Are Casters 'still' way better than noncasters after level 6?

Ways to control spellcaster power do exist, but get hokey when used over and over. When EVERY monster is immune to scry/buff/teleport somehow, when EVERY dungeon includes mysterious effects that limit mage mobility yet somehow aren't mentioned in the rules (and no amount of knowledge checking will glean what those effects are, except maybe "magic of the gods"), when EVERY encounter day has time pressure, anti-dimensional travel effects, or some other factors preventing the 15 minute adventure day, it gets hokey. That's all. As a DM, I'd rather run E6 than a hokey game.

Nah.

That's good occasionally. As I said above, is far better accomplish the fact that the children are grown, and build the adventure in a way that if they don't actually use all their stuff, things go wild.

And this is not only valid for wizzie spell, but for Rogue's "I'm absolutely sure I will do 50 on this skill" and "take these 50d6 SA", as well as the Fighter "ZOMFG killshots".

In other worlds: If you accept this, and/or like my gamestyle or banshees one, go high level. Otherwise, use E6, E10 and such, or stop/restart your campaings.

Ta-daaaa!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ways to control spellcaster power do exist, but get hokey when used over and over. When EVERY monster is immune to scry/buff/teleport somehow, when EVERY dungeon includes mysterious effects that limit mage mobility yet somehow aren't mentioned in the rules (and no amount of knowledge checking will glean what those effects are, except maybe "magic of the gods"), when EVERY encounter day has time pressure, anti-dimensional travel effects, or some other factors preventing the 15 minute adventure day, it gets hokey. That's all. As a DM, I'd rather run E6 than a hokey game.

I guess my question is....."if it's hokey for the DM to put measures in place to control what the characters do, and whether they can have the 15 minute workday, and to get around the wizard's supposed unkillability, then why is it any less hokey for the wizard to spam the exact same tactics over and over"?

I know when I play wizards, I love switching up my spell selection all the time. Is there risk? Sure. But I want to try out different combinations, and see how they work, rather than always do the same thing over and over. Oftentimes I'll read about a character in a fictional novel do something cool, and I'll try to come up with a selection of spells that lets me do something similar. The wizard is one of the best classes for that, as you can try so many different things.

Banshee
 

Honestly the way I play, or DM is the way I've always done it since 1e. I don't avoid the 15 minute adventure day due to the wizards supposed overpoweredness - I wasn't aware I should be doing it any differently. The combats occupy about 10% to 25% of the game, the rest is getting there, bypassing hazards, finding clues, RP encounters, 'skill challenges' for lack of a better phrase. And guess what those non-combat encounters could be resolved with spells as well, and that's how many are handled.

When a combat encounter occurs it could be a wandering monster, a 'gate house' encounter, or the main encounter, the PCs never knew for sure, but had to guess on circumstance and decide whether to 'nova' or not.

This style of play isn't a mechanism to somehow gimp the wizard, rather its a way to tell a story, build excitement, to have a fun game. While it just so happens to prevent the 15 minute adventuring day, that was never its intent, just a side benefit.

When the concept of the 15 minute adventure day first reared its head, I thought to myself, "who plays like that and why?" I found it completely outside my experience and could see where such play styles could have its bad ramifications, but luckily our games never run that way.

So I can honestly say, that my tactics and play-style was never done as a means to 'skew' the mechanics of the game, but always to tell a better story. I never saw it as a 'hokey' means to stop the wizard from dominating the game.

GP
 
Last edited:

Honestly the way I play, or DM is the way I've always done it since 1e. I don't avoid the 15 minute adventure day due to the wizards supposed overpoweredness - I wasn't aware I should be doing it any differently. The combats occupy about 10% to 25% of the game, the rest is getting there, bypassing hazards, finding clues, RP encounters, 'skill challenges' for lack of a better phrase. And guess what those non-combat encounters could be resolved with spells as well, and that's how many are handled.

When a combat encounter occurs it could be a wandering monster, a 'gate house' encounter, or the main encounter, the PCs never knew for sure, but had to guess on circumstance and decide whether to 'nova' or not.

This style of play isn't a mechanism to somehow gimp the wizard, rather its a way to tell a story, build excitement, to have a fun game. While it just so happens to prevent the 15 minute adventuring day, that was never its intent, just a side benefit.

When the concept of the 15 minute adventure day first reared its head, I thought to myself, "who plays like that and why?" I found it completely outside my experience and could see where such play styles could have its bad ramifications, but luckily our games never run that way.

So I can honestly say, that my tactics and play-style was never done as a means to 'skew' the mechanics of the game, but always to tell a better story. I never saw it as a 'hokey' means to stop the wizard from dominating the game.

GP

Almost word for word, I could say the same thing with my games. I hate dungeons. Loath DMing them. I tell a story, that often has a fairly big sandbox component....I know the beginning and end, but how the PCs get there is sometimes up to the players. In any case, combat is only a part of the game. We've had sessions with very little or no combat at all. They become all about interacting with NPCs, solving puzzles, doing research, roleplaying, negotiating, etc.

The whole "going nova" thing was never a factor as a result. Often wizards had many of their slots taken up with non-combat spells. Then, if something happened, like they got mugged by thieves in an alley, while walking to the noble quarter where they were planning on speaking with an informant, they would have less magic ready. It's not like they could let rip a meteor swarm in the middle of the Poor Quarter. Further, if they started ripping off combat spells in the middle of a city, the local guard and constabulary would become involved.

And the one instance where a character *did* do that, and killed a guard who had tried to apprehend him for breaking the law, yeah, the characters flexed their muscles and left the city.....but bounty hunters were sent, and *they* were tough enough and persistent enough to catch the character. And that particular character was tried and convicted in the end, and sentenced to years of hard labour. Time to roll up a new character.

IMO, it just makes sense...in a world where you have powerful magi, cunning rogues, and lethal warriors, the authorities, enemies etc. *will* come up with ways to deal with their abilities.

But it was all about the story. And I'll admit....the group min/maxer used to get bored. But I wasn't going to change the game for one player, when that particular mix worked very well for the other 4, and is *why* they wanted into my game in the first place.

I guess it's just a different type of games than some others run. Neither's better or worse...just different. But I've spent years reading the boards, reading about problems with one rule or another, or one character type or another, and I didn't "see" the problems, as many didn't come up in my game. The main one that *did* was the Vow of Poverty.

The idea of spending gaming sessions running around dungeons, or blowing all our characters' powers, then resting just never came up. It always felt so.....artificial.....like gaming by formula.

Banshee
 

It's a weird feeling I get in this discussion. Some people seem to argue that casters are so much more powerful than other character classes.....but then when options and legitimate tactics to limit or eliminate the caster are suggested, they turn around and say a game that used those tactics wouldn't be fun. If you're going to complain the characters are too powerful, you should be happy if people point out ways to control that power :)
You're referring to Mordenkainen's Disjunction and the previous discussion here? Two quick questions. What percentage of enemies at high level have access to Mordenkainen's/Mage's Disjunction? Let's say you force Disjuction once every session to keep the wizard in line. Are your players going to get a little bit sick of losing their hard won magical equipment after the 7th or 8th time?

I don't consider Mordenkainen's Disjunction a "tactic" against the wizard. If used as such, it just becomes a punishment upon all the players. Do this too often and you're going to hear players asking when the next campaign starts and who else is going to DM it. YMMV.

[On a side note, I think Disjunction is best used as a story device more so than being spammed against the PCs. The pathfinder ruleset improved this spell by giving it a duration versus MIs (although there is still a 5% chance of losing items so it will happen somewhat regularly if over-used.) In 3.5, the duration was instantaneous and so it was too vicious. The 40ft. radius as well acts as a natural inhibitor of the spell making it virtually uncastable half the time anyway.]

I didn't notice any other successful ways of controlling the wizards power that brings the wizard into line with the rest of the party from the discussion. If people could present such tactics and options, I would be very grateful (I'll spam XP to everyone :)) as I'm presently having to deal with exactly this situation (an 18th level wizard running rampant over his 17th to 20th level peers). I'd like to think I have a modicum of intelligence and that I'm conversant enough in high level play but in this regard, I seem to suck (or perhaps there is no reasonable way and I just need to accept the wizard's power over the rest of the party).

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
 

The idea of spending gaming sessions running around dungeons, or blowing all our characters' powers, then resting just never came up. It always felt so.....artificial.....like gaming by formula.

Banshee

Waitaminute... Banshee, are you saying that in your games of DUNGEONS and Dragons, the PCs don't spend time in dungeons?

Think about that for a moment.

It's possible that you are deviating a fair bit from the standard playstyle.

Which would explain a lot.

I'm curious -- precisely what was it about Vow of Poverty that you found so problematic?

- Ron ^*^
 

I guess my question is....."if it's hokey for the DM to put measures in place to control what the characters do, and whether they can have the 15 minute workday, and to get around the wizard's supposed unkillability, then why is it any less hokey for the wizard to spam the exact same tactics over and over"?

Banshee

I think you're comparing apples and oranges. Using effective tactics isn't hokey. Casting Mirror Image when you are in danger of being forced into melee combat instead of Read Magic isn't hokey. Scry/Buff/Teleport may be hokey, but if it's allowed then using it over and over isn't so much hokey as it is using a good tactic.

What is hokey is when an abundance of encounters just happen to include factors that just happen to negate strategies provided by spells available to casters, to the point of it straining credibility in the context of the game world. For example, the leader of an enemy organization having Anticipate Teleport on himself at all times isn't hokey, but having a preponderance of enemies that the PCs know about in advance be somehow (and often "mysteriously") immune to Scry/Buff/Teleport IS. The fifth time S/B/T doesn't work against an enemy that has no real defense against the tactic, it's hokey. If the DM doesn't want the tactic to work he/she should just remove it from the game entirely (which would mean paring down the wizard's power level).

- Ron ^*^
 

I didn't notice any other successful ways of controlling the wizards power that brings the wizard into line with the rest of the party from the discussion. If people could present such tactics and options, I would be very grateful (I'll spam XP to everyone :)) as I'm presently having to deal with exactly this situation (an 18th level wizard running rampant over his 17th to 20th level peers). I'd like to think I have a modicum of intelligence and that I'm conversant enough in high level play but in this regard, I seem to suck (or perhaps there is no reasonable way and I just need to accept the wizard's power over the rest of the party).

I'd be happy to try and help....but I think the point that the players in my group usually haven't been optimizers means they're likely not the guys you're looking for advice from :)

I've explained some of the things I've done, and they're spread out through the thread.

Here are some others:

1-Work your game so the 15 minute workday isn't an issue. Use timelines. Conflicting NPCs with goals that differ from those of the PCs. Make there be real consequences for not attending to quest issues in a timely fashion. Maybe there's an organization that is working against the PC's goals, and they want the same McGuffin the PCs want. When the PCs take out the gatehouse encounter, and then leave in order to rest and rememorize and go after the big baddy, their arch enemies from the other organization come in, now that the PCs have so nicely cleared out that gatehouse encounter, and do something to disable or kill the big baddy and steal the McGuffin.

2-Have enemies work smart. If the wizard is the tactical nuke of the party, what defenses would the NPCs use against them? Antimagic shell on a fighter/wizard works really well. But mainly, recognizing that the wizard can be dangerous, and has to be a priority.

3-Sometimes (at least at lower levels) simple measures like using caltrops, or marbles can work wonders. A rogue in our party was renowned for carrying bags of marbles, and scattering them all over the floor under the feet of her enemies, forcing saves to avoid falling flat on the ground. DR doesn't protect against it, nor does mirror image if it's an area attack....nor does mind blank or spell resistance, etc. A simple fly spell would work, or levitate..if the wizard had them.

4-Use spellcasters against your spellcaster. They'll have tactics to deal with him.

5-Dimensional Anchor could often be another good one. It allows a save, sure, but sometimes it could keep that wizard from getting away.

6-Mind Fog, followed by Confusion was often a good combo......depending on whether Mind Blank was already active or not.

Also.....any spell or effect that could occupy the other party members who don't have all these magical protections (like Mind Fog + Confusion) or Black Tentacles, Solid Fog, or a host of other mid level spells could limit the wizard's companions' ability to protect him. While they're busy trying to get untangled or whatever, the butchers move in to take down the mage.

Beyond that, the biggest thing is just not to give the wizard time and space to work. Even when protected by potent defenses like Moment of Prescience and Stoneskin, just how much protection they can offer can be limited.

The wizard is 1d4 hp/lvl. Thus, counting max hp at lvl 1, the average wizard will have 52 hp at lvl 20....plus whatever he gets from high CON or whatever. If he's put most of his points in INT, or, say, 3 in INT and 2 in CON, maybe he's got...what...13 or 14 CON? If he's using an ability buffer spell, he might have +4 to his CON..thus 17 or 18. So, now we're talking, buffed, 112 to 132 hp. Throw False Life on top of that... Moment of Prescience might protect against the one attack. But after that, Stoneskin is relatively limited in utility. DR 10/adamantine. Great. But at level 20, you've got fighters who might have.......+4 Flaming Burst Longsword, with 30 STR (due to level enhancements, buffs, specialization, maybe a girdle), who can cause 1d8+10+4+2+1d6 dmg (and this description is not even really optimized in the first place....but my dog is crying to be let out of the kennel, so I can't spend an hour researching a more indepth post). I don't have my books in front of me, so I know it's possible to do even more than that......the longsword isn't even the most damage optimized weapon. Because the Wiz' AC is relatively low in comparison to that of other characters, the fighters could conceivably hit with multiple attacks. Low level mooks with bows can pound multiple missile attacks at the wizard to wear down things like mirror images and stoneskin spells. A rogue spamming the trip attack and flanking the wizard can make casting spells very difficult.

If you use optional books, the wizards' options get better...but so do the options available to everyone else....then you get the mage killer feats etc. that restrict his ability to cast defensively etc.

I used to get frustrated at how easily characters of other classes could destroy wizard NPCs I threw against them. It comes down to things like if the wizard has his buffs up at the start of the encounter, if he has initiative, or if he's always acting later in a round, if he has ways of slowing down the ability of other characters to get in close to him etc.

At the end of the day, what I saw happen with wizards was symptomatic of what I've observed with high level play, period. Initiative matters. Those who got the jump, and got the first good hits in often carried the encounter, as attacks became powerful enough that if you had the third action in a round, you could be down to 50% of your hp in the first round after a few bad rolls...and then your whole strategy changes. Whether it was fighters, rogues, druids, wizards, or something else, I've seen all of these classes dominate games at various times. Sometimes it depends on the luck of the dice, timing, initiative, and the whole paper/scissors/rock aspect as to what you do vs. what the opponent chooses to do in a particular round.

There was another spell in an optional source, based upon one I saw in 2nd Ed. in a book about schools of magic....it was basically a scrying defense spell...if someone scries you, or tries to look at you with a magical sensor, they get hit with a nasty attack that goes back through the scrying link and fry the caster. Sort of like what Murmandamus did in A Darkness at Sethanon. I'm pretty sure somebody ported that spell over to 3E, but I can't remember which book it was in. I never did use it, but it could be something to help. And if it makes the wizard think twice about scrying, and rely on the rogue's sneaking talents instead, well, you're creating more reason for the party to work together, instead of it being the wizard's show, with everyone else being his support.

I'm not denying the wizard is powerful. I'm just saying that a good player can make *any* character powerful. Well, almost any character :) That kender bard (Planescape) was not the most effective....but it was a roleplaying player who ran him, rather than rollplaying....so it didn't matter.

Different games. What worked for me very well might not work for you. I could try running in your game, and find myself just as stumped by your players as you've been.

I'm not going to say that my way is better....just that it seems my game went differently than yours, and these problems didn't arise.....but it could be as simple a thing as that my players didn't care to optimize. Maybe we're more casual. Since I'm not an optimizer, I'm likely not even the right one to ask. But I'm sure if you ask on the CharOp boards, you'll find people can give you all kinds of ideas.

One note....you used the example of Spell Resistance being a good defensive spell...but it's a cleric spell. In my game, the characters didn't put all their efforts into just buffing the mage. Usually the cleric used that one on himself, or on the fighter, to give the fighter some protection so he wouldn't be neutralized by the first Dominate Person used against him (for instance). But for that matter, if any character in the party was the focus of all of the buffing efforts of the spellcasters, he would be difficult to deal with.

Banshee
 
Last edited:

I'm not going to say that my way is better....just that it seems my game went differently than yours, and these problems didn't arise.....but it could be as simple a thing as that my players didn't care to optimize. Maybe we're more casual. Since I'm not an optimizer, I'm likely not even the right one to ask. But I'm sure if you ask on the CharOp boards, you'll find people can give you all kinds of ideas.

More casual is right. THESE are your tactics for dealing with high-level casters? The fact that you included "marbles" is fantastic. "An 18th level wizard? I've got this one, guys -- I whip out a bag of marbles and throw them all over the floor!" :lol:

No offense, but my players would eat you alive.

- Ron ^*^
 

What is hokey is when an abundance of encounters just happen to include factors that just happen to negate strategies provided by spells available to casters, to the point of it straining credibility in the context of the game world. For example, the leader of an enemy organization having Anticipate Teleport on himself at all times isn't hokey, but having a preponderance of enemies that the PCs know about in advance be somehow (and often "mysteriously") immune to Scry/Buff/Teleport IS. The fifth time S/B/T doesn't work against an enemy that has no real defense against the tactic, it's hokey.
Please allow me to slightly disagree here. It's hokey and disrecpectful to the character's and the players who bother putting in the immense amount of time to play them the first time. There won't be a 5th time unless the player's are suckers for punishment, don't really care that much about versimilitude in the game, the DM couldn't care less or the game is about to implode. To invalidate tactics because it does not suit your story or precepts of your game is doing a disservice to the players unless they are on board with these changes.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
 

Remove ads

Top