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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Souljourner" data-source="post: 799016" data-attributes="member: 1622">Hygric -  I just wanted to say, I think it's great you're trying to fix the imbalance (assuming there is one, I'm not there, I can't say for sure).Thresher - not *EVERY* character concept can be viable.  It just so happens that fighter/wizard combinations are not very good in 3e.  It's not like 2nd edition where every wizard was exactly the same.  You can focus on different things.  However, I do think that there are a couple feats you *must* have to be viable at high levels.  Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration should be no brainers.  Spell Resistance is your bane.  Empower spell is essential for bumping up the damage of your spells such that they're still effective (and really, how else are you going to use those 11th level slots?)  And las t but not least, heighten spell is actually really useful once you get that high.  A lot of the utility type spells (slow, hold monster, etc) are low-ish level, and need the extra DC bumpage to be effective.  One more should be quicken, because at epic levels, you can afford to spend the 4 levels, and casting extra spells in a round is really useful (btw quickened True Strike is damn useful for hitting those impossible to hit things with ray attacks).  That's 5 feats, 4 of which could have come from your wizard's list of bonus feats.  Now you get 6 more from levelling... I hardly think that you are pigeonholed into one  archetype if you can freely choose more than half your feats to be whatever the heck you want.  I think the problem is that you jumped into third edition without any experience, and you're hurting because of it.  Wizards take some skill to use well in third edition.  You can't just hurl delayed blast fireballs around and assume you're going to win.  I think if you had had experience playing through the levels, you would be much more wise to the wizardly ways, and would be more effective, even given your effective 4 level loss.Granted, no amount of finagling is going to make you stand toe to toe with a sorcerer 4 levels higher than you, but you should be able to hold your own.... the real problem is that your 2 fighter levels are almost entirely useless.I kind of agree with the epic spell system, but kind of don't.  I think the problem is twofold: 1.) The XP cost is exorbitant, and a real detriment to the system.  Why should a 21st level caster spend 15,000 XP to get a single spell that is barely on par with something like a 7th level spell?  To get anything really earth shattering, you have to cheese out all the negative modifiers, which bring me to my second point.2.) The system seemingly encourages cheesing out the negatives.  The cost to make a spell a single action casting time is ridiculous.  What use is a spell that takes a minute to cast?  Well, if it lasts all day, then it's fine for a prep spell.   But obviously if a minute casting time is fine, why not 10 minutes?  And why not take a crapload of D6's worth of damage while you're at it?  One Heal will fix you right up (only 150 points, I know, but at 21st level you can take up to 42d6, which happens to average out to almost exactly 150 damage) and I know from experience, 6th level spells are a dime a dozen at 21st level.  so for prep type spells, you can get -60 to the spellcraft DC with the expenditure of one 6th level spell and 10 minutes.  Now compare that to a damage type spell, where you have to add 20 DC to make it castable as a single action.  That's a difference of 80 DC!!  Add in ritual casting, and you can easily make a prep spell that lasts a week and has an effective DC above 100.  Compare that to a battle type spell that has an effective DC of about 25.  Not exactly balanced, is it?Ok, that was more of a rant than I had intended, but a good thought exercise nonetheless.-The Souljourner</blockquote>

Verification