Casters Nerfed, Melee Ascendant (3.5)

[Jens]

To my mind at least, wizards are not supposed to be able to deal out as large amounts of damage to single opponents as melee fighter, this ability is the melee fighter's main (maybe only) strength.

Wizards are, however, able to cast confusion (the fighter will fail his save 75% of the time), fear (similar effect), mirror image/ mislead (how can the fighter dish out all that damge it he can't even locate the wizard). The wizard can dimension door away, cast all of his preperation spells, reappear (now flying, invisible and casting disintigrates from scrolls) and utterly destroy the fighter.

If the wizard were able to match a fighter in terms of straight damge to a single opponent, the fighter would lose all appeal. The advantage of the fighter is to be able to act as a emat shield and, consistently, deal out large amounts of damage.

Excellent point.

Wizards are able to scry, teleport, dispel magic traps, fly, become invisible, run really fast, move through walls, divine what a magic item can do, charm people and monsters, converse with gods, change form, halt time, ... So of course they should also be as good at fighting as focused fighters.

Actually, I think that the classes whose foci are not combat (that's most classes except fighters and barbarians) are too good at fighting, not the other way around. The other classes are good at all kinds of other stuff with spells and skills and special abilities so they shouldn't also be as good as the fighter-types at fighting.

 

[Quixon]

Where does it say this? It's right in the DMG about the magic weapons/ arrows section. Or do you mean in 3.5? If so, where can I find this information?

People figured it out from Dungeon Mag#100, which is written according to 3.5 rules. Then on Andy Collins(the guy in charge of 3.5 for WotC) own boards he confirmed it.

Bows and arrows won't stack anymore-they will overlap, so if you have a +4 Bows and +3 arrows, you will only get a +4, not the +7 you get now.

 

[Al]

To my mind at least, wizards are not supposed to be able to deal out as large amounts of damage to single opponents as melee fighter, this ability is the melee fighter's main (maybe only) strength

Would that be aside from having roughly double as many hit points, a significantly better AC, an incredible number of feats; not to mention the better usage of 'strategic' melee (grappling etc.)

Which is a CR 13 monster. Recall that it was the phenomenon of casters taking down monsters of higher CR than their level in one shot, that caused so much heartache

Granted, but then you can't get a 9th level lich, so that's a non-argument . With regard to CR 11 monsters, a lot of them have far more hit points than liches, not to mention better Fort saves. Indeed, for purposes of being vulnerable to disintegrate, liches are about the single weakest creatures in the game- hardly representative...

Greater Spell Focus bumps that up to 23. Spellcasting Prodigy bumps it up to 24. Various boom-spell PrCs can bump it even higher

None of which are core rules. 'Backwards-compatibility' is all very well, but if it means disempowering core rules just in case people slap on supplements, then that's clearly a faulty approach.

A wizard with Dex 13 will be dead long before reaching 11th level, for desperate lack of AC. Try Dex 16 at minimum. Add Weapon Focus (ray) and Point-Blank Shot for extra fun

13 Dex is fairly standard. Remember that you'll want a good Con, and a good Int as well. As for WF (ray) and PBS, I've never seen any PC wizard take either.

Ah, this must be an example of the post-modernist statistics they keep telling me about

Well, it was worth a shot . Seriously though, for the wizard to kill the lich, he must hit (50%), it fail its save (80%) and then roll more than 72 on 31d6 (er...can't be bothered to work out...probably about 90%). So his top spell is only having a 36% chance to knock out the lich, the monster which is weakest against disintegrate. Against creatures with good touch ACs, good Fort saves and lots of HPs, his chances drop dramatically.

The AoO does not prevent the coup de grace.

Bull Rush. Trip. Disarm (okay, so he could do a unarmed cdg, provoking yet another AoO and probably not being very effective unless his Str is exorbitant). Sunder (likewise). Grapple (if he misses on *his* AoO). Think outside the box .

Tommyrot.

Given how slowly melee tanks move, that enemies can form defensive lines around the held victim, that cdg provoke an AoO and that hold could wear off over a couple of rounds, the PCs' need to be very well-coordinated to do the old hold/cdg trick. I'm not saying that that's *bad* necessarily- I broadly agreed with the hold nerf: it's merely symptomatic of a wider trend.

A wizard going around on by himself, without tanks of his own to guard him, deserves to die. Heck, it happens even in 3E already

Well, are the tanks simply going to sit there and act as meat-shields? Quite often an enemy tank is more than willing to provoke an AoO and charge an enemy mage if he thinks that he can take them down.

If they're as nerfed as you claim, then clearly they're not so dangerous anymore, yes?

Not as dangerous, but still dangerous. Like I said, they have always had, and continue to have, a greater offense:defense ratio than fighters. In 3e, they had better offense and weaker defense; in 3.5e, it looks like they might have comparable offense and weaker defense. Given two targets with comparable offensive capabilities, any sensible opponent will target the one easier to kill.

Last time I checked, you don't count armor bonus for touch AC

I thought mage armour, being a force effect, did count- though to be fair, I'm not entirely sure now you mention it.

Actually, I think that the classes whose foci are not combat (that's most classes except fighters and barbarians) are too good at fighting, not the other way around

Nonsense. Ignoring the fact that combat (under core rules) is both the bulk of encounters in any given game and is the font of nearly all XP, the examples we are using are 'combat wizards'. If I played a loremaster with three Skill Foci in Knowledge skills, poor Dex and Con (good Int, Wis and Cha), an armload of divinations and utility spells and still expected him to match in combat, then of course that would be ridiculous. The argument I'm making is that *combat* wizards now cannot compete.

 

[hong]

Granted, but then you can't get a 9th level lich, so that's a non-argument .

Ah, 13th level wizards do not exist in your campaign. It must be a githyanki thing.

With regard to CR 11 monsters, a lot of them have far more hit points than liches, not to mention better Fort saves. Indeed, for purposes of being vulnerable to disintegrate, liches are about the single weakest creatures in the game- hardly representative...

Reposting for the benefit of the befuddled:

Pish tosh. You don't use a disintegrate against a pumped melee brute. You use disintegrate against a lich or vampire. Against the pumped melee brute, you use dominate or hold, and laugh as he tries to roll a natural 20 each round.

Tactics, d00d.

None of which are core rules. 'Backwards-compatibility' is all very well, but if it means disempowering core rules just in case people slap on supplements, then that's clearly a faulty approach.

The aim of the revision is to reflect the way people actually play the game, and that means taking into account the effects of splats.

13 Dex is fairly standard. Remember that you'll want a good Con, and a good Int as well. As for WF (ray) and PBS, I've never seen any PC wizard take either.

If your wizards don't have any Dex boosting items (or spells), no wonder they never survived to 13th level.

Well, it was worth a shot . Seriously though, for the wizard to kill the lich, he must hit (50%), it fail its save (80%) and then roll more than 72 on 31d6 (er...can't be bothered to work out...probably about 90%). So his top spell is only having a 36% chance to knock out the lich, the monster which is weakest against disintegrate.

Is this an example of the Big Lie or something?

Against creatures with good touch ACs, good Fort saves and lots of HPs, his chances drop dramatically.

Reposting a SECOND time for the benefit of the befuddled:

Pish tosh. You don't use a disintegrate against a pumped melee brute. You use disintegrate against a lich or vampire. Against the pumped melee brute, you use dominate or hold, and laugh as he tries to roll a natural 20 each round.

Tactics, d00d.

Bull Rush. Trip. Disarm (okay, so he could do a unarmed cdg, provoking yet another AoO and probably not being very effective unless his Str is exorbitant). Sunder (likewise). Grapple (if he misses on *his* AoO). Think outside the box .

Reposting a THIRD time for the benefit of the befuddled:

And anyway, who's talking about coup de grace? Just full attack the guy. Have two people do it, if necessary. If you're worried about lackeys interfering, recall that nobody wastes hold or dominate on lackeys.

Have you ANY experience at all with stunned or held combatants? Anyone who loses a round is pretty much dead.

Given how slowly melee tanks move,

Any melee tank worth his salt will be moving at 90 ft with good maneuverability, once they reach 12th level or so. Alternatively, they'll be moving at 40 ft with a +50 to Jump.

Well, are the tanks simply going to sit there and act as meat-shields? Quite often an enemy tank is more than willing to provoke an AoO and charge an enemy mage if he thinks that he can take them down.

Well, since you said

Given how slowly melee tanks move, that enemies can form defensive lines around the held victim, that cdg provoke an AoO and that hold could wear off over a couple of rounds, the PCs' need to be very well-coordinated to do the old hold/cdg trick.

it certainly shouldn't be that hard to stop someone from reaching the wizard, no?

Not as dangerous, but still dangerous. Like I said, they have always had, and continue to have, a greater offense:defense ratio than fighters. In 3e, they had better offense and weaker defense; in 3.5e, it looks like they might have comparable offense and weaker defense. Given two targets with comparable offensive capabilities, any sensible opponent will target the one easier to kill.

Any sensible opponent will target the one that makes a bigger spectacle of himself.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I thought mage armour, being a force effect, did count- though to be fair, I'm not entirely sure now you mention it.

Force-based Armor Bonuses count against Incorporeal Touch attacks, but not against generic Melee or Ranged Touch attacks.

-Hyp.

 

[Belen]

After the events of my last session, I can honestly say that the casters WILL be nerfed in 3.5 just on the tidbits of info we have so far.

Case in point: Clay Golems (11 HD creatures)- magic immunity.

This weekend my group fought 4 clay golems. Now, the party is 12th level. Bard, Wizard, Blademaster, Monk.

The wizard contributed a mass haste to the fight. Then promptly got one-rounded by the golem. (Note: You cannot heal damage from a clay golem without a cleric with the Heal spell.) The Bard ran away from the golem the entire combat as she had no magical blunt weapons.

The fighter stood around and soaked up attacks. I say that he soaked up attacks because he only took 30 damage the entire fight (after dealing zero because he can only use a blade). The fighter has a 34 AC when on the defensive, so I had to roll a 20 for the golems to actually hit.

Sooo...the hasted monk ran around doing flying kicks then full round actions. Yes, he partial charged every round to get his flying kick/ full round action. The monk defeated all 4 golems with 4 hitpoints to his name.

Fighter- 100 hp left after combat
Monk- 4 left, but he killed all 4 golems!
Bard- Ran around calling encouragement
Wizard- dead

However, in 3.5 the wizard cannot even mass haste the party. And clay golems are just immune to magic, so....SOL.

 

[Fenes 2]

After the events of my last session, I can honestly say that the casters WILL be nerfed in 3.5 just on the tidbits of info we have so far.

Case in point: Clay Golems (11 HD creatures)- magic immunity.

This weekend my group fought 4 clay golems. Now, the party is 12th level. Bard, Wizard, Blademaster, Monk.

The wizard contributed a mass haste to the fight. Then promptly got one-rounded by the golem. (Note: You cannot heal damage from a clay golem without a cleric with the Heal spell.) The Bard ran away from the golem the entire combat as she had no magical blunt weapons.

The fighter stood around and soaked up attacks. I say that he soaked up attacks because he only took 30 damage the entire fight (after dealing zero because he can only use a blade). The fighter has a 34 AC when on the defensive, so I had to roll a 20 for the golems to actually hit.

Sooo...the hasted monk ran around doing flying kicks then full round actions. Yes, he partial charged every round to get his flying kick/ full round action. The monk defeated all 4 golems with 4 hitpoints to his name.

Fighter- 100 hp left after combat
Monk- 4 left, but he killed all 4 golems!
Bard- Ran around calling encouragement
Wizard- dead

However, in 3.5 the wizard cannot even mass haste the party. And clay golems are just immune to magic, so....SOL.

Did you forget that in 3.5 haste targets several people?

Anyway, aren't there creatures you could summon to battle clay golems at that level? or use rock to mud/mud to rock to trap them? (Not sure about those spells working). Target the ceiling with disintegrate and bury them under rubble? Cast magic weapon / GMW on a makeshift club for the fighter?

Tons of options.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Saying the wizard is nerfed because he didn't acquit himself well in combat with one of the four (count 'em) magic-immune creatures in the core rules is like saying that fighters are nerfed because they can't reasonably stand toe-to-toe with colossal monstrous scorpions, wraiths, or remorhazes. And there are many, many more of the latter type of creature than the former. The magic-immune creatures appear to exist almost entirely to give the fighters a chance to shine.

 

[Belen]

IME, fighters always get a chance to shine. I really do not see people's trouble with magic as mages I have seen in games have not been overpowering, especially if a DM does his homework.

Just about every opponent I throw at the characters during mid to high level has some type of SR, or dare I say it, mages of their own. The best way to counter magic is with magic. Just because a lot of GMs find it hard to throw more than just melee monsters at the party does not mean that magic is overpowering.

I truly feel sorry for those people who have to deal with munchie mages, but neutering magic is not the best way to go.

For instance, I recently tracked down my first GM. We had fallen out of touch since those early days of gaming. While talking, he made the point that people take their characters too seriously. Dying, whether by heroism or tragedy, used to be a fun part of the game. Some of my fondest memories come from characters that bit the dust, such as my bard who was frozen by a elder white wyrm, then falling and shattering.

With the disappearance of save or die, then we take away one of the threats inherent in playing high level characters. Part of the excitement of low level is the threat of death with every encounter. That threat is somewhat alleviated at high level EXCEPT for save or die spells.

After all, what fun would we have if that 20th level fighter was walking across a narrow stone bridge 300 feet high, fell, and then calming took the 30d10 and scaled the cliff. Fear is a GOOD part of the game. If the game is so neutered that a 20th level PC has no fear of dying, then what's the point?!

Alternately, if the fighter knows that a disintegrate will only do 20d6, then I can readily see said fighter charging the wizard and one-rounding him.

Yes, a wizard can fly with improved invisibility, but how often do fights really happen outside when the wizard has every advantage? Most BBEG fights IME seem to take place in doors where a wizard has limited space to move. And every fighter I have met either has a see invis item, or has had that permanently cast upon themselves, so the biggest argument, that of a flying, invisible, caster, is really bunk. It make no sense when fighters have ranged weapons and items to puncture invis.

If you all want to neuter the game and take the fear out of combat away, then play d20 Smurfs.

Let us have the fear wrenching action.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If you all want to neuter the game and take the fear out of combat away, then play d20 Smurfs.

[glare] You got somethin' you wanna say?

("... and I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and fuuuuu-urious anger...!")

-Hyp.