D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Is every Magic Change Downward?

[Plane Sailing]

Re: Magic NEEDED to be reduced.

Here's something to think about:.

Here is something else to think about. In your example you gave the wizard a nonstandard feat (energy substitution). Hmmm, I wonder why they didn't include that in 3.5e Without that, most of that particular wizards options would have been limited against the fire giant.

Furthermore, your wizard blew most of his spells in the one encounter.

When fighting a giant like that, the fighter would probably be better off spring attacking with power attack (to avoid getting a full attack from the giant himself, which would be bad news). Power Attack is likely to raise his damage above the basic single attack damage you have listed.

Furthermore, the fighter's ability to cause damage to the next encounter round the corner isn't reduced one iota.

I don't find this a convincing argument, to be honest.

Cheers

 

[Jalkain]

After following all the sneak peaks and rumors and leaks it seems like every non magic aspect of the game has stayed the same or risen upwards in power while every magic tidbit is about reduced power.

Has anyone seen anything that makes magic better in anyway?
Marcus

I believe there a changes for wizards, bards, sorcerers, and druids which increase their power. For instance, please don't tell me that reduced spell scribing time/cost is not a major benefit to a wizard. And one which benefits the PCs more than the NPCs, I might add...

Furthermore, it is likely that the vast majority of spells have not been changed.

I believe that addresses the original question, now we get to watch the whole 'Casters Nerfed, Melee Ascendent' epic get played out again...

Originally posted by Dreamchaser
You would say that!!! I resent this!!! Your logic is broken!!! Your arguments are nerfed!!! My deoderant got the shaft!!! I'm never posting again!!! Until someone says something else I want to respond to!!!! How dare you nerf me like that!!!!

Nerf nerf nerf nerf!!!

Brilliant! When I saw the thread title, I was tempted to make a similar reponse, but I can't improve on that!

 

[Gwarok]

Lol

Ok let me get this straight. To prove that mages overshadow tanks and that mages need to be nerfed you put out a pretty well thought out example, that shows that tanks dish out more damage. Which has been my experience in every campaign I have either been in or run. Not to mention that your mage just blew his wad on ONE encounter. And he is useless for anything else if you just make him a combat mage, which to me is a crime. Why take one of the most interesting, versatile fantasy classes and try to get in a pissing contest with a tank?

Why are they nerfing core rules again? Leave SF as +2, make GSF +1. I never liked the add on books. I always found the PrCL to be unbalanced and kinda gooberish, the same goes for most of the feats. In fact, just about anything not playtested hard by WoTC is fanfiction for powergamers, yet now they are causing direct changes to one of my favorite classes. How about waxing all the BS from you campaigns? Putting out errata for stuff they approved or stop approving unbalanced crap in the first place?

/sigh

 

[Jalkain]

The problem is that some people have adopted the 'any class that can't consistently inflict as much damage as the fighter must be underpowered' mindset.

Wizards aren't just there to inflict damage. Slow is a great spell against large groups of opponents, but it doesn't inflict any damage. Other good non-damgaing spells include Sleep, Confusion, Eyebite, Power Word Stun... I could go on, but you get the idea.

The point of spells like Slow isn't to damage the enemy. It's to stop the enemy from damaging you.

What about Monster Summoning? Monsters don't just deal damage, they also take spells and blows that would otherwise be suffered by the PCs. Which means less healing is required, less temporary items get consmued etc. If I save the party resources, doesn't mean that I've made an important contribution?

What about gathering information using divinations? I can think of several occasions when I have saved the party from a dungeon ambush using Detect Thoughts. Ambushes are often deadly, and even if they are survived, the cost in terms of party resources is often high. Better to spot the ambush before it happens, and then fight the battle on your terms. That's worth a lot more than doubly empowered fireballs in my book.

And once you've confounded your opponents plans and stopped them from attacking effectively, what then? Well, guess what, your fighters can move in and wipe the floor with them. That's what fighters are for. Sometimes you'll have the opportunity to catch your enemies in a Cone of Cold or similar, in which case that's a bonus.

This is how a wizard can be made into a viable all-day party member. By using the full range of spells in a way which ensures that the party as a whole stays in better shape for longer. Not by casting haste and then launching a 3 round fireworks display before running out of spells. Wizards, by the nature of the class, have always had to be careful not to run out of spells. That was true even in 1st Ed, and I can see no reason why people should expect it to be any different now.

Anyway, this is one wizard who's looking forward to playing 3.5e.

 

[AuraSeer]

Re: Magic NEEDED to be reduced.

Round one: Mage casts Haste[...]

You're using the admittedly broken 3.0 version of haste. When you compare straight damage of a hasted meleer and a hasted caster, the caster will nearly always come out ahead, because his output is doubled while the meleer only gets 1 extra attack.

Switch to the 3.5 version of haste, and your two example characters are on a much flatter playing field.

 

[rushlight]

Alright, there's alot of good discussion, so I'll go at it a piece at at time.

Elder-Basilisk:
"Really, if a wizard can blow that many of his spells in a single encounter, they darn well ought to make a significant difference."

Well, I did leave out all the other possibilites that a mage could take. They can make all manner of scrolls and whatnot to keep themselves viable throughout the day. In fact, the example wizard I used (with a different feat selection) could probably keep up that volume of output for many encounters, depending on his willingness to spend XP and gold.

Those item-creation feats are what seperate 3e mages from 2e mages. Pardon the pun, but making items in 2e used a much more "arcane" system - i.e. it was pretty much a mystery what you should do, and only the GM knew what to do. This is significantly different, in that 3e allows the choice of creation feats, which by extention, forces the GM's hand to allow all sorts of items. Once a player has invested specific character traits into something, it's difficult for a GM to say "no, you can't make anything". Essentially, mages in 3e have the built-in rule structure to bypass the "spells per day" motif that was essential to balance in 2e. Therefore, mages CAN extend themselves over the course of several encounters.

One possibility that I left out of my example, and a significant oversight, is that were there 2 or 3 giants, the mage would have done nearly duplicate damage to those as well. That's something a fighter can never approach (even with the Cleave path, which IMHO, is useless*). Perhaps it was an oversight of mine to set my example against a single creature, when the mage really doesn't shine until there's several enemies within a nice 30 foot radius. It's as if the mage's damage potential increases proportionately to the number of enemies. The fighter can't do that.

*- I feel that the Cleave path is useless, since it's only viable against very weak enemies, or only once or twice during an encounter. I don't think that it's useful to waste a feat onthe chance of one or two extra attacks per encounter.

 

[rushlight]

Re: Re: Magic NEEDED to be reduced.

You're using the admittedly broken 3.0 version of haste. When you compare straight damage of a hasted meleer and a hasted caster, the caster will nearly always come out ahead, because his output is doubled while the meleer only gets 1 extra attack.

Switch to the 3.5 version of haste, and your two example characters are on a much flatter playing field.

That's exactly my point. I'm FOR 3.5e.

 

[Gez]

Re: Re: Magic NEEDED to be reduced.

Switch to the 3.5 version of haste, and your two example characters are on a much flatter playing field.

Yeah. The fighter gets one extra attack, while the wizard gets an higher running speed, ideal for fleeing (which is what they're supposed to do, aren't they?).

 

[DreamChaser]

The problem is that some people have adopted the 'any class that can't consistently inflict as much damage as the fighter must be underpowered' mindset.

Wizards aren't just there to inflict damage. Slow is a great spell against large groups of opponents, but it doesn't inflict any damage. Other good non-damgaing spells include Sleep, Confusion, Eyebite, Power Word Stun... I could go on, but you get the idea.

The point of spells like Slow isn't to damage the enemy. It's to stop the enemy from damaging you.

What about Monster Summoning?

What about gathering information using divinations?

And once you've confounded your opponents plans and stopped them from attacking effectively, what then? Well, guess what, your fighters can move in and wipe the floor with them. That's what fighters are for.

This is how a wizard can be made into a viable all-day party member.

Anyway, this is one wizard who's looking forward to playing 3.5e.

<some snips above>

THANK YOU!!!!

There is a certain "m" word I have had to resist throwing around as I read all these "I can't obliterate the world with my daily spells anymore" complaints. There are hundreds of spells on the wizards list and most of them have nothing to do with combat or that relate in a less obvious--and thus more fun--way.

You said it and you said it well.

DC

 

[Al]

rushlight- If your example proves anything, it proves that haste was broken. Few people would dispute that. On the recent poll I posted over at the General Discussion boards, the spell more people thought broken than any other was haste .

Of course, there are a few loose ends, such as Harm, by extension Heal, and possibly Polymorph and Hold that could be tidied up.

Yet the point is that WotC have gone too far. Getting rid of Haste *alone* effectively halves the damage capability of the average wizard (if he has enough firepower to sustain him through the day). Rework your example without Haste, and I think you'll find that the wizard is outclassed absolutely.

The point was that 3e did need minor tweaks, but only minor ones. They went too far. The justification for toning down SF (because it conflicted with GSF) is utterly illogical.

For example:
KILL ANYTHING (Fighter)
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialisation, Improved Critical, Power Attack, Sunder, Cleave.
Benefit: You can kill anything as a free action out to a range of 10000 miles. It gets a Fort save DC 100+your level+your Str mod to avoid this.
Normal: You can't.

Now, it is a reductio ad absurdum, but to nerf Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, Improved Crit, Power Attack, Sunder and Cleave because in *conjunction* with something absurd they are too powerful would be patently ridiculous. Solve the problem itself (GSF)- not the prerequisites.