D&D 3.x 3.5 Spell Focus gives only +1 to DCs

[Kraedin]

What can a 20th level min/maxed wizard do these days for spell DCs?

18 Int base + 2 (grey elf) + 6 (headband of Int +6) + 5 (tome of Int +5) + 5 (level bonuses) = 36 Int, for a +13 bonus.

10 base DC + 13 (Int) + 2 (Greater Spell Focus) + 6 (Archmage Spell Power) + spell level = 31 + spell level.

I see that the revised Pit Fiend has saves of Fort +19, Ref +19, Will +21 and SR 32. Presumably, we have a +28 to 30 to overcome spell resistance (depending on any changes to Spell Penetration or Spell Power), so that's not a big problem. If you're casting an 8th level spell from your focused school, it has to roll a natural 20 to save.

The wizard looks fine to me. (Assuming you're a min/max monster, of course. Those who aren't are, as always, screwed.)

 

[Numion]

Hmm.. maybe this change will make the Archmage PrC usable again. This goes to the neutral change class for me - not positive nor negative IMO

 

[mmu1]

This is absurd. Are they going to change Iron WIll and such to only give a +1 to saving throws? I never minded the +2 from spell focus or +4 from greater spell focus, since it only applies to one school of magic. And even with greater spell focus, things were still saving against my spells on a regular basis, especially at higher levels. Now if they make spell focus give you a +1 to all dcs froma ll schools, I'll be ok with it. Otherwise, they have only nerfed spell casters in yet another way.

Umm... I believe one of the aspects of this system is that you're supposed to be able to save against spells on a regular basis?

This reminds me of a DM I had, who bitched that spells sucked, and only melee was worthwhile, because Hold Person didn't always work on the tanks and rogues on the first try...

I know that a lot of people think save-or-die spells are only worth it if the other guy doesn't stand a chance of saving, but that's not how the game's supposed to work.

 

[Kaji]

I'm a big wizard player, and the idea that it was more useful to buff up a wizard and use Tensor's Tran rather than hand out the death and mayhem that is every wizards right just sounds like madness to me. High level wizards (in 3.0) can cast spells like mad, with Haste, Quicken, several spells that go on and on and can be contolled as a free action, Imbue Familiar w/ Spell Ability, Charm Monster (how many beasties have high Will saves?). It just goes on and on. And of course, every wizard worth his salt has +6 to Int as soon as that's possible. Spell Focus and Greater Focus were just that much gravy. Frankly, at higher levels, the big deal is Spell Penetration, not Focus. It's pretty challanging to get through all that SR on high level outsiders and enemy wizards/clerics. I'm not worried about this change at all. It will just make me have a range of spells prepared to target weak saves, some of which I might not use but had to have as insurance. My DM will be happy, and I'll have to burn a few more xp's to make scrolls. I'll make it.

 

[Grog]

What can a 20th level min/maxed wizard do these days for spell DCs?

18 Int base + 2 (grey elf) + 6 (headband of Int +6) + 5 (tome of Int +5) + 5 (level bonuses) = 36 Int, for a +13 bonus.

10 base DC + 13 (Int) + 2 (Greater Spell Focus) + 6 (Archmage Spell Power) + spell level = 31 + spell level.

I wouldn't be so quick to throw in tomes of Int like that - since the stat boosting items are getting huge price increases, the tomes might be too. And who says the Archmage is going to have the same powers?

This revision is really shaping up to be the "nerf-the-players" revision. If that turns out to be the case, I'm not buying.

 

[LordAO]

Umm... I believe one of the aspects of this system is that you're supposed to be able to save against spells on a regular basis?

This reminds me of a DM I had, who bitched that spells sucked, and only melee was worthwhile, because Hold Person didn't always work on the tanks and rogues on the first try...

I know that a lot of people think save-or-die spells are only worth it if the other guy doesn't stand a chance of saving, but that's not how the game's supposed to work.

Excuse me? I was merely pointing out that having greater spell focus didn't make me munchkin at all before. I was not bitching that people were saving against my spells. Use some discretion before you whip out your flamethrower and polymorph self into a troll, will you?

Of course, it is pretty irritating when you only have so many spells per day, you have to go through after (d4 Hps, pitiful attack bonus and proficiencies, no armor, crappy skills, enourmous cost of spellbooks etc etc etc) just to have the priveledge of having them, and then when you finally get to cast them, they either have SR, save, or are immune to your effect.

That does get annyoing. But that wasn't even my point.

 

[Dimwhit]

For the most part, I've really liked the 3.5 changes. But this change downright sucks. My Wizard has 2 spell focuses and 1 greater spell focus. When I convert my character to 3.5, I'm probably going to eliminate one or all of them. It's a total waste feat at +1. The amount that people can easily raise their saving throws is greatly disproportionate to the amount a spellcaster can raise their DCs.

The only other change that's terrible so far in 3.5 is making the buff spells 1min/level. No point in using those spells now.

Of course, someone will probably tell me that I don't have to use the 3.5 rules. Well, if I want to keep playing with all my friends I will, because my DMs will be using those rules, so I will too.

 

[Pappy]

This 3.5 change is absolutely ridiculous. It seems to me that they are handicapping spellcasters far too much in the revision. I mean, there was the revised haste, in which fighters gain an extra attack at their highest BAB but spellcasters are not allowed another action, and now this.

There are people on the boards who shout "but later on with stat boosting items and such a high level wizard will still have heafty DC's." Yet, what they are forgetting is at those higher levels, other characters in which the spellcasters are encountering are wearing those very same items.

And I'm with AO on this one. If spells are meant to be saved against on a regular basis, then people fighting fighters with monstrous BAB's should be able to dodge out of the way on a regular basis (IE...first attack). But if that's the case...where's the resolution in combat?

Pappy

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Shard

much better change would of been to just remove greater focus and keep spell focus at +2.

I agree

Ki Ryn

Hrm, that seems like a bad idea. It's so easy to raise your Fort, Ref, and Will, but so difficult to raise your spell DCs.

Everyone's experiences must be different. IME opponents with strong saves aren't all that common. *Sigh* If I leave a legendary tiger with a good Will save, it's too strong. If I take away the good Will save, it's too weak. (I assume it's CR 15, not 10!)

IMO, knocking out a combatant 50% of the time in one round is a problem. It isn't fun (IMO!) and the wizard didn't use up nearly 20% of his resources.

It would be nice if lower-level wizards were stronger, though.

 

[Bauglir]

THAT is the wizard's problem imo. Their power is too binary, particularly at high levels. Either the wizard will end the encounter in a single spell, or spend the encounter frustrated by a pickle of SR and saves that amount to near magic immunity, and just not affect the monster at all.

This is why I think the move from 'save or die' to 'save or take a chunk of damage' are a good thing; couple this with a general reduction in SR & immunities and the wizard can contribute again, rather than dominating or being useless.