In defense of Evocation

[Cruiser1]

Evocation is frequently considered the weakest school of magic, and the one most likely to be banned when playing a specialist. This is due to the relatively recent popularity of the "Batman" style Wizard which focuses on save or suck spells, battlefield control, and buffing, and the corresponding perceived inefficiency of direct damage spells. However before reaching the conclusion that Evocation is as worthless as playing a Monk (just kidding ;) there are a few points to consider.

Evocation is Simple

Beginning Wizards think the most important thing to have is spell slots. Intermediate Wizards think the most important asset you have is turn actions, hence the popularity of Quicken Spell. However only the most advanced Wizards realize that the most important thing you have is real world time. From a powergaming standpoint, given a fixed amount of time in a D&D session, you want to do as much adventuring as possible in it, in order to reach as high a level as fast as possible. The most fearsome enemy in D&D isn't the monsters, or even a sadistic DM, but the campaign ending altogether because the school year started again, or just because people just got bored and wanted to play something else.

In other words, you want battles to take place quickly, and to be fun. You can have the best build in the world, however if you don't get a chance to actually play it because combat takes too long, you won't ever reach high levels due to time constraints or because you get bored of the character. If I Scorching Ray an enemy, I simply roll to hit and the DM subtracts a number from the monster's hp. My turn is over as fast as the Fighter's. If however I cast something like Touch of Idiocy or Enervation, the game comes to a screeching halt while the DM adjusts the character's stats, saves, skill points, spells, etc. Does your group suffer from one-battle-a-session-itis?

Evocation is Effective

Evocation is one of the more effective schools, where not only do I suggest not barring it, but it even makes a good choice for specialization. I'm not suggesting a blaster Wizard is the best strategy, but rather Evocation has many other useful spells that you don't want to do without. For example:

Contingency: One of the most powerful spells available. Yes, it can be simulated with the Illusion spell Greater Shadow Evocation, but that's an 8th level spell, meaning you have to do without your "get out of jail free" card for four character levels. Most campaigns don't last long enough to reach that spell rank, or if they do your Wizard isn't that level because he's died and deleveled a few times because he didn't have Contingency! ;)
Wind Wall: A simple way to deflect all ranged attacks. Awesome defensive spell that totally shuts down archers.
Shatter: Destroy an item. Very versatile, and can even be used against an enemy's equipment. Hey, where'd my greataxe go?
Sending: Send a message and get a reply from anywhere, even across planes. A great way to find missing people, communicate with distant NPC's or separated party members, taunt the BBEG from afar and get roleplaying XP, and so on.

Batman aficionados will agree battlefield control is one of the most effective things to do in combat, and Evocation has lots of it. Some cool Evocation control spells:

Wall of Ice: Keep the enemies away, and damage them if they break through. Comes in a nice hemisphere form as well.
Wall of Force: Block a passage, where not even Dispel Magic or an antimagic field can take it down.
Forcecage: Trap anybody with no save. Expensive, but worth it after you take their stuff. ;)
Resilient Sphere: Trap the enemy inside, or have an invulnerable safe haven to buff within.
Telekinetic Sphere: Like Resilient Sphere but you can move it around. Move your party past any obstacle, or levitate a trapped enemy and drop them from high up.

Similarly, save or suck spells, even those with no save, don't work as well as you might expect in actual combat. For example, consider Solid Fog, which reduces your speed to 5 feet. However, the fog has 20 foot radius, so even if you're in the middle of the Fog, you can get out in one round by doing a run action to move 4x your speed. Yay, you've wasted a 4th level spell slot and now the enemy is 20 feet closer to you.

Evocation, of course, does Damage

This message is about "Evocation is good", not "blaster is good", however there are a few things to say about doing damage in combat. Area of effect damage spells (and battlefield control) are effective against weenie swarms, so they don't run past the meatshields and take you down before your allies can stop them. Damage spells (and of course buffing party members) are also surprisingly good against BBEG's, because their saves are high enough to resist save or sucks (the DM probably made sure of it). Finally damage spells are important if you're by yourself or separated from the party. Battlefield control so you can face monsters one at a time, or save or suck so the party can chop up the weakened monster, still depends on someone actually killing them afterward, where if your melee lackeys aren't present you need to be able to do damage yourself.

Another thing about damage is that it's reliable. Barring things like spell resistance or immunity, or using a Reflex save spell against a monster with Evasion, a damage spell is guaranteed to do damage, even on a successful save. Hence you're guaranteed to be able to take down a monster in x rounds. Doing damage makes it easier for the DM to figure out and balance appropriate encounters. Reliability is an important and often overlooked part of D&D, so you don't die due to a few bad rolls.

Once, my group was playing Environmental Impact: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030425a. The DM made an encounter stronger by doubling the number of Needlefolk (so there were 14 total). When we encountered them, they were all spread out, but still within an 80 foot diameter circle. My turn, I simply cast Ice Storm over them all, and rolled enough to do over 16 damage, no save. The other players stared, and the DM sighed and swept 14 minis off the table. :) Sure, our enemies used different tactics from then on, but that made them vulnerable to other things. Sometimes just the threat of being able to do an area of effect spell is more effective than actually casting one.

Evocation is Fun

Even if you don't agree that Evocation is equal to other schools in power, you should at least agree that Evocation is one of the most fun schools! Ultimately, the person who "wins D&D" is the one who has the most fun. The popularity of Wizard blaster builds isn't due to people thinking they're effective, as much as people simply wanting to play them. Flashy area of effect spells like Fireball are fun, where you take out a bunch of enemies at once. Battlefield control spells are fun too, where you get to lay down walls, spheres, and other geometrical goodness on the battlemat. Stone Sphere, Ball Lightning, and especially Defenestrating Sphere are awesome, where they let you roll a ball around bashing, zapping, or tossing enemies around like rag dolls. :)

Similarly, playing a utility Wizard isn't very fun. Save or suck spells are frustrating and unsatisfying. They either end the battle right away, or don't work at all. A Wizard who uses save or suck spells is like a bad lover. You're either *bang* done right away, or you can't get it going in the first place. ;) Don't get me wrong, save or suck (assuming it works) is one of the most powerful things in D&D. It's just not very enjoyable. Consider the following scenario:

BBEG: "Well, if it isn't the party of 'adventurers'. I was wondering when we'd finally meet. I see you've dispatched my trusted lieutenants. I must admit your skills have improved quite a bit over the last year. But you're still no match for me, where I will enjoy sacrificing your souls to -"
PC Wizard: [Rolls initiative] *Baleful Polymorph*
BBEG: "Rats, rolled a 1 on my Fort Save" [turns into snail]
PC Wizard: Calmly picks up snail and feeds it to familiar.
Fluffy: *gulp*
PC Fighter, Cleric, and Rogue: ...
DM: "Well, that was an anticlimax. I wonder what's on TV?"

Improving Evocation vs. Other Schools

Still convinced that Evocation is bad? Fine, however it shouldn't be a bad school. Evocation should be the most powerful school for doing direct hp damage to monsters. Unfortunately the Orb spells which bypass spell resistance and only require a ranged touch attack to hit (and are therefore some of the best damage spells in the game) are all Conjuration. A number of Conjuration spells bypass SR, presumably because they conjure "real" things and throw them at you, as opposed to evoke "magic" energy around you directly.

That's disappointing, because Conjuration (which already has healing, teleportation, and summoning, along with other quality effects like Mage Armor and Grease) seems to also have SR bypassing damage spells, arguably making it a better Evocation school than Evocation. Just as people often complain about class balance, there should also be balance between schools of magic. A very good house rule is to move the Orb spells to Evocation.

Similarly, Transmutation can be considered better than Evocation at nuking, due to the powerful Disintegrate, which does 2d6 damage per caster level, instead of 1d6 for standard nukes. Disintegrate should be an Evocation spell as well, because it seems like it uses force energy to rip things apart at a molecular level. In other words, if you want to nuke, it should be an Evocation spell. If you ban that school, you shouldn't be able to do direct hp damage to monsters.

[Artemician]

Well said, well said. Stabbing people through the heart with a lightning bolt is cool. Draining their strength is not. Debuffs in general.. while the most effective use of your spell slots, are about as fun as shooting fish in a barrel.

On another note, I've been rolling an idea around in my head for quite some time:

What is the difference between Conjuration, Abjuration and Evocation?

Sure, you say. Abjuration is creating barriers. Conjuration is uh.. creating stuff. Evocation is blasting. However, explain the orb spells. Contingency. Similiarly, why is Wall of Ice Cvocation? Isn't it creating stuff? And Mage Armour is Conjuration, while the mechanically similiar Shield is Abjuration. What a sorry state of affairs.

I propose a new (and radical) solution: Remove the entire Abjuration school.

Dispel Magic, Spell Turning, Disjunction, et all are moved to Universal.

Physical-type ones (Stoneskin) are moved to Transmutation.
Antibuffs (Remove Curse, Freedom) are moved to Necromancy.
Globe of Invulnerability, Prismatic Wall as well as the "trap" spells (Explosive runes, Fire Trap) are moved to Evocation.

Shield is moved to Conjuration.

Magic Circles, Dimensional Anchors and Guards and Wards are moved to Enchantment.
Defensive Buffs (Resistance, Endure Elements, et all) are also moved to Enchantment. This includes Nondetection and Mind Blank

*
Now, since Conjuration is regarded as overpowered generally, and since it is, and has in its possession many spells that don't fit, move the following spells.

All healing spells are moved to Necromancy.
Orb spells (and other damage-dealing stuff, such as Acid Splash and Melf's Acid Arrow) are moved to Evocation.
Teleport is moved to Evocation.

*Now, we run into a problem. Conjuration seems pretty sparse.

Wall of X spells are moved to Conjuration.

__

The end product here, is that two previously "weak" schools, Enchantment and Evocation, are brought up to the level of the other schools. The enormously overpowered school, Conjuration, has been pruned. The spell list and school classification also makes more sense. Thoughts?

[Rachel Lorelei]

Beginning Wizards think the most important thing to have is spell slots. Intermediate Wizards think the most important asset you have is turn actions, hence the popularity of Quicken Spell. However only the most advanced Wizards realize that the most important thing you have is real world time. From a powergaming standpoint, given a fixed amount of time in a D&D session, you want to do as much adventuring as possible in it, in order to reach as high a level as fast as possible. The most fearsome enemy in D&D isn't the monsters, or even a sadistic DM, but the campaign ending altogether because the school year started again, or just because people just got bored and wanted to play something else.

In other words, you want battles to take place quickly, and to be fun. You can have the best build in the world, however if you don't get a chance to actually play it because combat takes too long, you won't ever reach high levels due to time constraints or because you get bored of the character. If I Scorching Ray an enemy, I simply roll to hit and the DM subtracts a number from the monster's hp. My turn is over as fast as the Fighter's. If however I cast something like Touch of Idiocy or Enervation, the game comes to a screeching halt while the DM adjusts the character's stats, saves, skill points, spells, etc. Does your group suffer from one-battle-a-session-itis?

Enervation imposes a flat penalty; touch of idiocy reduces some stats. For a group that's been playing for a bit, or any PvP, this simply isn't much of an issue--Glitterdust, saves, okay, blinded, -2, flatfooted, go.

Evocation is Effective

Evocation is one of the more effective schools, where not only do I suggest not barring it, but it even makes a good choice for specialization. I'm not suggesting a blaster Wizard is the best strategy, but rather Evocation has many other useful spells that you don't want to do without. For example:

Contingency: One of the most powerful spells available. Yes, it can be simulated with the Illusion spell Greater Shadow Evocation, but that's an 8th level spell, meaning you have to do without your "get out of jail free" card for four character levels. Most campaigns don't last long enough to reach that spell rank, or if they do your Wizard isn't that level because he's died and deleveled a few times because he didn't have Contingency! ;)

Contingency is nice. It can be duplicated, as you mention, and getting it four levels earlier isn't enough to save the school.

Celerity: Another lifesaving spell. Always win initiative, or always get a spell off *now* if you want to, even during another player's turn.

Celerity, um... isn't Evocation. It's Transmutation, which is one of the truly good schools.

Wind Wall: A simple way to deflect all ranged attacks. Awesome defensive spell that totally shuts down archers.

Handy... on rare occasions. Actually, archers can be dealt with in other ways, and may well go around your Wind Wall. Furthermore, archers are a tiny fraction of the enemies one faces.

Shatter: Destroy an item. Very versatile, and can even be used against an enemy's equipment. Hey, where'd my greataxe go?

Very soon, enemies have either magical gear (humanoids) or none (monsters), making Shatter completely ineffective.

Sending: Send a message and get a reply from anywhere, even across planes. A great way to find missing people, communicate with distant NPC's or separated party members, taunt the BBEG from afar and get roleplaying XP, and so on.

Seriously? This is the sort of thing one pays NPC casters for. One doesn't use it often.

Batman aficionados will agree battlefield control is one of the most effective things to do in combat, and Evocation has lots of it. Some cool Evocation control spells:

Wall of Ice: Keep the enemies away, and damage them if they break through. Comes in a nice hemisphere form as well.

Evocation is far poorer at battlefield control than the schools that specialize at it, barring one spell (Forcecage), IMO. Wall of Ice, for example, is significantly inferior to Wall of Stone because of its puny hit points.

Wall of Force: Block a passage, where not even Dispel Magic or an antimagic field can take it down.

And then you can't get through either. At high levels carving a path through rock won't take that long, teleportation bypasses walls of force, Disintegrate or a rod of cancellation removes it... and that's neglecting the fact that this thing has to be a vertical plane! That's what kills it. When I make walls, I want to be able to shape them.

Forcecage: Trap anybody with no save. Expensive, but worth it after you take their stuff. ;)

Greater Shadow Evocation strikes again, bypassing the material component. Speaking of the component, it makes this impractical for actual play.

Resilient Sphere: Trap the enemy inside, or have an invulnerable safe haven to buff within.
Telekinetic Sphere: Like Resilient Sphere but you can move it around. Move your party past any obstacle, or levitate a trapped enemy and drop them from high up.

Okay, but in no way top-notch spells.

Yes, Evocation has a few useful spells. Otherwise, giving it up wouldn't cost *anything*. But it has far fewer good spells than any other school.

Similarly, save or suck spells, even those with no save, don't work as well as you might expect in actual combat. For example, consider Solid Fog, which reduces your speed to 5 feet. However, the fog has 20 foot radius, so even if you're in the middle of the Fog, you can get out in one round by doing a run action to move 4x your speed. Yay, you've wasted a 4th level spell slot and now the enemy is 20 feet closer to you.

Except, of course, they do--at least, they have in my experience, and that of many others; I've seen numbers on saving throws for monsters versus DCs posted that bear that out. Critiquing one spell isn't much of an argument... and you're wrong on that, as it happens. Any creature trying to move through the solid fog progresses at a speed of 5 feet--regardless of how it's moving. You can't move more than five feet through the fog a round, which is the point.

Evocation, of course, does Damage

This message is about "Evocation is good", not "blaster is good", however there are a few things to say about doing damage in combat. Area of effect damage spells (and battlefield control) are effective against weenie swarms, so they don't run past the meatshields and take you down before your allies can stop them. Damage spells (and of course buffing party members) are also surprisingly good against BBEG's, because their saves are high enough to resist save or sucks (the DM probably made sure of it). Finally damage spells are important if you're by yourself or separated from the party. Battlefield control so you can face monsters one at a time, or save or suck so the party can chop up the weakened monster, still depends on someone actually killing them afterward, where if your melee lackeys aren't present you need to be able to do damage yourself.

The common counterargument to this is that "weenie swarms" aren't a credible threat--if an area spell kills them all, they could be defeated without using that spell without much if any trouble, or with the help of, say, a low-level illusion.
As for BBEGs, that's where no-save debuffs and repeated castings come in. Not every "boss" can be a Hexblade/Paladin of Tyranny with high charisma, after all! Besides, battlefield control, no-save spells like a lot of rays, dispelling, buffing, and the like give a wizard plenty to do. Haste is going to be more helpful than Fireball (two iconic third-level spells), whether against a regular enemy or a BBEG.

Another thing about damage is that it's reliable. Barring things like spell resistance or immunity, or using a Reflex save spell against a monster with Evasion, a damage spell is guaranteed to do damage, even on a successful save. Hence you're guaranteed to be able to take down a monster in x rounds. Doing damage makes it easier for the DM to figure out and balance appropriate encounters. Reliability is an important and often overlooked part of D&D, so you don't die due to a few bad rolls.

It is possible to reliably get spells past enemy saves. You say "reliable", but evocation spells are subject to energy resistance and immunity--which is increasingly common the higher level you are.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20030425a. The DM made an encounter stronger by doubling the number of Needlefolk (so there were 14 total). When we encountered them, they were all spread out, but still within an 80 foot diameter circle. My turn, I simply cast Ice Storm over them all, and rolled enough to do over 16 damage, no save. The other players stared, and the DM sighed and swept 14 minis off the table. :) Sure, our enemies used different tactics from then on, but that made them vulnerable to other things. Sometimes just the threat of being able to do an area of effect spell is more effective than actually casting one.

If 16 damage killed them, how much of a threat were these things? The party could have cleaned them up in several rounds, maybe taking a few points of damage, and still have that slot.

Evocation is Fun

Even if you don't agree that Evocation is equal to other schools in power, you should at least agree that Evocation is one of the most fun schools! Ultimately, the person who "wins D&D" is the one who has the most fun. The popularity of Wizard blaster builds isn't due to people thinking they're effective, as much as people simply wanting to play them. Flashy area of effect spells like Fireball are fun, where you take out a bunch of enemies at once. Battlefield control spells are fun too, where you get to lay down walls, spheres, and other geometrical goodness on the battlemat. Stone Sphere, Ball Lightning, and especially Defenestrating Sphere are awesome, where they let you roll a ball around bashing, zapping, or tossing enemies around like rag dolls. :)

Personally, I've never found evocation to be fun. "I cast Fireball. I cast Fireball. I cast Lightning bolt. Let me roll my damage dice. Now I'm out of spells." I have a lot of fun with Enchanters and Illusionists (as character types, not necessarily as specializations). This is entirely a matter of taste, and there are *plenty* of people who enjoy playing SUBTLE wizards, not strategy-less firebrands ready to throw a magic missile at anything that moves. It's never fun to debuff? Nonsense. It's a lot of fun for a lot of people, some of whom find "MAGIC MISSILE MAGIC MISSILE FIREBALL FIREBALL BOOM BOOM BOOM!" to be dull and finesse-free.
What's more, "Fireball" rarely actually takes out several enemies at once. More often, it only damages them somewhat.

Similarly, playing a utility Wizard isn't very fun. Save or suck spells are frustrating and unsatisfying. They either end the battle right away, or don't work at all. A Wizard who uses save or suck spells is like a bad lover. You're either *bang* done right away, or you can't get it going in the first place. ;) Don't get me wrong, save or suck (assuming it works) is one of the most powerful things in D&D. It's just not very enjoyable. Consider the following scenario:

That's not true at all! Debuffing and buffing and battlefield control are a lot of fun. Tactical battlefield control, clever illusions, and simply tossing a Glitterdust into a group of advancing enemies and watching as they wander around unable to locate your party getting picked off. There is satisfaction in a job well done, and a lot of fun to be had by the precise application of the right spells to demolish enemies.
And then there was that time I launched a Confusion spell at a group of enemies lurking in a tree to ambush us. It turned into Tree Fight Club, and much hilarity ensued.
It's also fun pointing at an enemy, saying "die!", and having it actually happen, rather than having them shrug off your twenty points of damage and charge you.

Frankly, if what you call the "Batman" wizard (because his spell list is a utility belt? Because he wins?) were really by and large as un-fun to play as you say, it wouldn't have gained the popularity it has.

BBEG: "Well, if it isn't the party of 'adventurers'. I was wondering when we'd finally meet. I see you've dispatched my trusted lieutenants. I must admit your skills have improved quite a bit over the last year. But you're still no match for me, where I will enjoy sacrificing your souls to -"
PC Wizard: [Rolls initiative] *Baleful Polymorph*
BBEG: "Rats, rolled a 1 on my Fort Save" [turns into snail]
PC Wizard: Calmly picks up snail and feeds it to familiar.
Fluffy: *gulp*
PC Fighter, Cleric, and Rogue: ...
DM: "Well, that was an anticlimax. I wonder what's on TV?"

Funny how that never seems to happen to me! There are a number of reasons for this--namely, that BBEGs generally have minions and defenses against this sort of thing. For example, the first round of combat would generally be spent casting Haste, or Repulsion, or something of the sort--one can't and doesn't rely on enemies rolling a one.

What's more, you're expected to do things other than blast: consider any big, beefy monster with a low will save, like a giant! The simple application of a spell like Confusion or Slow or Fear turns an encounter with a group of them from life-threatening to quite manageable. If instead you threw a Fireball at them, your party is getting squished.
An unsquished party is a happy party!

[Swooper]

For example, consider Solid Fog, which reduces your speed to 5 feet. However, the fog has 20 foot radius, so even if you're in the middle of the Fog, you can get out in one round by doing a run action to move 4x your speed. Yay, you've wasted a 4th level spell slot and now the enemy is 20 feet closer to you.

I beg to differ. The wording on Solid Fog does in fact not suggest that your base speed drops to 5 feet, but rather, that you are unable to move more than 5 feet per round. Am I terribly wrong in this? If I am, the spell is rather pointless.

Other than that, good article.

[Dausuul]

Can't say I agree with the "evocation is simple" statement. You know why? Because you're usually rolling a whole pile of d6s for damage, and adding them up takes a while. And there are saving throws to consider. And you have to figure out exactly who's in the area of effect and who isn't. When I played a blaster in a high-level game, I actually took Maximize Spell just so I wouldn't have to roll so many damn dice.

Compare that to enervation, where you roll a d4, the DM applies the penalty, and that's that. And many battlefield control spells don't involve a roll at all. In my experience, Batman spells are actually quicker to resolve... and I find them a whole lot more fun and interesting than just dishing out damage.

I beg to differ. The wording on Solid Fog does in fact not suggest that your base speed drops to 5 feet, but rather, that you are unable to move more than 5 feet per round. Am I terribly wrong in this? If I am, the spell is rather pointless.

Other than that, good article.

Solid fog says:

This spell functions like fog cloud, but in addition to obscuring sight, the solid fog is so thick that any creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet, regardless of its normal speed...

It says "a speed of 5 feet," not "a speed of 5 feet per round." That means it has to be talking about the creature's move speed.

However, the rules on actions in combat also say "you can't run if you can't see where you're going." It would be up to the DM to decide exactly how to apply that, but strictly as written that would make it impossible to take a quadruple move in a solid fog, since you can't see the destination square from your starting position.

Solid fog isn't a win button, but its tactical value is still quite high.

[Krimm_Blackleaf]

I myself have always been a big evocation fan. Not because I think it's more effective, I do indeed think evocation is one of the least worthwhile schools to be a part of in hopes for optomization. I do however believe evocation is by all means really really fun. Not just for combat either; I have a CE elven sorcerer who's a evocation specialist and has a few ways to improve his damage. This makes it very fun when you're in towns, there's someone you don't like in the tavern, take a nice hidden little stake-out within eyesight of it and take the place out.

Fire, lightning, cold and acid are so fun to throw at people and monsters, I can picture their effects. I can't really picture the effects of enervation except for the monster looking a little more sallowed. I can picture the monster being burned alive, or having skin eatten away, or having it being immediately frosted over and turned black and I LOVE being able to picture that.

[Sir Giacomo]

Hi everyone,

Cruiser1 makes some very valid points. Yes, Evocation is not the weakest school for arcane spell users, and it is one of the points where I believe the otherwise excellent LogicNinja Batman guide is wrong. In fact evocation is one of the strongest schools.
Although Rachel Lorelei provides some good counterarguments as well.

I'd like to add the following strengths of evocation:
- attacking spells necessitate often reflex saves. Reflex is the strong save of only a few classes, and those can be dealt with with fortitude-saves (excepting the monk, but those are likely rare). Most of the typical opponents (monsters, animals, enemy warriors and priests/casters) have sucky DEX and base reflex saves.
- they are mostly LONG range. This is so much better than many of the LogicNinja-Spells that are save/suck or nosave/suck, but close in range (getting the caster within the charging range of enemies most of the time).
- they are great for affecting large areas/many enemies and soften them up for cleave-using fighters in the group
- they are very easy to use (in terms of strategy)

On individual key spells:
- sending: one of the great uses of this spell is to send to one of your friends who is acting strangely recently. If that friend does not respond, it is quite clear the guy next to you is disguised/illusioned enemy spying on you. The spell is also great for locating your lost friends (something an npc caster cannot do)
- contingency: shadow evocation only goes so far. The Greater version will duplicate the contingency, but only at 60% probability (a really harsh DM may go with the RAW and say it is only 20% since the only thing that changes with the greater shadow evocation version over the 5th level one is level availability and damage). Could be a nuisance to waste two or more 8th-level spells in an adventure instead of a 6th level slot (say, if you want to get up a contingency again quickly after it was triggered).
- resilient sphere/wall of force/force cage: I cannot list the sheer number of times I saw these spells used in duels or on maxing boards listing the greatness of arcane casters (vs non-casters). These spells are among the most powerful of their respective levels. Combine them with item creation feats to gain those coveted cube of force, etc. stuff
Again, Greater Shadow evocation emulates them only with a certain probability, making it quite hazardrous at those levels.
- similarly wind wall and shatter (combine with quickened dispel magic, then you squish almost all magic items) are listed often as must-haves for arcane superiority.


- Giacomo

[Cruiser1]

Enervation imposes a flat penalty; touch of idiocy reduces some stats.

Well, negative levels impose penalties to attack rolls, saves, skill checks, ability checks, hp, and spells available, which seriously affects a character sheet. Reducing some stats means reducing saves and skill checks and such based on them.

Celerity, um... isn't Evocation.

Doh! That's what I get for writing about non-core sources. :( Celerity at least seems "zippy" like an Evocation spell, although since it deals with turns like Haste and Time Stop I see why it's Transmutation.

Very soon, enemies have either magical gear (humanoids) or none (monsters), making Shatter completely ineffective.

So Dispel Magic on the enemy's gear first and then Shatter it. :) Shatter certainly loses effectiveness at high levels, but its great for a 2nd level spell.

Seriously? This is the sort of thing one pays NPC casters for. One doesn't use it often.

The Sending spell is useful in the field or dungeon when there aren't NPC's around, say when you get separated from your party in the Tomb of Horrors.

Wall of Ice, for example, is significantly inferior to Wall of Stone because of its puny hit points.

Well, Wall of Stone is a 5th level spell compared to a Wall of Ice being a 4th level spell. Wall of Stone can also only be cast in certain circumstances, i.e. attached to existing stone, while Wall of Ice can be cast in the desert, in a dirt field, etc. A Wall of Ice also covers 4x the area of Wall of Stone.

And then you can't get through either. At high levels carving a path through rock won't take that long

Wall of Force is dismissable, so when you're done with it, just dismiss it if you need to get through. Sure, at high levels lots of things are possible, but Wall of Force is pretty interesting when you're 9th level (e.g. cast it in front of a ship and watch the ship crash).

Any creature trying to move through the solid fog progresses at a speed of 5 feet--regardless of how it's moving. You can't move more than five feet through the fog a round, which is the point.

The Solid Fog spell says "creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet, regardless of its normal speed". That seems to imply its speed becomes 5 feet. If I'm in a Solid Fog, I can use my move action to move 5 feet, and then cast Gust of Wind (another Evocation spell :) to get rid of the Solid Fog. If I didn't cast a spell, and instead did a double move, it seems like I could move 10 feet (or even run to move 20 feet).

If 16 damage killed them, how much of a threat were these things? The party could have cleaned them up in several rounds, maybe taking a few points of damage, and still have that slot.

Environmental Impact (see above link) is an adventure for 8th level characters (which we were, meaning pure casters' top spells are 4th level). The Needlefolk are ranged attackers, who concentrate their fire on Elves. Guess what my race was? Round 1, they all shot at me, almost killing me. Druid goes, and casts Wind Wall (Evocation :) to protect us. My turn, I really want a heal, so I ended the combat right then and there.

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

The Solid Fog spell says "creature attempting to move through it progresses at a speed of 5 feet, regardless of its normal speed". That seems to imply its speed becomes 5 feet. If I'm in a Solid Fog, I can use my move action to move 5 feet, and then cast Gust of Wind (another Evocation spell :) to get rid of the Solid Fog. If I didn't cast a spell, and instead did a double move, it seems like I could move 10 feet (or even run to move 20 feet).

Except for the last bit about running you are correct.

You can’t run across difficult terrain or if you can’t see where you’re going.

[mikeejimbo]

My typical response for "Why'd you ban Evocation?" is something along the lines of "What do I look like, a sorcerer?"

Of course, I've only played a wizard a few times. Mostly I play a Cleric.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Evocation is a middle range school. Enchantment and Necromancy are both lower than it I feel (go and look how many high level things are immune to mind effecting spells.) and Divination for the wizard is saved by canny use and the drop only one school specialisation.

(For the record my fav ever char was a "Light specialist" Wizard who was themed heavily around prismatic spells so there was quite a bit of evocation there.)

But it is getting weaker.

Conjuration, allready holding the healing magic that necromancy ought to have is now taking the direct damadge spells too. I can forive Disintigrate because "transuting somone so they fall apart" makes sence. Conjuring a "real ball of sound" makes 0% logic. Abjuration is fine as it is, strong yes but at the same time lacking what would make it a true swis army school.

[its_all_ogre]

most of my players greatly prefer evocation type blasting spells.
well aware that they are generally not as effective as others though.
that said i normally experience the lower level 'save or lose' spells, where an enemy can often pass by rolling a mere 12 or higher. at that stage most enemies pass and the damage spell would have been more effective.

now i'm off to get popcorn and enjoy this duel!

[Dausuul]

Well, negative levels impose penalties to attack rolls, saves, skill checks, ability checks, hp, and spells available, which seriously affects a character sheet. Reducing some stats means reducing saves and skill checks and such based on them.

Negative levels are relatively easy to track... just knock off 5 hit points for each one, and keep track of how many the subject has. Apply that number as a penalty on all d20 rolls.

Sure it takes away spells, too, but very few monsters are actual spellcasters--the vast majority just get SLAs, which aren't affected. And even where casters are concerned, it's not hard to just knock off one top-level spell or slot per negative level.

I do actually see your point; the main problem with debuffs is not the individual debuff, it's the fact that each one does something different and you have to remember them all. However, if you limit yourself to just one or two debuffing spells (and really, with enervation and slow, how many more do you need?), it's not a big issue.

most of my players greatly prefer evocation type blasting spells.
well aware that they are generally not as effective as others though.
that said i normally experience the lower level 'save or lose' spells, where an enemy can often pass by rolling a mere 12 or higher. at that stage most enemies pass and the damage spell would have been more effective.

That's why you soften them up with enervation first.

I agree that dumping Evocation is not an automatic decision; the force-barrier and Bigby spells are very very useful, particularly in a dungeon setting where a wall of force can trap an enemy (preferably with a cloudkill thrown in for good measure). The use of shadow evocation to produce a contingency effect, while legal by RAW, is extremely sketchy and likely to be forbidden by many DMs. And there are times when direct damage is called for.

[Amiria]

For non-core Evocations, don't forget Moonbow (SC, 5th level). A maximized Moonbow does a truly obscene amount of hit point damage. Heck, this blaster spell is even a worthy candidate for the Arcane Thesis feat (PHBII). Combine it with Incantatrix and some Metamagic Rods to go crazy. Empower Spell, Quicken Spell, Twin Spell. Get the Energy Substituiton feat or the archmage's Mastery of Elements class feature for best results.

[Yuki Akuma]

Okay. So you like Evocation. That's fine. Play what you like, no one's going to stop you.

That doesn't stop Fireball from being mechanically and mathematically weaker than Haste, though.

Why do people have the urge to try to convince people that their way of playing is the One True Way of True D&D? Why do the opinions of random neckbeards on the Internet matter to you so much? Just play what you want to play, and if it embarasses you so much, don't tell us!

[Lapak]

Whether or not damage-dealing is mechanically weaker than save-or-lose/debuff/battlefield control (which it is) I think it's ridiculous that the school's one strength has been usurped by Conjuration.

I don't like the 'magically created single-round' spells to begin with; the distinction between the fire in an Orb of Fire and the fire created by Burning Hands seems utterly false to me. But putting them in Conjuration is just adding insult to injury, and I don't think that they belong there.

[SilverClawShift]

I think one thing people forget when they're arguing about things like this, is that D&D is a game. It's also a game controlled by an intelligent person (in theory) who has a twin-job of telling a story, and making sure everyone (themselves included) is having fun.

Ultimately, whatever school of magic you specialize in (if any) and whatever schools of magic you drop, you and your party should still be having a good time playing the game. If your DM puts you in situations where you CANNOT win without a spell from your banned school, he's not maknig the game very fun.
Arguing the finer points of game mechanics is fine (and fun in its own right). Just don't forget that no matter what you play, the game is meant to be enjoyable, and an unenjoyable game fails. A party of 4 monks? Hey, weak, make it fun though, that's all that matters.
Some people have fun optimizing for uber-power. Personally I'd rather just play the game, but to each their own.

As far as spell schools go, I find evocatino to generally be less fun for most spellcasters. If you want to deal damage, you can grab a big stick and hit something with it. Magic can change reality itself into your favor. That tends to be a little more 'cool' in my book.

[The Prince of Cats]

That doesn't stop Fireball from being mechanically and mathematically weaker than Haste, though.

I have seen the look on the fighter's face when she realised that the BBEG got an extra attack per round. It was concern and consternation.

I saw the look on their faces when I started counting out d6s for a fireball spell. No competition; that was terror...

[Tyger]

I have seen the look on the fighter's face when she realised that the BBEG got an extra attack per round. It was concern and consternation.

I saw the look on their faces when I started counting out d6s for a fireball spell. No competition; that was terror...

Yup, but that's not what we're talking about here. Its not what the spells can do in the hands of the BBEG... its what those same spells can add to the effectiveness of the party.

I have seen the look on my teammates' faces when they realized that they got an extra attack, a bonus to AC, a bonus to relfex saves, a bonus to BAB and an extra 30 feet of movement.

I saw the look on their faces when I asked to borrow two more D6s. No competition, there was boredom. :)

[Indon]

I'd like to throw in that while a bit of utility spellcasting is okay, it's very, very easy to make the game boring with it.

"Oh, look, another encounter." *Renders enemy helpless* "Okay, Rest of the party, you go mop up, I'mma go get me a lemonade."

It's a great way to, as far as I'm concerned, suckify any campaign.

And as for BBEG's actually having a defense to you? I wish Tippy were posting on this thread so he could spend the next 8 pages systematically demonstrating that unless your BBEG is _also_ Batman, he gets neutralised in 1 round, and can push it to 3 if he's really lucky. But I'll settle for pointing out that the whole _point_ of being Batman is to be able to deal with _any situation_. Unless your opponent can deal with any of your myriad measures for immediately defeating him (which means he's probably another Batman wizard), you're going to beat him the boring way.

And if your players didn't want life-threatening encounters, they wouldn't be playing a game in which they were adventurers. They'd ask their DM for an NPC-class-oriented campaign in which they were all competing merchants or something.

Blasting, in general, means you contribute to the party (about as much as everyone else if they're optimising as much as you are) without boring everyone else with coup de grace combat. This doesn't mean you _only_ cast Fireball, or related spells. It just means you don't rely on encounter-enders.

So I guess I should say that I feel a balance of approach to be optimal.

As for individual spells, Shatter is awesome. It's Sunder, except it doesn't rob you of good loot.

Evocation also has a couple of the Prismatic line of spells (Which is strange, because if I recall there are also Conjuration and Abjuration prismatic spells).

[Argent]

I have seen the look on the fighter's face when she realised that the BBEG got an extra attack per round. It was concern and consternation.

I saw the look on their faces when I started counting out d6s for a fireball spell. No competition; that was terror...

No doubt -- it's not near as viscerally frightening to have an extra attack roll against you as it is to watch that DM shaking a double handful of dice and grinning maniacally at you.

[Yuki Akuma]

I have seen the look on the fighter's face when she realised that the BBEG got an extra attack per round. It was concern and consternation.

I saw the look on their faces when I started counting out d6s for a fireball spell. No competition; that was terror...

If the BBEG was a wizard, why was he casting haste on himself?!

Compare an extra attack per round from a wizard to an extra attack per round from a barbarian, or a rogue in flanking position with said barbarian...

Of course, fear has absolutely nothing to do with how strong or weak something actually is, just what your players think is strong or weak.

[AKA_Bait]

Two quick things:

1. Must agree witht the OP. Evocation is FUN. As much as I understand the mechanical benifits of the batman wizard nothing says Arcane Might like rolling a whole bunch of d6 for damage.

2. A word on shatter. It is useful as a low level spell in combat. It is also useful at higher levels outside of combat or in the moments leading up to combat. Sure, you won't be able to shatter the BBEG's sword with it because the weapon is magical but during his BBEG speech you can sunder his throne (if it's light enough) or secptre or statue to himself. If he hasn't drawn the weapon yet you can probably shatter the scabbard it's in. Sure, it's not all that mechanically useful after a point but as an RP tool it can be darn cool. That is not unimportant.

DM: Upon entering the room you see an altar made of bone. It seems thinly constructed of human arms and legs. Upon it sits a dagger and a bowl full of blood. Behind it, coweled in a deep red robe stands a humaniod figure. Only the red of his eyes can be seen below the shadow of the cowl.

Evoker: I shatter the altar. "Hiya pookums! Aww, did we break your toy?"

[Dausuul]

And as for BBEG's actually having a defense to you? I wish Tippy were posting on this thread so he could spend the next 8 pages systematically demonstrating that unless your BBEG is _also_ Batman, he gets neutralised in 1 round, and can push it to 3 if he's really lucky. But I'll settle for pointing out that the whole _point_ of being Batman is to be able to deal with _any situation_. Unless your opponent can deal with any of your myriad measures for immediately defeating him (which means he's probably another Batman wizard), you're going to beat him the boring way.

The "Batman wins everything always" arguments look nice on paper but often don't hold up in play. The biggest reason for this is that they tend to assume the wizard in question is 20th level with access to every spell in the book. With rare exceptions, most campaigns I've seen or heard of take place in the 4-12 range, where wizards are powerful but far from unbeatable... particularly if the DM doesn't allow access to the Spell Compendium. Wizards are a lot easier to challenge if they aren't allowed the celerity line or assay spell resistance.

[Quietus]

Okay. So you like Evocation. That's fine. Play what you like, no one's going to stop you.

That doesn't stop Fireball from being mechanically and mathematically weaker than Haste, though.

Why do people have the urge to try to convince people that their way of playing is the One True Way of True D&D? Why do the opinions of random neckbeards on the Internet matter to you so much? Just play what you want to play, and if it embarasses you so much, don't tell us!

Awww, I think you missed the point.

This isn't a "I love Evocation! *Hug*" thread. This is a "Evocation isn't as bad as everyone thinks it is" thread. Which is entirely true.

[Tyger]

Awww, I think you missed the point.

This isn't a "I love Evocation! *Hug*" thread. This is a "Evocation isn't as bad as everyone thinks it is" thread. Which is entirely true.

Yup, exactly. Defenstrating Sphere is my absolute favorite spell, and its evocation. And I've been been known to have my wizard toss a few fireballsfrom time to time as well. Nothing says wizard like a good fireball. :)

[Emperor Tippy]

Awww, I think you missed the point.

This isn't a "I love Evocation! *Hug*" thread. This is a "Evocation isn't as bad as everyone thinks it is" thread. Which is entirely true.

Evocation is a school of magic. That makes it inherently good. Good enough that a wizard who's only school was evocation is balanced with a level 20 fighter.

But compared to the other schools of magic, evocation is the worst. I rarely advocate banning any schools (elf generalist sub level instead) of magic btu evocation simply is the worst of them all.

[Saph]

One point in favour of Evocation which Cruiser missed:

It's true that a save-or-suck spell or a party buff spell is usually more effective than a direct damage spell . . . if the enemy is at full hitpoints.

If the enemy is at 10%-30% hitpoints, however, then buff and debuff spells become much less useful. By that point several members of your party are likely to be disabled or low on HP, and one way or another, the battle is only going to last one or two more rounds (either the monster kills one of your party members, or you kill it first). In this situation just blasting the monster and trying to kill it as fast as possible is a pretty good tactic.

- Saph

[Grod_The_Giant]

evocation being fun or not is a matter of taste. Personally, I can't stand buffing and dispeling and all that stuff- give me a warmage any day!

True, things like save or dies and debuffs and negative levels are effective, but are they fun? Ok, yes, a player may find it fun, but look at it from the DM's perspective:

• Dispel Magic? Arrgh, what's the caster level on a +4 armor? Who buffed the minions?
• Enervation? Dammit...sure, they may look easy to keep track of, but the DM has to keep track of all the stuff you do for MULTIPLE monsters, remember to use the special abilities of all his creatures, environmental factors, timing...Is it really nice to add MORE to his load?
• Save or Die? Crap...the BBEG I spent TWO HOURS ON is dead...in one round...

Anticlimatic, adding to the DM's load (and DON'T say that he shouldn't be DM if he can't handle all that- I always DM for my party, and it's not easy as it is- and I try to steer clear of ability and level drain and other abnormal rules), stealing the spotlight from the other party members...is this 'fun'?

Also, the schools should be:
Abjuration: Spells that protect, block, or banish. Fine...well, maybe banishing should be Conjuration or Transmutation.

Divination: Spells that reveal information. No problem.

Enchantment: Spells that imbue the recipient with some property or grant the caster power over another being. Change the description to "spells that grant the caster power over another's mind" and it's fine. Or put the buff spells from Transmutation in here.

Illusion: Spells that alter perception or create false images.

Necromancy: Spells that manipulate, create, or destroy life or life force. Why isn't healing in here? Oh, if you call it 'using positive energy'... that's evocation.

Transmutation: Spells that transform the recipient physically or change its properties in a more subtle way. Some overlap with Enchantment, but still no biggie.

The problem is:

Evocation: Spells that manipulate energy or create something from nothing.
Conjuration: Spells that bring creatures or materials to the caster.

Overlap? Major overlap here. What are the Orb spells doing in Conj? Why does the descriptions of theses two schools sound suspiciously identical?

Instead, try this:
Evocation: Spells that manipulate energy to smite the caster's foes.
Conjuration: Spells that create and manipulate real-world materials, and call creatures.

Put ALL the wall spells in Abjuration, the orb spells in Evocation, and so on. Judge spells on a case-by-case basis when a player wants them but school might be an issue.

[ZeroNumerous]

(and DON'T say that he shouldn't be DM if he can't handle all that- I always DM for my party, and it's not easy as it is- and I try to steer clear of ability and level drain and other abnormal rules)

Right, then you're not quite doing what you should if your players decide to ramp up the power-level. If the party wizard takes it to 11, you don't stop at 10. You set up a trap with a kobold warband. The sorcerer of the warband slaps him with Feeblemind.

Dispel Magic? Arrgh, what's the caster level on a +4 armor? Who buffed the minions?

The minion cleric. Partly level -1.

Enervation? Dammit...sure, they may look easy to keep track of, but the DM has to keep track of all the stuff you do for MULTIPLE monsters, remember to use the special abilities of all his creatures, environmental factors, timing...Is it really nice to add MORE to his load?

Counters. Take a notepad, write "BBEG", "Affected Guys", and "Unaffected Guys". Mark down the number he rolls on Enervation, then put a mark down for each NPC that gets hit with it.

Save or Die? Crap...the BBEG I spent TWO HOURS ON is dead...in one round..

You spend two hours on a BBEG? Uh.. I don't know what kind of games you're running, but I've never spent two hours on a BBEG. How can you possibly waste two hours on a BBEG when you have to stat out his thirty or forty minions?

Grod, you seem to be taking the wrong kind of approach when it comes to DMing. Your NPCs are the extras in the movie. The PCs are the heroes. They always win unless it's Ravenloft.

If the party wizard nukes your BBEG with one save-or-die, then thats a tactical choice on the part of his player. It's not something you take personally, because then you fall into the mind-set of the DM Versus Players, which kills your game faster than any PC--Yes, even Pun-Pun.