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

[Li Shenron]

I don't think casters are going to be "nerfed" or become unpopular because many spells are being corrected to make them less of "a must" for every caster, or because SF is being lowered.

Anyway, I cannot deny that every fighting class (Brb, Ran, Mon, Pal) except maybe Fighter - but there's going to be some Greater Weapon Specialization that I really wonder if it's +4 damage - is getting something changed to better: something new, something stronger, or something earlier than before.

I haven't really played AD&D except a few evenings at all, but as long as i remember, casters sucked until high levels. 3ed seemed to had the attitude to empower all casters to make them "comparable" with combatants in power, how does it now sound that what once was welcome as a great improvement to the game now it is a great thing that it gets toned down? Hey, I mean this is not my opinion, I basically played only 3e, but that's what I have been mostly hearing on this board when 3e came out...

Maybe they are just trying to make achieve a shift from typically 3-4 short encounters/day to less but longer? If spells generally work less often, it means we'll see casters casting more before succeeding...

 

[mmu1]

Don't worry, people, you can use the new and improved Fox's Cunning and Owl's Wisdom to boost your DCs back up.

Oh... Ooops... Those spells got nerfed too, even though your average "beer and pretzles" guy probably didn't abuse them either.

Seriously, though, the only time I've seen wizards have any trouble with creatures beating their save DCs was with BBEGs and "gimmick" creatures that had one unusually high save, or perhaps unusually high SR, to make up for some major weakness.

"Good" saves should mean something more than just a piddly 50/50 chance of saving, which is where things were heading with the way spell DCs were climbing...

 

[Li Shenron]

By the way, I really don't think that PrCl special abilities should be taken as a reason to halve Spell Focus. If someone plays an Archmage/RedWizard/something else with tons of DC-boosting items, don't blame Spell Focus, which is a single feat that can be taken only once and works only on 1 school (even if of course you take SF in the school you use most). Do you jump in joy for the new SF? And you still get Archmages/RedWizards/whatever with the DC which is 29 instead of 30

 

[Darklone]

Something else to consider ...

Very important for those groups who ONLY use the three core books: They actually see an increase in spell DCs now (at the cost of another feat).

Folk here in the Rules section and your average smackdown fan may be surprised, but there ARE some groups playing that way

 

[Bauglir]

How do you work that out?

 

[Technik4]

Spell Focus

But wasn't spell focus always too powerful? I'm not saying the correct gauge for something's power is the # of people that took it, but honestly how many Specialist Wizards, Wizards, and Sorcerors out there did *not* take spell focus at least once?

As far as looking at things independently instead of the big picture, consider if another change is to let specialist wizards increase the DCs of their spells by 1. You could not reasonably make such a change with 2 feats costing 4 points of DCs. Also, while people say that the save bonuses (Iron Will, et all) were balanced, there was no Greater Iron Will was there? Hence the inbalance.

Consider another feat that wasn't as powerful, Ability Focus. Granted it is almost exclusively for monsters, but it raises *1* ability/spell 2 points. Compare this to a wiz/sorc getting a large percentage of spells they will cast every day 2 points higher and you see why ability focus was weak. Naturally monsters have different rules (they aren't around as long) but the point remains.

Players who only play with the core books will see that Spell Focus was split into 2 feats, not that 2 feats got nerfed.

And a balanced rule system allows the lowliest min/maxer to the greatest roleplayer (who sucks at crunching numbers) to play the game. Hopefully this change makes all of 3.5 more balanced with itself (the other changes) and with the existing rules (3.0). Nevertheless, I would not judge it before you see the rest.

Technik

PS- Jester I hear ya man! I'm in Texas for now, but I plan on moving out to Cali late 2004.

 

[Apok]

Something else to consider ...

Very important for those groups who ONLY use the three core books: They actually see an increase in spell DCs now (at the cost of another feat).

How do you figure?

In 3.0, Spell Focus (the only core DC boosting feat) gave a +2 DC to all spells of one school. Now you have SF and GSF which, if both are taken, will net you a +2 DC to all spells of one school. Either way, you are still gaining a +2 DC, now it just costs you two feats (very expensive for a class that only gets 7 or 8 feats throughout a 20 level career).

Unless you are referring to the possibility that Spellcasting Prodigy is now core. If that's the case, then yes you will get an extra +1 to all your DC's.

 

[Apok]

Re: Spell Focus

As far as looking at things independently instead of the big picture, consider if another change is to let specialist wizards increase the DCs of their spells by 1. You could not reasonably make such a change with 2 feats costing 4 points of DCs.

Now that is an interesting thought. If that is true, then the Spell Focus changes wouldn't have as great an impact, it would just give you more incentive to play a specialist wizard.

Anyone out there willing to break their NDA, just this once?

 

[Darklone]

How do you work that out?

How do I work what out? That some groups are still playing without the splatbooks (like me)? That's what I hear in several other forums. I even know two groups who play with splatbooks but ruled zero the Greater Spell Focus.

This post assumes that Spell focus gives +1 and Greater Spell Focus gives +2 and they stack (which I am not sure of anymore). Did you mean that?

 

[Spatzimaus]

In 3E, Spell Focus was more powerful than, say, Iron Will, because the caster picks and chooses what school to cast, while the victim has no control over what save to use. An Evoker who takes Spell Focus (Evocation) will get that +2 DC to almost every offensive spell he casts, while the target only gets his +2 to save against 1/3 of the spells.
Of course, Iron Will/Greater Fortitude/Lightning Reflexes also work against spell-like abilities, breath weapons, poisons, diseases, etc., so it's hard to balance.

So, these Feats needed to be toned down a bit IMO, solely to increase the diversity of casters. I played a Sorcerer who didn't use Spell Focus, and it was tough to get anything through, while my Evoker Wizard friend with SF/GSF never had problems.

That being said, reducing Spell Focus to a flat +1 is pretty weak. I don't think it should remain at +2, but why not make more of a Spellcasting Prodigy-style of ability? +1 to save DC, and add some other ability worth another +1. For example:

SPELL FOCUS: +1 to save DC, +2 to caster level
GREATER SPELL FOCUS: +2 to save DC, +4 to caster level.

So, if a 6th-level Wizard with Spell Focus (Evocation) casts a Fireball, it has the save DC of a 4th-level spell and does 8d6 damage. It won't remove the need for Empower, since it still hits the 10d6 damage cap AND only applies to one school, but it doesn't increase spell level either. On the bright side, it now provides a bonus to saveless spells (in range, if nothing else), which the old Spell Focus didn't.