D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Spell Focus gives only +1 to DCs

[Darkness]

Simulacrum, no name-calling, please.

Shard O'Glase, responding in kind isn't very helpful, either.

Thanks!

- Darkness

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Feh, that's beyond weak.

Well, there's my first confirmed houserule for 3.5: I'll be using the 3.0 Spell Focus / Greater Spell Focus rules.

Greater Spell Focus was desperately needed for many wizards, because it was SO easy for the foes to make the saving throws your character might commonly throw around that it was a joke.

Really? Last night the party paladin missed 4 out of 5 saving throws. Two of them were DC 15 when he had a +9 to his roll. The others were equally easy and he only made one of them.

 

[mmu1]

If the wizard can't even affect the monster with his highest level spell what chances are there that he will be able to affect the monster with his lowest level spell? Nada zip. In effect the wizard is useless. Spell focus was there to enable the wizard to make use of his lower level spells. What fun is there if the wizard can only cast 1 or 2 spells in support then basically do nothing for the rest of the combat?

Oh, BS... (Or a complete exaggeration, anyway) In that particular example brought up above, a decent wizard would have something like a 25% chance of taking out the demon with a 5th level spell (with 3.5E Spell Focus), and demons have pretty much the best saves and SRs in the game. That means with a 4th level spell, which he has several of, he'd still have a viable chance...

Then there are the spells that don't give a save, do partial damage, affect mobility... And since when is it beneath a wizard to contribute to an encounter by using protective spells? What, that's good enough for a cleric, but a wizard has to be able to blast anything and everything with a damage or save-or-die spell?

 

[RigaMortus]

Re: Re: 3.5 Spell Focus gives only +1 to DCs

Well, by this reasoning either dodge should give a plus 2 to armor class

Funny you should mention that...

because in 3.5, it will

The only other change I'd like to see is that it works for ALL enemies, not just one you select. I don't know how many times players (me included) have forgotten to declare they were dodging an enemy or to switch to a different target to dodge against.

 

[Apok]

Well, now if Spellcasting Prodigy becomes core (and i suppose without regional requirement as there might be in FR) and SF & GSF are tone down, this is REALLY going to make me angry. What would be the point in taking SF for +1 in ONE school if you can have the same if ALL spells, AND the other bonus? That you can later take GSF for another +1 at the expense of another feat? That you don't have to take it at 1st level?

Why not do the same with Weapon Specialization? +2 damage over a dice roll which at most is d12 means at least about +30% to the average damage, and almost +20% (ok, approx!) to the max damage. I don't think WS gets halved and GWS now means +2.

The more 3.5e gets closed and the more my mood changes to nervous... I was very excited at the idea of a revision, but some of the latest news don't appeal me when they tone down a thing and then bump up another to restore a kind of "balance" that might have been there in the first place. Bump up the Ranger with unneeded things like Endurance and Evasion (and 3!! free feats to combat path) to then drop HD to d8? Halve Spell Focus "because it's too popular" to then make SProdigy core - possibly the most popular feat in FR ever? So... since ALL of my Wizards and Sorcerers started at 1st level took Toughness, does it make it powerful enough to be toned down in the revision?

If I sound harsh, it's because I am. I apologize.

For the most part, I agree with you. I don't agree w/ the nerfs to SF and GSF primarily because it's way too easy to boost your saving throws and much less easy to boost your DC's.

As for the point in taking SF if Spellcasting Prodigy is available as core, there's plenty of good reasons. +1 to DC's is +1 to DC's, which is a Good Thing (TM) for any spellcaster, even if it is restricted to a single school. Most casters focus on one or two schools anyway, so it's a great deal.

Of course, this is pure heresay. I have no idea weather or not Spellcasting Prodigy will indeed become Core. If it is, it will be under a different name (they've already listed the 3.5e feats) and it's effects could be different.

Also, the concept that feat Usage is somehow proportional to it's Overpowerdness is total bollocks. Every archer takes Point Blank Shot, just about every fighter takes Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization if they can. This doesn't mean that the feats are overpowered, just that their function is so fundamental to the concept that choosing them is a no-brainer. Ditto SF and (if allowed) GSF.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Really? What's this "decent wizard" that you're talking about? And which 4th and 5th level spells give him a viable chance of taking out the devil?

The "one spell, one creature" spells I can think of at those levels are: Charm Monster, Dominate Person (won't work), Dismissal, Hold Monster (nerfed to save every round now), and Phantasmal Killer.

So, let's take a "decent" 9th level wizard. Int 16+2 (stat increases)+4 (item); Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus, Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration (and we're assuming they weren't nerfed to +1 clvl for consistency's sake--IME they were more popular among generalist wizards and sorcerors than the focus feats).

To effect the Ossyluth, the wizard needs to roll an 8. So that's a 65% chance of success with any given spell.

To then effect the Ossyluth, with the spell, the wizard has a:
Charm Monster DC 22 vs +15 (including the +4 for an obviously hostile target)=20% chance of making the Ossyluth ignore the wizard or attack him for subdual. (Come on, he's Baatezu; just because he thinks the wizard is his friend doesn't mean he likes the wizard's companions).

Dominate Person: won't work on an outsider

Dismissal: DC 22 vs +12 (accounting for the HD difference between the Ossyluth and the wizard)=29% chance of banishing the Ossyluth

Hold Monster: DC 22 vs +11=33% chance of paralyzing him for one round (not that this does nothing to prevent the use of the Ossyluth's spell like abilities)

Phantasmal Killer: DC 22 vs +11 and +12=33% chance of dealing damage to the Ossyluth and a 14.6% chance of killing it outright.

If you go to wizards focussed on dealing damage rather than save or effect spells, most of them will have to deal with the Ossyluth's numerous elemental immunities and resistances as well.

So, the wizard can easily spend a lot of spells without effecting the Ossyluth. In fact, the best case scenario (an abjurer with 3 dismissals prepared, greater spell focus abjuration, and greater spell penetration (looking suspiciously like an optimized wizard for a highly unusual encounter rather than a "decent wizard")) has about a 69% chance of getting rid of the Ossyluth in three rounds if he casts all three of his 5th level spells. And I wouldn't call that a reasonable chance, considering that both the character and the spell in question are optimized and useful only in exactly this situation.

It's not quite "go home, you're useless" but another fighter or a barbarian would be far far more useful.

Oh, BS... (Or a complete exaggeration, anyway) In that particular example brought up above, a decent wizard would have something like a 25% chance of taking out the demon with a 5th level spell (with 3.5E Spell Focus), and demons have pretty much the best saves and SRs in the game. That means with a 4th level spell, which he has several of, he'd still have a viable chance...

Then there are the spells that don't give a save, do partial damage, affect mobility... And since when is it beneath a wizard to contribute to an encounter by using protective spells? What, that's good enough for a cleric, but a wizard has to be able to blast anything and everything with a damage or save-or-die spell?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I don't see Spellcasting Prodigy in this list. It is not core.

General Feats
Acrobatic
Agile
Alertness
Animal Affinity
Armor Proficiency (light)
Armor Proficiency (medium)
Armor Proficiency (heavy)
Athletic
Augment Summoning
Blind-Fight
Combat Casting
Combat Expertise
Improved Disarm
Improved Feint
Improved Trip
Whirlwind Attack
Combat Reflexes
Deceitful
Deft Hands
Diligent
Dodge
Mobility
Spring Attack
Endurance
Diehard
Eschew Materials
Exotic Weapon Proficiency
Extra Turning
Great Fortitude
Improved Counterspell
Improved Critical
Improved Initiative
Improved Turning
Improved Unarmed Strike
Improved Grapple
Deflect Arrows
Snatch Arrows
Stunning Fist
Investigator
Iron Will
Leadership
Lightning Reflexes
Magical Affinity
Martial Weapon Proficiency
Mounted Combat
Mounted Archery
Ride-By Attack
Spirited Charge
Trample
Natural Spell
Negotiator
Nimble Fingers
Persuasive
Point Blank Shot
Far Shot
Precise Shot
Rapid Shot
Manyshot
Shot on the Run
Improved Precise Shot
Power Attack
Cleave
Great Cleave
Improved Bull Rush
Improved Overrun
Improved Sunder
Quick Draw
Rapid Reload
Run
Self-Sufficient
Shield Proficiency
Improved Shield Bash
Tower Shield Proficiency
Simple Weapon Proficiency
Skill Focus
Spell Focus
Greater Spell Focus
Spell Mastery
Spell Penetration
Greater Spell Penetration
Stealthy
Toughness
Track
Two-Weapon Fighting
Two-Weapon Defense
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
Greater Two-Weapon Fighting
Weapon Finesse
Weapon Focus
Weapon Specialization
Greater Weapon Focus
Greater Weapon Specialization

Item Creation Feats
Brew Potion
Craft Magic Arms and Armor
Craft Rod
Craft Staff
Craft Wand
Craft Wondrous Item
Forge Ring
Scribe Scroll

Metamagic Feats
Empower Spell
Enlarge Spell
Extend Spell
Heighten Spell
Maximize Spell
Quicken Spell
Silent Spell
Still Spell
Widen Spell

 

[Pax]

Oh, BS... (Or a complete exaggeration, anyway) In that particular example brought up above, a decent wizard would have something like a 25% chance of taking out the demon with a 5th level spell (with 3.5E Spell Focus), and demons have pretty much the best saves and SRs in the game. That means with a 4th level spell, which he has several of, he'd still have a viable chance...

See, there you are, assuming a single spell will END the combat.

God forbid the 5th level spell the Wizard has is Cone of Cold (a bucketfull of damage, but, hardly "save or die"). Or Greater Shadow Conjuration.

Not EVERY Wizard spell is a save-or-die situation. Don;t judge ALL ave DCs solely by the "worst case" examples.

Then there are the spells that don't give a save, do partial damage, affect mobility... And since when is it beneath a wizard to contribute to an encounter by using protective spells? What, that's good enough for a cleric, but a wizard has to be able to blast anything and everything with a damage or save-or-die spell?

When one plays, say, an Evoker, stays true to theme, and is Evoking elemental (etc) damage a lot ... one gets rather quickly depressed at how infrequently you DEAL the advertised damage amounts to enemies worth having CHUCKED those spells at in the first place.

 

[mmu1]

See, there you are, assuming a single spell will END the combat.

God forbid the 5th level spell the Wizard has is Cone of Cold (a bucketfull of damage, but, hardly "save or die"). Or Greater Shadow Conjuration.

Not EVERY Wizard spell is a save-or-die situation. Don;t judge ALL ave DCs solely by the "worst case" examples.

When one plays, say, an Evoker, stays true to theme, and is Evoking elemental (etc) damage a lot ... one gets rather quickly depressed at how infrequently you DEAL the advertised damage amounts to enemies worth having CHUCKED those spells at in the first place.

Evokers always cry when they finally realize that their massive, AOE spells designed for slaughtering larger amounts of weaker enemies don't do that much against single strong creatures... Of course, there's always the 17.5 points of damage a round from Magic Missile...

And we can hardly base this argument on a situation in which the wizard memorized spells that aren't any damn good for fighting outsiders - if you design DCs so that sub-optimal spells still have a good chance of working, the optimal ones will be impossible to resist.

Why don't we see what happens to that Osyluth after the wizard takes Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration and hits the devil with a couple of Enervations? Or, under current rules, traps it in a no-save, no-SR hemisphere made with a Wall of Force?

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Why don't we see what happens to that Osyluth after the wizard takes Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration and hits the devil with a couple of Enervations? Or, under current rules, traps it in a no-save, no-SR hemisphere made with a Wall of Force?

If those are your ideas of optimal spells for the situation, you need to revise your ideas.

What will happen with Wall of Force? Absolutely nothing. Greater Teleport is on the Ossyluth's list of at will abilities. He turns invisible and teleports wherever he'd want to be. Then starts the combat over again (if he wants to).

Enervation?

A "decent" 9th level wizard has +4 BAB and a 14 dex. Since he's spent his feats on Greater Spell focus and Greater Spell penetration, he doesn't have point blank or precise shot.

IIRC, the touch AC of an Ossyluth is 14. So, assuming that the Ossyluth is not in melee, the wizard needs to roll an 8 in order to hit. And then an 8 in order to beat SR. That's a 42% chance of dealing an average of 2.5 negative levels per spell. The cleric could cast Recitation once for more or less the same result.

Of course, given the Ossyluth's abilities (Invisibility at will, Wall of Ice at will, Fly at will, teleport at will), it's unlikely to be targetable unless it is in melee combat. So, the wizard really needs a 12 in order to hit the Ossyluth with the enervation. That's only a 29% chance of doing anything to it. Said wizard was better off with Dismissal and may actually have been better off with Phantasmal Killer (which at least has a chance of ending the combat instantly and has about the same chance of dealing damage as enervation has of inflicting penalties).