EOM compared to Core

[osarusan]

Has anyone used an EOM/Core combination in their game? My game is going to go in that direction eventually, but not for a few more levels. I was wondering if anyone who has had experience with a combo game, or comparing the two systems could share any advice.

As it stands, EOM seems much more powerful in addition to being more flexible. I love the system, especially for its flexibility, but when it comes to power I worry about how well it will "mesh" with the core system. (I'm expecting Core to be slightly less powerful, but I'm afraid it could be a dramatic difference.)

So are there any caveats I should know about before venturing into this? Or any specific comparisons of the two systems?

Thanks.

 

[Morrus]

Generally, I've found EoM to be less powerful but more flexible.

 

[RangerWickett]

On a sheer numerical scale, EOM is weaker than core spells. To equal a 1st level spelll like magic missile (long range, average of 3.5 damage), you'd need to be at least 4th level (+4 long range, +0 1d6 damage, assuming they don't make their save). To equal a spell you'd cast at 5th level, like fireball (long range, 20-ft. radius, 5d6 damage), you'd need to be at least 10th level (+4 long range, +2 radius, +4 damage).

True, there are ways to abuse things, especially when creating effects that aren't common in the core rules so I had no baseline to compare them to, but in such cases the GM should be able to recognize when something is grossly overpowered.

What problems do you see?

 

[osarusan]

Well I think the problems I'm worry about are the costs of range and area of effect. They seem a little on the cheap side, IMHO. But your post raises a question... You said Long Range for Magic Missile would be +4 MP. Isn't long range (800 ft) only +3 MP? Magic Missile has a range of 100+10/lvl, so I'd say +2 MP for a 150 foot range would be closer. You also listed +4 for fireball's long range. Shouldn't that only be +3? Or am I doing something wrong in my calculations?

Anyway, I'm running a game with a party of all EOM wizards, so my concerns are unique to that situation. In a party with only 1 or 2 spellcasters, I can see how they'd be much weaker... but I've run all-wizard games before, and all-EOM parties seem *much* more powerful than all-Core parties. So, in that aspect, my concerns may not be valid at all. (I think EOM makes an excellent system for an all-mage party.)

 

[osarusan]

On second thought, my I'm wrong in saying that the costs are too cheap for range and area of effect... Maybe it's just a couple of lists that are a bit too cheap for my tastes? I'm not sure, but I'll explain some of the things I've noticed.

As far as damaging spells are concerned, I think the costs are OK... but when it comes to buff spells, it only takes 1 mp to make the buff a 10 ft range and easily cover everyone in the party. Same goes for teleport, heal, etc. So that pretty soon, every single helpful spell my players have in their lists is an area effect. This means that with just two spells, everyone in a party can have a huge DR and a huge energy buffer (and with the adaptive feat, this makes for a nearly invincible party, unless the opponent happens to have multiple type of energy attacks).

It also seems to make charms more powerful than I'd think they should be, since you have to beat the save by 5 to avoid any negative effects. It makes area stun spells a lot more powerful (more than 1 MP-worth, IMHO) than a simple targeted charm.



Anyway, like I said this is coming from an experience with an all-mage party. So chances are that has a lot more to do with it than if the party had only 1 or 2 mages.

 

[MonsterMash]

Well the options would be to increase the MP costs or adjust the area affected - make it 5 ft instead of 10 ft, as the rules are robust enough to stand it. With the charms or stuns, you could adjust the save DC or amount that the save has to be beaten by.

I definitely think that EoMR spells tend to lower amounts of power than an equivalent core spell, but I need to really get a chance to play test with it to confirm my understanding of the rules.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

One thing is, how often do you need all of that fireball's range? Not very, I think.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

D-minky... on the all-party buff problem you see, IIRC the area affect will stick to that area. In order to get it to stick to the characters in the area you need the discriminating enhancement.

So, really useful if the party is in close quarters and staying right next to the mage.. but the spell will also affect opponents who get within range.

With Discriminating, you have the cap of 1 person per caster level along with the extra MP cost.

I am HRing that you need the Discriminate with Teleport spells as well, or you take the entire AoE.

I have to agree that area Heals are much more powerful
I have not had a chance to see the Charm list in play yet, so I am holding judgement {and HRs} on that

 

[osarusan]

Can someone confirm the cost of long range? Ranger Wicket is listing +4... while I was pretty sure the book says +3. Of course I'm more likely to believe Ranger Wicket, and assume that I'm doing something wrong considering I'm not the author. It's killing me wondering what I've overlook. ;-)

 

[RangerWickett]

Hm. No, no, you're right. It is +3. Odd. Oops on my part.