Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tyrol" data-source="post: 1573008" data-attributes="member: 18213">You fail to mention that the Wizard's 150 damage (from those 3 spells pulled off in one round of 3.0) affects a TWENTY FOOT RADIUS and therefore is MULTIPLIED by however many targets are within that radius.   It is not uncommon to catch five or more enemies in a fireball.  Using your own example, your 3.0 wizard who averages 150 damage and "sounds pretty balanced" is likely really doing anywhere from 450-900 damage, depending on how many enemies there are (3-6).   The main reason to cast a fireball spell is to hit multiple targets.   A 17th level caster would not follow your example to hit a single target (unless he was an idiot, had an ill-prepared spell list, or otherwise had no other choice).   At that level, there are far more effective spells for dealing with 1 foe at a time, all of which can be cast in a single round (in both 3.0 and 3.5).  It wouldn't even be a stretch for a party to encounter 7+ enemies at once, in which case your 3.0 wizard could 'average' upwards of 1000 damage in a single round (if in tight quarters especially).   Haste in 3.0 was clearly way overpowered and strayed from previous versions of haste.  As it is, 3.5 haste remains a good, usable spell even after being nerfed.Edit: Oh yeah, I almost forgot to mention that for your Knight/Paladin you assumed successfull attack rolls for your averages.  If we assumed failed saves on a level TEN wizard casting a fireball (or heightened fireball), targeted to hit five enemies.... 10d6 fireball ranges from 10-60, effectively averaging 35 damage... thats 5 * 35 = 175.  And so a level 10 wizard could outdamage your level 17 knight/paladin on average, and that's in 3.5.</blockquote>

Verification