Casters Nerfed, Melee Ascendant (3.5)

[Elder-Basilisk]

That's probably not a valid comparison. Cone of Cold is a 5th level area effect spell, while Disintegrate is a 6th level single target ranged touch attack.

If you want to see the stupidity of the Disintegrate change WRT old spells, compare it to Otiluke's Freezing Sphere (ray version). 40d6 or 15d6. Your choice. (Of course, one has a save for minimal damage and the other has no save at all but is resistable cold damage). So there are reasons to pick Freezing Sphere over Disintegrate. The real point, however, is that translating save or die spells into damage spells screws the damage caps and damage by spell level system that D&D had in 2e and 3e. (Although I think my previous criticism: that it's still save or die for most PCs but not necessarily for NPCs is more telling).

Yeah, But the poor evoker can only throw around a 15d6 Con of Cold while the transmuter is tossing 40d6 Disintegrates.

Bad, Bad, bad idea.

 

[idum]

One of the best elements in D&D is the possibility for a wizard/sorcerer to contribute in combat.

At low levels, an elf wizard can use his long bow (with the good bonuses he have with 14+ dex, nothing special considering +2 for race ) for a good combat session.
Not a melee, ok. But a magic-expert avoid that rude way to kill the opponent. He prefere use to hit from a secure distance.

The same, if he like to use his long sword (with a good bonus in strenght) he can increase his power even if he is at low levels (i.e. 3th level, with Shield and so on).

Last, but very important, no limitations for a couple of fighter levels for add a couple of d10 HP, a +2BAB and a couple of interesting combat feats.

When levels come up, i.e. 12th, numbers of spells, variety and flexibility in a tactical choice, some useful magical items, perhaps mages cannot do 120 pts in an attack, but, well, i'm sure that a good wizard can do damages in a very interesting ways...

Really, considering the hard life for a low level wizard in AD&D... i really don't see the problem.

Shield need to be lowered, really. +7 is too much.
Rest of other spells i don't know, there aren't in my first choice for sorcerer, and definitely aren't in my standard-day-selection for a wizard.

My 2 cents.

 

[WizarDru]

I don't know about that. In Living Greyhawk, PCs regularly face 200 hp elementals, advanced owlbears, advanced dire bears, advanced Athachs, etc, starting at level 8.

Well, Living Greyhawk is kind of skewed, too. My admittedly limited experience is that LG is low magic, particularly with respect to magic items. That tends to hurt the melee characters more than the magic users.

And IIRC from your story hour, the CR 23 Winterwight was going up against an 18th level party and was pretty much tearing them to shreds. Hadn't they gone four rounds or so with the Winterwight without being able to touch it when you rolled a "1" on the saving throw?

Heh. Well, you have to factor in that Kayleigh, our main story hour author, had a significantly different view of the combat than the rest of the party. They were scratching it, just not enough. Scorch, the party wizard, was just rolling terribly. As it was, he failed to beat the SR of the winterwight 8 times (or more, I forget the exact number), but he had a flat 40% chance to do so. The party was rolling 1s left and right. The damage could have been more serious if I'd played the ww as much nastier...as it was, he was arrogant and enjoyed toying with them. So I guess I can see it both ways, and your point is well taken. I guess I just don't like save or die spells because of the anti-climax they often create.

 

[greymarch]

Spellcasters should be nerfed!

In 3.0, a spellcaster with haste, and the quicken spell feat could cast 3 spells in one round.

A hasted wizard, with a quickened time-stop could cast three time stops in one round. Each time stop would give the wizard 1d4+1 rounds of free spellcasting. On average, the wizard could cast 10 spells in one round!

Spellcasters were too powerful in 3.0. I am glad they are being weakened.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The actual stats are:
Blademaster 4

Does the mage have an int of 26?

Did you let him take his levels in wilder (also from WoT)?

A 1st level wilder can throw around grenade (3d6 damage to an area) some 3 times a day.

Or how about create fire and tie off weave?

Simply put - you're comparing characters from two different game systems. They aren't balanced.

Add in the fact that your wizard isn't a powergamer, and it's little wonder that he's not as effective.

 

[cable]

The one nerf to which I really object is bringing Spell Focus down from +2 to +1. I think that's just too rough, unless SF now applies to multiple s

Eh? When did this happen? If this is true what more is there to say? Arcane casters are getting the shaft.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Spellcasters should be nerfed!

In 3.0, a spellcaster with haste, and the quicken spell feat could cast 3 spells in one round.

In 3e a hasted Tempest with all the TWF feats could make 9 attacks in one round before cleaving too. When you consider that he doesn't usually average more damage than a hasted greatsword wielder does on his 5 attacks, it doesn't sound so bad though.

If you don't consider what the spells actually did or were or the opportunity cost of such prodigal spellslinging, 3 spells/round sounds impressive. However, assuming a 10th level wizard casting two fireballs and a quickened magic missile per round (which he can do for two rounds before he runs out of fireballs), he's still only doing an average of 88 points of damage on two failed reflex saves, 71 points of damage on one failed reflex save, 53 points of damage on two successful reflex saves (one if the target has evasion, and two failed reflex saves if the target has improved evasion), and 18 points of damage on two successful reflex saves against an evading target.

Now, that's a lot of damage but a hasted, buffed, raging fighter/barbarian will do almost as much (74 points of damage/round against AC 20, no save for half) and can keep on doing it every round for 8 or 9 rounds.

(The character in question is a 28 point buy Ranger 1/Barbarian 1/Fighter 4/Rogue 2/Temple Raider 2 with 18 strength (28 raging with an empowered bull's strength), power attack, weapon focus and specialization: falchion, and a +3 falchion--to keep things simple, I didn't add in his 2d6 sneak attack damage on any of the attacks or factor in the attack bonus from the partial charge in his Haste partial; to check the calculations go to http://www.public.asu.edu/~tarchon/munchkin.html

I know that the character is optimized for damage but he isn't ridiculously optimized for damage (Fighter/Barbarian/Tribal Protector or Weapon Master with a greatsword or even straight up fighter 6/barbarian 4 would do better--in any case, the 10th level wizard under discussion is obviously optimized so we might as well compare apples to apples)

When you compare the wizard to that character, his 3 spells per round don't look nearly so unbalancing.

A hasted wizard, with a quickened time-stop could cast three time stops in one round. Each time stop would give the wizard 1d4+1 rounds of free spellcasting. On average, the wizard could cast 10 spells in one round!

Of course, the quickened time stop takes a 13th level spell slot so what you're discussing is epic level not core rules.

Spellcasters were too powerful in 3.0. I am glad they are being weakened.

Given the confusion you're apparently in over Quicken spell, it's somewhat difficult to take this conclusion seriously. Why don't you try the 3.0e "nerf" that quickened spells take a slot four levels higher than the spell ordinarily would before calling for new ones. Believe me, it makes the game work much better.

 

[Storminator]

<SNIP>

Now, that's a lot of damage but a hasted, buffed, raging fighter/barbarian will do almost as much (74 points of damage/round against AC 20, no save for half) and can keep on doing it every round for 8 or 9 rounds.

(The character in question is a 28 point buy Ranger 1/Barbarian 1/Fighter 4/Rogue 2/Temple Raider 2 with 18 strength (28 raging with an empowered bull's strength), power attack, weapon focus and specialization: falchion, and a +3 falchion--to keep things simple, I didn't add in his 2d6 sneak attack damage on any of the attacks or factor in the attack bonus from the partial charge in his Haste partial; to check the calculations go to http://www.public.asu.edu/~tarchon/munchkin.html
<SNIP>

Yeah, except that naturally he'll be doing that against a foe who's a lot like him, and also happens to dish out 75 points of damage a round. In my experience barbarians go like this for about half the fight. Then the cleric runs over to stabilize them before the rage ends.

Meanwhile, the still unscathed wizard merely ratchets down to the next level of spells.

PS

 

[Gothmog]

Originally posted by Elder Basilisk:

If you don't consider what the spells actually did or were or the opportunity cost of such prodigal spellslinging, 3 spells/round sounds impressive. However, assuming a 10th level wizard casting two fireballs and a quickened magic missile per round (which he can do for two rounds before he runs out of fireballs), he's still only doing an average of 88 points of damage on two failed reflex saves, 71 points of damage on one failed reflex save, 53 points of damage on two successful reflex saves (one if the target has evasion, and two failed reflex saves if the target has improved evasion), and 18 points of damage on two successful reflex saves against an evading target.

You do realize that your wizard in this example isn't doing that much damage to a single foe, but to a whole area? In those terms, then yes, spellcasters are WAY too powerful, and needed nerfing. I'm think the new revisions are a great idea, and hopefully the 3.5 will rely less on omnipresent and overpowered magic than 3E does.

 

[rangerjohn]

Well I hope you fighters have fun in the dungeon. I'm not going to trampse around just to heal you after the fight or dispel magic.