Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="drnuncheon" data-source="post: 850025" data-attributes="member: 96">Hmm...where's that empowered bull's strength coming from?  Oh...a spellcaster.Also note that that's a 20' diameter, not a 20' radius - quite a bit less space....yet does not require a to-hit roll against each opponent....again the caster.  So, with a fourth level spell (from another caster) and a bunch of PrC abilities, you can outdo a third level spell.Oh, and you have to be a caster, too.Hmm. I'm not sure that example showed what you wanted it to show.You're right, but it is an example.  Wizards can do plenty of damage-dealing in a fight, and anybody that is boo-hooing about them not being able to keep up because they can only cast one spell a round has not really thought it through.Here's a thought, though:  why should wizards be able to compete with fighters in the damage-dealing department?  Why should they be even close?Barring magic items (which apply to everyone), a fighter can't come even close to the ability to create a wall of force, or to fly above the heads of his opponents out of reach.  He can't summon helpers or monsters out of nowhere.  He can't vanish and reappear instantly half a world away.  He can't make a single attack - a ranged touch attack, at that - and have a chance of putting even the most powerful foe out of the fight, no matter what.  He can't go to another plane, take over someone's mind, or create objects from thin air.So...why should wizards get to do all of that and beat the fighter for damage output?  Don't seem fair to me.J</blockquote>

Verification