D&D 5E Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e

[Treantmonklvl20]

That makes it (Absorb Elements) significantly better than Protection from Energy (since it's a reaction and 1st level - even though it's only one round), even with the added damage aspect going to waste. Switched the rating to green.

 

[Celtavian]

That makes it (Absorb Elements) significantly better than Protection from Energy (since it's a reaction and 1st level - even though it's only one round), even with the added damage aspect going to waste. Switched the rating to green.

I was looking at that spell as well. After running to level 16, breath weapons are the most significant energy damage you face other than a 9th level spell like meteor swarm. You do not really need an hours worth of protection for a concentration slot. Absorb Elements is a far better means to ward off such attacks. It uses a lower level spell lot. It lasts until the start of your next turn. It allows you to use the defense when needed rather than casting it when you might possibly never be struck by the energy in question. It's a damn good spell choice. When you need resistance from energy, you really need it. Dragon breath hits hard. The additional ability to do damage is useful to Eldritch Knight's or rogues.

And an evasion class with that spell is amazing. Imagine you already take half to no damage from evasion. If you use Absorb Elements, the most you will take from a Dex save damaging energy spell is a 1/4 damage. Pretty awesome.

 

[Celtavian]

I said "better 'deceive' option," by which I meant a long-term deception like taking over a kingdom by becoming the queen, or breaking a spy ring by becoming one of their members. When you're running a deception like that, DPR isn't really a consideration. I get the idea that your games are pretty much combat-oriented. In the Contagion thread you said that "plot" spells like Dausuul's Contagion should not even be in the PHB, and using Magic Jar to run a long-lasting deception is pretty much on par with Dausuul's Contagion, so I expect in your games you'd call Magic Jar usages like the above a "plot spell" which you wouldn't do. Dominate Person will then be superior for you, for the reasons you listed and the fact that it's cheaper to cast, and that the downside isn't a downside for you. That's what I meant by "at least [Dominate Person]'s useful for short-term hijinks."

You putting "plot" in parentheses does not change how Dausuul intended it which was solely as a plot (not a plan or scheme, but a plot point in a story) spell with no other uses. I still disagree that any spell should be created solely for use in a story plot and placed in the PHB. If something is solely for a story plot (not a plot as in a scheme or plan), then it should go in the DM for his occasional use. You misinterpreted that entire discussion. I'm not going to rehash it given how far off you are from understanding my disagreement with Dausuul.

Hmm. Just read magic jar. I actually hadn't read that spell fully. Interesting. Duration until dispelled with no concentration. I haven't read every spell. I was going off the old magic jar. This is something new I need to read.

 

[ThirdWizard]

You putting "plot" in parentheses does not change how Dausuul intended it which was solely as a plot (not a plan or scheme, but a plot point in a story) spell with no other uses.

Wow. Just wow.
[MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION] even clarified this in the original thread that he was referring to "plot spell" to mean "non-combat spell" very explicitly. I'll even quote myself.

Not plot in reference to "the plot of a book" but plot in reference to "my character is plotting something."

Hope that helps.

Again. I hope this helps.

 

[Celtavian]

[MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION] even clarified this in the original thread that he was referring to "plot spell" to mean "non-combat spell" very explicitly.

You mean he stated he meant something else later on in the thread? Yes, I read that.

I'll even quote myself.

Again. I hope this helps.

It does not help. Not even sure why you wasted time posting this given I did not disagree with non-combat uses for spells. The fact is Dausuul's original post implied it should be for story purposes or some larger plot that would do next to nothing unless the DM took a lot of time to flesh out the overall effect it would have. If a spell is created specifically for either purpose, it should go in the DMG.

Sequester is not that type of spell. It has a very specific non-combat purpose that could find use in a variety of scenarios.

In the context you are attempting to use plot in, anything could be a plot spell. You're changing the goal posts and attempting an argument I never made in the first place. Just as emdw45 is creating a disagreement that never existed and taking shots about it that are tiresome. Every single spell in the book is a plot spell by your definitions. Even a combat spell that wins a combat advances the plot and can affect things for years to come. An invisibility spell used to infiltrate a castle and kidnap someone is a non-combat plot spell. A fireball used to burn an entire section of forest is a non-combat plot spell according to your criteria.

I never argued against any of that. You as a player can use any spell available in the PHB for any purpose you can conceive of. A spell that is created solely for advancement of a nation scale plot that would require a DM to develop and create an adventure solely because you cast the spell is not something that should be in the PHB. Maybe that will make it clearer to you. I wasn't arguing against anything you, Dausuul after he clarified, or emdw45 stated. Clever and effective use of magic in schemes is fine by me.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Specifically, a "plot spell" would be useless in combat or your average dungeon crawl. Which you would know if you had read the linked post.

But, if you just want to argue semantics, you can just continue to ignore others' contribution to conversations.

 

[Quartz]

I've just looked at the original 3.x guide and I'm amazed that [MENTION=55582]Treantmonklvl20[/MENTION] ignores the awesomeness of the crafter mage. Bandoleers of scrolls (so you have a spell on scroll for every occasion) and potions (ditto), spamming Fireballs and Lightning Bolts from your wands, masses of miscellaneous magic items, etc. Let the cleric pick up Craft Magic Arms & Armour but Brew Potion, Craft Wand, and Craft Wondrous Item should be on every mage's character sheet.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I've just looked at the original 3.x guide and I'm amazed that [MENTION=55582]Treantmonklvl20[/MENTION] ignores the awesomeness of the crafter mage. Bandoleers of scrolls (so you have a spell on scroll for every occasion) and potions (ditto), spamming Fireballs and Lightning Bolts from your wands, masses of miscellaneous magic items, etc. Let the cleric pick up Craft Magic Arms & Armour but Brew Potion, Craft Wand, and Craft Wondrous Item should be on every mage's character sheet.

This isn't the right forum for discussing 3.x. Crafting in 5E is usually infeasible unless your DM is particularly generous with item formulas.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

I've just looked at the original 3.x guide and I'm amazed that [MENTION=55582]Treantmonklvl20[/MENTION] ignores the awesomeness of the crafter mage. Bandoleers of scrolls (so you have a spell on scroll for every occasion) and potions (ditto), spamming Fireballs and Lightning Bolts from your wands, masses of miscellaneous magic items, etc. Let the cleric pick up Craft Magic Arms & Armour but Brew Potion, Craft Wand, and Craft Wondrous Item should be on every mage's character sheet.

Sorry, I can't really comment on specifics from 3.5. I wrote that guide 8 years ago, and haven't played 3.5 in the last 7 or so, I would not claim to be an authority on 3.5 wizards anymore.

 

[Verse]

A point on Portent

Treantmonk is back with a new wizard guide to 5th edition, what a pleasure! Thank you for your previous work (I've always enjoyed playing wizards, your guide in 3.5 made me enjoy them all the more and I am grateful for the time you invested in creating it)!

I would just like to raise an important caveat on portent (which I really do love, despite being an abjuration wizard) that you MUST choose to use the ability before the die is rolled. I only say this because when you mention turning the BBEG crit into a miss, it reminded me of how I use the lucky feat (one of my favorite feats) to do just that, but I can only do so because lucky expressly permits such use after the die roll (but before knowing the outcome).

Portent is a fantastic ability, but if you plan to use it before a BBEG aims a nasty attack or spell at you with a to hit roll, use it quick because once the die is cast, your fate is sealed (unless you're <cough> lucky)!