Anabstercorian
First Post
Okay, I noticed this this game session. Wizards are, supposedly, better at killing people with magic than clerics are. So, when I found this disparity, I was annoyed.
Destruction vs. Finger of Death
They're both 7th level, both close range Death spells.
Destruction requires a 9th level spell to restore a target to life, not to mention either 5000 xp or 25000 gp. Finger of Death merely requires a Resurrection, which is a good 15000 gp cheaper. Additionally, on a failed save, Destructions 10d6 averages 35 damage, while Finger of Death averages (assuming a 25th level caster) 34. More likely it'll average 25 or so.
I don't think that Destruction's one weakness (requiring a 500 gp focus) is a significant handicap given the cash thrown around at the levels where you acquire this spell. This really annoys me. Save or die is the WIZARD's job, ding-dangit! The cleric has enough offensive capacity with it's immense combat-buff potential. Why does he have to outshine the wizard with direct damage as well?
Grumble grumble.
Destruction vs. Finger of Death
They're both 7th level, both close range Death spells.
Destruction requires a 9th level spell to restore a target to life, not to mention either 5000 xp or 25000 gp. Finger of Death merely requires a Resurrection, which is a good 15000 gp cheaper. Additionally, on a failed save, Destructions 10d6 averages 35 damage, while Finger of Death averages (assuming a 25th level caster) 34. More likely it'll average 25 or so.
I don't think that Destruction's one weakness (requiring a 500 gp focus) is a significant handicap given the cash thrown around at the levels where you acquire this spell. This really annoys me. Save or die is the WIZARD's job, ding-dangit! The cleric has enough offensive capacity with it's immense combat-buff potential. Why does he have to outshine the wizard with direct damage as well?
Grumble grumble.
