even being hit doesn't automatically cause you to lose your spell.
- Drawbackless Magic: AD&D had a ton of drawbacks for all the more powerful spells in the books. D&D 3.X just threw those drawbacks away without replacing them with anything.
- Fast casting: In AD&D, you spent your turn casting a spell. In 3.5, you spend one Standard Action casting, another moving and there are very few spells that can be interrupted outside readied actions.
- Bonus spells from high ability score: In AD&D, there was no way of getting more spell slots than listed. In 3.5, they took the old tables, but gave casters an automatic means of increasing their spell capacity.
- Spell DCs incorporate caster's key ability score. This change single-handedly made Save-or-X effects usable on mid-levels (though a bit weaker on low levels).
- Ability scores were uncapped and made to grow linearly and expected to grow a lot: This helps casters since casters gain much more from their key ability score than Fighters.

[taltamir]

No. If you have to defensive cast, you're doing it wrong.

not the reason. not a major reason. not a minor reason. not a reason at all.
If you need to defensive cast, you're doing it wrong.

its like WOTC throwing a bone to newbie players who don't know how to play a caster yet.

[Evard]

What makes casters over powered is that when they are hit they don't lose that spell and when they are knocked out they don't loose all their spells for that day.

If a magic user needed a melee character to defend them (and give them ability to stop things from hitting casters like the fighter in 4e) then casters may over power the melee types but without a melee type then the casters are royally...

In 3.x make it where if you are not a melee character then you cannot do a 5 foot step in battle (cause really that is a martial kind of skill), defensive fighting is alright, if you get hit you loose that spell or maybe it blows up in your face, also make it where melee types get to take attacks if they are adjacent to a caster and the caster is being attacked (switch places as a free action 1 per round that gets more usages as they get higher level). If the caster is knocked out then they loose all spells prepared or not (including invocations).

[Crow]

If you need to defensive cast, you're doing it wrong.

its like WOTC throwing a bone to newbie players who don't know how to play a caster yet.

This just stinks of elitism. As a counterpoint, I would say that if your games are so predictable that your wizard always know what is coming, and is always able to stay comfortably safe, you are playing in a game that is just boring as heck. Maybe the "Newbs" aren't the ones "doing it wrong". Maybe it's your DM.

[Radiun]

Clerics also got more spell levels, and therefore spell slots... if I recall correctly

[Lapak]

not the reason. not a major reason. not a minor reason. not a reason at all.
If you need to defensive cast, you're doing it wrong.

its like WOTC throwing a bone to newbie players who don't know how to play a caster yet.

While I'm in general agreement that defensive casting is not the core reason - or even a major reason - that casters are overpowered in 3.x, you're overstating the case here. Below level, oh, 10 or so, situations where being trapped in melee such that five-foot steps won't get you clear are entirely within the bounds of possibility. More to the point, there are no perfectly-effective, always-on countermeasures to such situations. As a DM, I've gotten significant melee threats within reach of PC spellcaster on numerous occasions, especially at the beginning of campaigns where the spellcasters have fewer resources to avoid it. And my players are not fools.

I would go so far as to argue that if your level 5 wizard is NEVER in a situation where he has to cast in melee, it is the Dungeon Master of that campaign that is 'doing it wrong.' And doing it very, very wrong to boot. Any halfway intelligent monsters that survived up to this point in a D&D world should and would make getting on top of spellcasters a top priority in every combat situation.

[Kurald Galain]

not the reason. not a major reason. not a minor reason. not a reason at all.
If you need to defensive cast, you're doing it wrong.

its like WOTC throwing a bone to newbie players who don't know how to play a caster yet.

Talt, are you posting this thread to discuss the issue, or to state that your view is the correct one?

[LibraryOgre]

Not the reason, but an important contribution.

From the "changes between 2E and 3E thread",

That list left out what I consider to the one of the biggest things: Reduction of memorization/preparation times. In 3.x, the 15 minute adventuring day became feasible... two encounters, blow your load, and rest 8 or 24 to rememorize. The abbreviated memorization times start about 3rd level if you have an 14 casting stat or higher... in 2e terms, someone memorizing as many spell levels as can be prepared in 3e with a 14+ casting stat at 3rd level would require 70 minutes, vs. the 60 minutes it will take you in 3e. It would also be a strike against the "scry and die" wizard, who would have to go through a much longer preparation process after scrying... and things might have changed in the days it would take them.

Really, I also think that was another strike against the sorcerer, in a way. If sorcerers required 15 minutes of prep time a day to be ready to cast their full load, and wizards took 10 minutes/spell level, I think you'd see a LOT more sorcerers. Sure, they're limited, but they're also ready to go at a moment's notice, unlike wizards.

[taltamir]

This just stinks of elitism. As a counterpoint, I would say that if your games are so predictable that your wizard always know what is coming, and is always able to stay comfortably safe, you are playing in a game that is just boring as heck. Maybe the "Newbs" aren't the ones "doing it wrong". Maybe it's your DM.

My last game I played we were facing GROUPS of CR 5 monsters (way under CRed) at level 1. Casting as a whole was nerfed a lot.
Arcane thesis was banned to players and allowed to enemy bosses.
Celerity was banned to players and allowed to enemy bosses.
All abusive spells were banned (example, no shape shifting of any kind, etc).
Enemies were min maxed hardcore with various broken classes from any source.
Enemies used intelligent tactics.
Enemies usually had more class levels than players, were typically a custom living construct race with unbelievable capabilities (they got to pick from a large list, which included things like fast healing and SR).
Significant limitations on spells known (such as "single school" wizards) meant we had no divination, at all.

Not once did anyone, player or not, cast defensively... we did however on occasion have to take a 5 foot step or withdraw before casting.

You calling me elitist? you think the only reason to not cast defensively is

your wizard always know what is coming, and is always able to stay comfortably safe, you are playing in a game that is just boring as heck

No I am not playing "boring safe games". Defensive casting is a horribly sub par tactic that you shouldn't bother using. And doesn't confer game breaking powers as you describe.

The one time defensive casting could be viable is if you got stuck near an enemy with reach and a 5 foot step will not let you get far enough away to cast safely... in which case you should withdraw (use full round to move 2x your speed without provoking AoO for moving out of your initial square, but still provoke on other threatened squares).

Which begs the question... why are you near an enemy with reach?

Talt, are you posting this thread to discuss the issue, or to state that your view is the correct one?

discussion requires me to state what I think is correct so that it may be counter argued and perhaps proven wrong.

[Signmaker]

1. You can five foot step then cast a spell, it is safer then defensive casting since you cannot fail and don't provoke.
2. You shouldn't be in melee, and since you are intelligent, you probably are not going to be in melee.
3. Even if you are in melee and use defensive casting successfully, it doesn't do anything to "overpower" you. If anything, the fact you don't automatically succeed in casting a spell when threatened, and might actually draw an AoO is a silly extremely situational penalty that is severe, unreasonable, and so easily avoided it is not an issue.

1. Quite often: No you cannot. Either due to number of assailants, reach weapons, or difficult terrain generation, you can be prevented from doing such.

2. Bad thinking. You can be ambushed. You can be surprised without contingencies active. You can be forced by plot to do so.

3. Yes it does. Defensive casting can easily be tricked so that you can't fail the quite simple to optimized concentration check, so it becomes a free ticket to casting. And that can lead you to do what you want to do, and that's to tell others to shut up and sit down.

[SurlySeraph]

Defensive casting doesn't do anything at all to overpower casters.
1. You can five foot step then cast a spell, it is safer then defensive casting since you cannot fail and don't provoke.
2. You shouldn't be in melee, and since you are intelligent, you probably are not going to be in melee.
3. Even if you are in melee and use defensive casting successfully, it doesn't do anything to "overpower" you. If anything, the fact you don't automatically succeed in casting a spell when threatened, and might actually draw an AoO is a silly extremely situational penalty that is severe, unreasonable, and so easily avoided it is not an issue.

1. 5-foot steps won't always help. Difficult terrain, enemies adjacent to all the squares that you could step into, someone with a spiked chain who's adjacent to you, cornered, etc.
2. Ah yes, the "Casters are omniscient" fallacy combined with the "Melee characters cannot walk" fallacy. You don't always have a choice about being in melee. Ambushes happen, charges happen, getting surrounded happens, and melee characters who can reach you exist.
3.

a silly extremely situational penalty that is severe, unreasonable, and so easily avoided it is not an issue

a silly extremely situational penalty that is severe, unreasonable, and so easily avoided it is not an issue

I'm not sure what you're attempting to argue, but whatever it is you seem to have refuted it yourself. Also, can you explain why it makes more sense for the weird hand movements, chanting, and intense concentration inherent in spellcasting to automatically succeed when threatened than for them to provoke an AoO? When answering, you may wish to consider that actions that seem far more likely to prevent your opponent from attacking you, such as trying to disarm him, provoke AoOs.

Again, defensive casting is only a very small part of why wizards are so powerful in 3E. Removing it wouldn't bring them down to the same level as melee characters by any means. But it does contribute to their overpoweredness.

[Lapak]

Not once did anyone, player or not, cast defensively... we did however on occasion have to take a 5 foot step or withdraw before casting

....

The one time defensive casting could be viable is if you got stuck near an enemy with reach and a 5 foot step will not let you get far enough away to cast safely... in which case you should withdraw (use full round to move 2x your speed without provoking AoO for moving out of your initial square, but still provoke on other threatened squares).

You were never caught in a small combat space, such as a room? Never attacked from both sides in a passageway? Never surrounded? Never attacked by multiple kinds of attackers, some with reach and some without? Never surprised?

If all those things were true, your DM was not using 'intelligent tactics' for your monsters. They are all very basic tactics that would prevent you from five-foot-stepping or withdrawing your way out of melee. I understand that you're playing up how much of a threat that the monsters were mechanically, but if you were never caught in melee their stats were all they had going for them.

[AslanCross]

I think one of the pervasive arguments is that spellcasters tend to eat into the roles of other party members simply because their spells can pretty much take over an entire class's abilities.

[TheOOB]

Really, I always thought the reason casters where overpowered is because they have a large list of varied abilities that gets bigger and more powerful with level while most other classes only have basic attacks and 2 or 3 other abilities.

Until you give everyone ability lists, the people with lots of special abilities will be overpowered. 4e tried to fix that, it's up to you to decide whether or not they did a good job.

[DragoonWraith]

I'd think that the reason casters are overpowered is because they can do everything: there are low level spells to make almost any skill check irrelevant, there are spells attacking any weakness at every level, there are spells that can trip, that can grapple, that can disarm, that can protect you, that can heal you, that can allow you to hit, make your attacks do huge damage, move you from place to place. There is not a single thing in all of 3.5 that some spell can't replicate. No matter what your schtick is, a spellcaster can do it just by casting the appropriate spell, and usually without having to worry about taking the class levels or the feats that allow you to do it.

[taltamir]

1. Quite often: No you cannot. Either due to number of assailants, reach weapons, or difficult terrain generation, you can be prevented from doing such.

You are not flying? you let them close in on you?

2. Bad thinking. You can be ambushed. You can be surprised without contingencies active. You can be forced by plot to do so.

Contingencies? you don't need a contingency. Ambushes don't work the way you think they do. And a crazy prepared ambush... well I will explain later in my post

3. Yes it does. Defensive casting can easily be tricked so that you can't fail the quite simple to optimized concentration check, so it becomes a free ticket to casting. And that can lead you to do what you want to do, and that's to tell others to shut up and sit down.

By the time you can do that, you have a variety of all day powers and spells that make it a non issue. Quickened/immediate spells don't provoke AoO, you should be having hours/CL flight active, etc.
And the only benefit it gives you is "your turn (to cast a standard action spell) without being gang raped by surrounding enemies who have reach weapons via AoO"

A fighter who is surrounded by enemies can attack one without provoking AoO from everyone and having his attack interrupted by said AoO...

And again, it just wouldn't happen... you need a bunch of enemies with flight, very fast, invisible, with reach, to surround your wizard.

And if enemies are that crazy prepared for you, they can just ready action to hit you if you cast a spell. That way it doesn't matter if it is quickened, defensive, or whatever. The ready action takes precedence and always interrupts your spell, always.

Defensive casting only helps against FREE AoO enemies get against you without even planning. If they are trying to shut you down a readied action (uses up their standard action) achieves it and ignores defensive casting and swift/immediate/whatever spells.

[SurlySeraph]

My last game I played we were facing GROUPS of CR 5 monsters (way under CRed) at level 1. Casting as a whole was nerfed a lot.
Arcane thesis was banned to players and allowed to enemy bosses.
Celerity was banned to players and allowed to enemy bosses.
All abusive spells were banned (example, no shape shifting of any kind, etc).
Enemies were min maxed hardcore with various broken classes from any source.
Enemies used intelligent tactics.
Enemies usually had more class levels than players, were typically a custom living construct race with unbelievable capabilities (they got to pick from a large list, which included things like fast healing and SR).
Significant limitations on spells known (such as "single school" wizards) meant we had no divination, at all.

You calling me elitist?

Reread what you just wrote. Ask yourself whether a hyperbolic description of how powerful the threats you faced in your game were might come off as elitist.

Which begs the question... why are you near an enemy with reach?

Gee, perhaps because he walked up to you? Or teleported, flew, burrowed, plane shifted, was waiting hidden, etc.?

You are not flying? you let them close in on you?

Perhaps you are not level 5 yet? Or the duration on your Fly spell ran out, and you did not have another one prepared because you used your other 3rd-level slots to prepare other useful spells?

Ambushes don't work the way you think they do. And a crazy prepared ambush... well I will explain later in my post

So you're saying that a wizard can never walk into someplace where someone is waiting hidden. Is that it?

And again, it just wouldn't happen... you need a bunch of enemies with flight, very fast, invisible, with reach, to surround your wizard.

Because of course all wizards are permanently flying at high speeds and cannot be fully surrounded because of their wizardness. Regardless of level.

And if enemies are that crazy prepared for you, they can just ready action to hit you if you cast a spell. That way it doesn't matter if it is quickened, defensive, or whatever. The ready action takes precedence and always interrupts your spell, always.

Which requires them to forgo making a full attack against you. Also, I see nothing in the rules that makes readied attacks automatically stop spells. Could you cite that?

[Signmaker]

You are not flying? you let them close in on you?

Contingencies? you don't need a contingency. Ambushes don't work the way you think they do. And a crazy prepared ambush... well I will explain later in my post

By the time you can do that, you have a variety of all day powers and spells that make it a non issue. Quickened/immediate spells don't provoke AoO, you should be having hours/CL flight active, etc.
And the only benefit it gives you is "your turn (to cast a standard action spell) without being gang raped by surrounding enemies who have reach weapons via AoO"

A fighter who is surrounded by enemies can attack one without provoking AoO from everyone and having his attack interrupted by said AoO...

And again, it just wouldn't happen... you need a bunch of enemies with flight, very fast, invisible, with reach, to surround your wizard.

And if enemies are that crazy prepared for you, they can just ready action to hit you if you cast a spell. That way it doesn't matter if it is quickened, defensive, or whatever. The ready action takes precedence and always interrupts your spell, always.

Defensive casting only helps against FREE AoO enemies get against you without even planning. If they are trying to shut you down a readied action (uses up their standard action) achieves it and ignores defensive casting and swift/immediate/whatever spells.

1. Yes. I can't always have Overland Flight up, especially when I can't cast it at low levels. Additionally, not all enemies are grounded. Simplistically, you can't reduce the discussion to that situation, because not all encounters reduce to that situation. It's an incomplete argument.

2. Enemies don't have to be 'crazy prepared' to ambush you. They can be as simple as a raiding party that surprises you from the bushes, gets a surprise round, and surrounds the party. Oh my, now you're surrounded, plain as that.

3a. High level assumption which does not apply to lower levels.
3b. Assuming schrodinger wizard, whereas many are not. It can take something as simple as a forest map, nighttime environment, and an adequate H/MS setup to ambush a party.
3c. Defensive casting prevents the "Oops, random AoO fizzled my spell" dilemma. Sure, your opponents can ready an action, but that's readying an action. Getting fizzled because of a person's AoO is a far more humiliating and annoying action.

[Crow]

Not to mention, sometimes there is a ceiling where your party needs to go and flying won't buy you anything at all.

[taltamir]

Reread what you just wrote. Ask yourself whether a hyperbolic description of how powerful the threats you faced in your game were might come off as elitist.

You are specifically and intentionally taking things out of context.

He was calling me elitist before I have described it. Describing it as my reasoning would be elitist. But the accusation of elitism was based on a different reason.

I described how powerful the threats I was facing as a direct response to the accusation of only

your wizard always know what is coming, and is always able to stay comfortably safe, you are playing in a game that is just boring as heck

I used it as an example of me not playing a "omfortably safe" game.

1. Yes. I can't always have Overland Flight up, especially when I can't cast it at low levels. Additionally, not all enemies are grounded. Simplistically, you can't reduce the discussion to that situation, because not all encounters reduce to that situation. It's an incomplete argument.

at those low levels where you don't have flight, you also do not have the means to auto succeed the concentration check. In fact it is a damn hard concentration check in levels 1-5.

[Crow]

I used it as an example of me not playing a "comfortably safe" game.

And yet, it was.

[taltamir]

And yet, it was.

no it wasn't... a bunch of us died. we got ambushed. we ran away from most encounters... it was terrifying. Actual fear was felt.
We never used defensive casting because it is a horribly sub par tactic, not because the game was "safe".

Also, that right there was an example of an elitist response.

[Signmaker]

at those low levels where you don't have flight, you also do not have the means to auto succeed the concentration check. In fact it is a damn hard concentration check in levels 1-5.

Tunic of Steady Spellcasting. Ranks. Masterwork Item. Not-crappy Con. Skill Focus (Concentration) if you really want it. Affordable as a package by 2-4th level.

+5, +4-8, +2, +1-3.

I'm looking at a minimum of +12, and a maximum of +21 with just the above suggestions. So no, it isn't, when the DC is 15+Spell Level.

[Kantolin]

O-o Spellcasters weren't overpowered in 2E?

You mean they're very weak at levels 1-4? I'd buy that one. I've never heard that spellcasters were anything besides overpowered after that.

[taltamir]

Tunic of Steady Spellcasting. Ranks. Masterwork Item. Not-crappy Con. Skill Focus (Concentration) if you really want it.

+5, +4-8, +2, +1-3.

I'm looking at a minimum of +12, and a maximum of +21 with just the above suggestions. So no, it isn't, when the DC is 15+Spell Level.

now tally up the absurd costs; which includes feats and a lot a of wealth...
All for a horrible sub part ability you should not never even use.

[Signmaker]

now tally up the absurd costs; which includes feats and a lot a of wealth...
All for a horrible sub part ability you should not never even use.

2550 gp, one feat. Joy. Even assuming level 1, it's DC 16 with 4 ranks, probably a +2 con, and the masterwork item, as a completely minimal (50 gp) investment. That's a +8 vs DC 16, which isn't all that horrible. As a minimum.