Balance For Irresistable Damage?

[Moon-Lancer]

if its anything higher then 15d2, then its stronger then the orb spells. the orb spells you still need to hit with. Orb of force is 10d4. even that though can be resisted by def spells in spell compendium.

 

[hong]

I'd say the only saving grace of such a spell is the possibility of opponents with Evasion (which are relatively rare) because otherwise even if everyone makes the save all the time, the spell is sort of stealthily a spell that gives no options to escape it (but for half damage). For instance, let's say I found the 15d2 spell you proposed to be overpowered (average damage 22.5). Let's say you made the new spell do 1d8 per 2 levels up to 10d8 (I picked this number because it rounds nicely). This is secretly the same 15d2 spell from before with a chance of doing double damage on the off-chance the save is failed (unless the opponent has Evasion).

Because of Evasion, the latter would be slightly more acceptable, but I'd still be strongly opposed. Make it Reflex: None and we'll talk

What if it was no save, but an 8th level spell? That basically rules out all the metamagic funny business. I guess there's metamagic rods, but they're questionable in their own right.

 

[Rystil Arden]

What if it was no save, but an 8th level spell? That basically rules out all the metamagic funny business. I guess there's metamagic rods, but they're questionable in their own right.

In that case, I'd agree that, while it is still unbalanced to allow completely unstoppable damage in theory, it is in this special case balanced de facto by the low damage, inability to metamagic without super-crazy rods, and the level 20 cut-off for characters (unless you go epic, when all bets are off!). Here's another thought: What if it does 1d4 damage per spell level? You have to Heighten it to make it do more.

 

[FireLance]

Well, I'm still not convinced that it is unbalanced in theory to allow completely unstoppable damage. The only factor for me is how much unstoppable damage a spell of each level should be allowed to do. Anyway, in many cases, a spellcaster can effectively do unstoppable damage by just picking the right spell. If an opponent is immune to fire, use lightning bolt. If an opponent has evasion, use magic missile. If an opponent has spell resistance, use acid fog. Completely unstoppable damage may encourage lazier play (the "I just blast it" type of wizard PC ), but it doesn't seem inherently unbalanced to me.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Anyway, in many cases, a spellcaster can effectively do unstoppable damage by just picking the right spell. If an opponent is immune to fire, use lightning bolt. If an opponent has evasion, use magic missile. If an opponent has spell resistance, use acid fog.

And that's what makes the game of D&D so fun! Plus there's the possibility of a monster with both, which encourages melee. It's a glorified rock-paper-scissors, and it makes it more interesting.

Completely unstoppable damage may encourage lazier play

Have you ever played Rock-Paper-Scissors-Atomic Bomb? On the schoolyard when I was very little, some kids tried to have us play it once. It was kinda dumb, since Atomic Bomb beat all the other ones

D&D rewards specialisation. When you specialise, you get stronger at one thing, but you give up being good at another. When your thing comes up, you rule, and when it doesn't, you have help from your friends. Unfortunately, if you specialise around "atom bomb", you never encounter something against which your specialisation is weak. Your specialisation is essentially free. The only way to make it balanced is to ensure that it is so bad that even a specialist will not be that much better than someone who didn't specialise against any given defense and is much much much worse than someone who did specialise against that defense, since the spell cuts through against all of them.

 

[FireLance]

To continue the rock-paper-scissors analogy, in the context of D&D, inescapable damage is not an atomic bomb - it's a mirror that reflects whatever your opponent puts out. It doesn't beat anything, but it doesn't lose to anything, either. It's not save for half, or resist the spell or take damage, or be immune, resistant or take full damage. It's an average outcome that's worse than the best result you could get, but better than the worst result you could get, too. Like I said, it might be uninteresting, but I don't see how it's broken.

 

[Rystil Arden]

To continue the rock-paper-scissors analogy, in the context of D&D, inescapable damage is not an atomic bomb - it's a mirror that reflects whatever your opponent puts out. It doesn't beat anything, but it doesn't lose to anything, either. It's not save for half, or resist the spell or take damage, or be immune, resistant or take full damage. It's an average outcome that's worse than the best result you could get, but better than the worst result you could get, too. Like I said, it might be uninteresting, but I don't see how it's broken.

The problem is that the others scale. Paper doesn't always cover rock if the rock is big enough. Rock can't always crush scissors if the scissors are made of adamantine. That's because the game naturally scales. But no-resistance-allowed always does fine against everything (unless you make the damage incredibly low, as I was thinking with hong). This makes it generally too good for a significant underdog, which is bad for two reasons:

1) If players are said underdog, they will be cheated of a fun and challenging fight, but even if they don't care about that and just want to kill stronger stuff, they'll wind up doing one of those "We kill everything in the world because it can't stop us, even if it's stronger" deals, where the players either continue that spree or die when someone else assassinates them, both generally unsatisfying. It also leads you to have to either reduce treasure/XP/both or else get into an infinite spiral where they grow stronger and stronger by defeating unreasonable opponent after unreasonable opponent.

2) More often, the enemy is the underdog. Players usually win, after all. If you throw 200 regular orcs at a party of 20th-level adventurers, they will just laugh. If you throw 200 level 7 orc Fighters at the same party, they will laugh again. They don't get XP for either of these. Both of these are not only reasonable fights for that level, they are easy ones! But if those level 7 orcs all have this new irresistible spell, dealing 7d2 (that's the lowest numbers--some of your voters wanted more!) x200 = 2100 damage, spread between the party (less before the party can go, though, but 2100 is way overkill), then you have a TPK. If the orcs did something with a save, the PCs would make the save except on a 1 (and I use telescoping die rolls in my games, so even more likely to save in my game), so 10 save failures on average, and that's if the PCs are not immune to what the orcs did (Freedom of Movement and Death Ward pretty much always up at that level, for instance). If it involved a ranged touch attack and no other resistances (is there anything like that that does good damage? Why Orb of Force, of course), that's an interesting question, but I think the average party of Wiz, Clr, Ftr, Rog has two characters who would avoid the attacks except on a high roll and two who at least require a middling-low roll, so you probably won't have more than one death, but maybe you will if they target the heavy-armoured guys. This is because of the Orbs, though, really. If the PCs get any sort of minimal SR (items, spells, etc will provide this--it's worth it!), they're basically immune to anything the Orcs will do barring very high rolls (except Orb spells and this new proposed spell). Even an SR 25 (considered fairly abysmal by a level 20 character) will multiply the Orcs' efforts by 3/20 (so an Orc Warlock who hits the Fighter with a 8 or higher goes from a 65% chance--dead Fighter--to a 9.75% chance (alive Fighter), or the saving throw contingent goes from 1/20 to 3/400, meaning they'll get 1 or 2 success for the entire 200 orcs). Of course, if they have SR 28 or higher (and SR 30 or 31 is competitive for their level--a Monk has this), it means that the Orcs can't touch them with SR: Yes spells, and they're not going to hit with physical attacks except on the 20, so the PCs win the no-XP battle (unless you have those Orbs or this new spell). The point is that this new spell makes an auto-victory into a death-based-on-initiative-count. (You don't even need 200 Orcs--you really just need enough to kill the Wizard and the Cleric before they can go. 50 Orcs who go first should be enough to easily do this. The Fighter and Rogue won't be able to kill enough of those 50 before the Orcs go again to live)

 

[FireLance]

Right, and if the rock, paper or scissors is big enough, the mirror won't reflect all of it, too.

1) The unreasonable opponent is just going to sit there and let the PCs blast him? Can the PCs even kill him before they run out of spell slots? A 1st-level wizard could deal effectively irresistable damage to a CR 4 brown bear with magic missile, but how long will he live after that?

2) If the PCs have no SR or specific counters, 200 wizards with magic missile will do better than 200 wizards with irresistable damage. If SR swings the tide so completely, it suggests that SR is the atomic bomb, and not the spell.

 

[hong]

And that's what makes the game of D&D so fun! Plus there's the possibility of a monster with both, which encourages melee. It's a glorified rock-paper-scissors, and it makes it more interesting.

Eh. I HATE that aspect of D&D. It just complicates things for no good reason, making encounter planning and chargen at high levels a chore.

I wouldn't have a problem with an 8th level spell that did some amount of d6 damage, no save/SR/resist. In fact, it's far preferable to Otto's irresistible dance, which depending on the target and SR roll, can end the fight as an exciting encounter right there. Damage is just damage, and doesn't require using exotic monsters, mandatory team members or magic items to counter.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Right, and if the rock, paper or scissors is big enough, the mirror won't reflect all of it, too.

But it still works. With most other mechanisms, the big rock or adamantine scissors can avoid any effect. The ability to take nothing is crucial in a war of attrition.

1) The unreasonable opponent is just going to sit there and let the PCs blast him? Can the PCs even kill him before they run out of spell slots? A 1st-level wizard could deal effectively irresistable damage to a CR 4 brown bear with magic missile, but how long will he live after that?

Precisely--this is why the damage has to be low enough that the PC has to use many of them to do anything, even for someone who poured her heart and soul into being good with Irresistible Damage (because unlike any other specialisation where you get better at only one thing, this one will work against anything, even a god). If the character went absolutely berserk (and I do mean all-holds-barred twinked-out spend almost-all-your-feats (though some of the metamagic can be used in other ways) absolutely berserk) with metamagic on this thing, I see 247.5 damage per round (sustainable for 3 rounds at level 20 assuming 28 Int, which is a given) coming from 15d2 (Thesis, Easy, Practical, being a Spellscale--the works!) without using Metamagic Rods (a single Metamagic rod will make that damage much easier and viable with a much more reasonable build, and it need not even be a Greater rod--to be even more evil, you can use the rod and the build and throw in Repeat spell, so they take the same damage next round, also irresistible). This is, in my book, unreasonably high for something that has no defense.

2) If the PCs don't have Shield, Brooch of Shielding, or SR, that's completely their own fault--100 or 200 1st-level Wizards with Magic Missile prepared should not be an issue for them, but it will be if they've left themselves exposed like that.

SR is not the atomic bomb--SR is one of the R-P-S. It's the thing that (other than orbs, which are a contention) protects against all the biggest damage spells in the game. If the spell is particularly damaging or hard to avoid for its level (other than Orbs, which are a contention), SR is there for you. If SR is rock, the biggest damage spells are scissors, which can't beat rock, but they cut up the vulnerable paper. The Orbs are scissors like their cousins, but they also beat rock.