Evocation-Conjuration Rendundancy

[Merlion]

First, let me state that I dont see what I am about to observe and comment on as a bad thing. I just want to see what people think.

It seems to me that Conjuration is making Evocation increasingly redundant. In the past it always seemed to me like Conjuration was the school for (obviously) summoning things and for "conjuring" physical stuff...things made of matter, or more solid energy constructs (like Mage Armor), acid based spells stuff like that. And then Evocation was the school of energy, fire, cold, lightning, force used actively, but not creating physical objects and the like.


However, as time goes on we are seeing more and more Conjuration spells that it seems to me, the way things have always been layed out, would be Evocations. In Complete Arcane, the Orb and Lesser Orb spells, Blast of Flame, Blade of Fire, Arch of Lighnting for instance to me all seem like Evocation spells to me, (except maybe the Orb of Acid spells). They all generate energy. Blast of Flame is basically a lower level Cone of Cold with fire damage. (Of course then theres Defenestrating Sphere which is Evocation but seems to me like a Conjuration since it basically creates a ball of wind).

If you look at "conjuring" as creating or calling an object or creature, this doesnt make sense. However, its easy to interperate "conjuring" very broadly...in the overall definition of the word, you can conjure just about everything.

But then where does that lead Evocation? Its always been a school with only one real aspect...an aspect that could easily be folded into Conjuration.


Thoughts?

 

[Thanee]

I think that Evocation spells are still highly superior to Conjuration spells for what they are good at, but with Conjuration you get a fairly decent coverage nowadays, with some blast-type spells in addition to the teleport-line, summons, wall spells, and so on. It's surely an extremely potent school now.

Well, Evocation was always my prefered school to use as prohibited school, anyways.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Pickaxe]

I think that Evocation spells are still highly superior to Conjuration spells for what they are good at, but with Conjuration you get a fairly decent coverage nowadays, with some blast-type spells in addition to the teleport-line, summons, wall spells, and so on. It's surely an extremely potent school now.

Well, Evocation was always my prefered school to use as prohibited school, anyways.

Bye
Thanee

I don't think Merlion is taking issue with the potency of the two schools; rather, he's questioning whether they really are different, especially given the apparent overlap of certain spells. Even in the core rules, you have Call Lightning, Flame Blade, Fire Storm, etc., which are Evocation spells that could fit into Conjuration. (After all, Call Lightning is *calling* lightning, just as some Conjuration spells call creatures.)

I'm not unhappy with it either way, but a similar thought occured to me when I was looking for druid Conjuration spells with saves, to see if Spell Focus (Conjuration) had any worth to a druid other than getting him/her to Augment Summoning. IIRC, there are zero druidic conjurations that would benefit from SF, at least in PHB. And yet, as I looked through the spells, I kept coming to ones like Call Lightning thinking that this might be a worthy Conjuration spell, only to discover that these are all evocations, because they deal in energy.

As an added thought: If all energy spells are placed in Conjuration, would this include negative energy as well? Whither Necromancy? In fact, many schools have spells that bring forth something, matter or energy, which would be given up to this uber-school. What's left? Divination, Enchantment (possibly including fear spells, orphaned from Necromancy), Illusion (but are these Conjurations as well, especially shadow spells?), Transmutation, and some Abjuration (Dispel Magic yes, Shield no).

To me, combining schools seems less advisable, but new spells should stick to the rules in terms of school assignment rather than blurring the lines.

--Axe

 

[shilsen]

Well, Evocation was always my prefered school to use as prohibited school, anyways.

Join the club. Blowing someone up is no fun (esp. since it's a lot harder to do so with the extra hps in 3e). Making him jump off a cliff, or getting his buddy to do it, or turning him into a frog - now that's classy!

That being said, I think that the bigger error Complete Arcane was in introducing a bunch of conjuration spells which do damage just as well as (if not better than) evocation spells but don't allow SR. I'll probably house-rule those in some way if I allow them in my game.

 

[Hawken]

However, as time goes on we are seeing more and more Conjuration spells that it seems to me, the way things have always been layed out, would be Evocations. In Complete Arcane, the Orb and Lesser Orb spells, Blast of Flame, Blade of Fire, Arch of Lighnting for instance to me all seem like Evocation spells to me, (except maybe the Orb of Acid spells). They all generate energy. Blast of Flame is basically a lower level Cone of Cold with fire damage. (Of course then theres Defenestrating Sphere which is Evocation but seems to me like a Conjuration since it basically creates a ball of wind).

If you look at "conjuring" as creating or calling an object or creature, this doesnt make sense. However, its easy to interperate "conjuring" very broadly...in the overall definition of the word, you can conjure just about everything.

But then where does that lead Evocation? Its always been a school with only one real aspect...an aspect that could easily be folded into Conjuration.

The spells you mention could have been typoes as far as what school of magic they are. Whenever WotC gets around to releasing an errata they will probably note it then. Until then, just house rule they are Evocation spells, which they are. Evocation spells create something from nothing. Conjuration (and Summoning) spells bring something from somewhere else to where the caster is at. Anything energy-based is or should be Evocation (sonic, force, fire, etc.), while anything physical (acid, etc.) is/should be Conjuration.

As an aside, I've always felt healing spells should be Necromantic since they affect the body, mind or soul. The only way I could see them being Conjuration is if they are conjuring replacement blood, flesh, organs, etc. in order to heal what was damaged/destroyed.

Even in the core rules, you have Call Lightning, Flame Blade, Fire Storm, etc., which are Evocation spells that could fit into Conjuration. (After all, Call Lightning is *calling* lightning, just as some Conjuration spells call creatures.)

How could these spells fit into Conjuration? They are not physical substances. They are energy effects that are created from nothing, not taken from someplace else and brought to the caster. The "Call" in Call Lightning is just for the sake of a snazzy name. Acid is not an energy, its a substance, so it makes sense that spells of that nature would be Conjuration. But Lightning, Fire, etc. are energy so they should be/remain Evocation. There is no overlap. Energy (fire, force, etc.) is not a substance that can be conjured. Energy spells won't be placed in the Conjuration school, that's what the Evocation school is for. Conjuration/Summoning for non-living and living matter, respectively; Evocation for energy.

Blowing someone up is no fun (esp. since it's a lot harder to do so with the extra hps in 3e).

That depends on the spells you have available. Most spells now aren't as good at blowing things up, but you can always make your own. Or use magic from a source other than the PHB. The Revised Elements of Magic has each mage create their own spells. And it solves the point of this thread (Conjuration or Evocation) quickly and simply.

 

[Diirk]

IIRC, there are zero druidic conjurations that would benefit from SF, at least in PHB.

Fire Seeds (for some functions of it, not all), heals (when used on undead), Storm of Vengeance. You're right tho, there aren't many.

 

[Pickaxe]

How could these spells fit into Conjuration? They are not physical substances. They are energy effects that are created from nothing, not taken from someplace else and brought to the caster. The "Call" in Call Lightning is just for the sake of a snazzy name. Acid is not an energy, its a substance, so it makes sense that spells of that nature would be Conjuration. But Lightning, Fire, etc. are energy so they should be/remain Evocation. There is no overlap. Energy (fire, force, etc.) is not a substance that can be conjured. Energy spells won't be placed in the Conjuration school, that's what the Evocation school is for. Conjuration/Summoning for non-living and living matter, respectively; Evocation for energy.

Part of the point of this thread, unless I am mistaken, is to throw out the idea of changing how these two schools are defined, and possibly combining them. So, yes, I agree that Call Lightning, etc., fit quite naturally into the Evocation school without overlap with Conjuration, as defined by the rules. But the words evocation and conjuration themselves don't necessarily connote very different things, and its only the written rules that distinguish one as dealing with energy and the other with physical things. (I should confess that the experience I described for myself was before I actually read the school descriptions carefully.) Yes, evocation spells don't necessarily bring things from another place, but neither do Mage Armor, Acid Splash, or a number of other Conjurations. And some Conjuration spells could be construed as dealing with energy, such as summoning a fire elemental. And why is acid covered by conjuration (because it's not energy) yet still affected by Resist Energy?

Again, I'm neither unhappy with nor desirous to change the distinction between the two schools, but I can understand Merlion's point of view.

Diirk, you're of course right about those druid conjurations. I hadn't thought of the healing spells, but I do recall running across Fire Seeds and SoV. Of course, those two are so high a level that you'd either have to wait a long time to get Augment Summoning, or else carry a feat (SF) that will have little use until you get sixth level spells.

--Axe

 

[Merlion]

I don't think Merlion is taking issue with the potency of the two schools; rather, he's questioning whether they really are different, especially given the apparent overlap of certain spells.

Basically yes....my problems are less mechanical and more conceptual. Theres overlap amongst all the schools...but if that goes to far one begins to wonder if a given school has a real reason to exist from a magic-logic standpoint.

To me the setup of (roughly) Conjuration=matter Evocation=energy worked well...there was a little sensible overlap but Evocation kept its identity. That seems to be rapidly changing both mechanically and conceptually.

The spells you mention could have been typoes as far as what school of magic they are. Whenever WotC gets around to releasing an errata they will probably note it then

Thats possible, but I dont think that will happen. If it were one or two of those spells, perhaps...but theres the orb spells, blast of flame, arc of lightning...too many to just be typos. As I remember, Frostburn has some similiar overlap spells as well.

then, just house rule they are Evocation spells

My response to this is the same as any time someone advises that one just house rule something...only the DM gets to make the house rules. And many DMs, in my experience, dont really do house rules...they go straight by the book


That aside, my concern is less with what mechanical effects the may have on the game, and more with the fact that the designers are doing it at all...blurring a long existing paradigm for little or no reason, thats only hurting in game logic. Its another sympton of a seeming overall trend to focus on mechanics and throw in-game logic (not neccesarily real logic, but basic common sense and within-the-world consistency) out in favor of "balance".

The Revised Elements of Magic has each mage create their own spells. And it solves the point of this thread (Conjuration or Evocation) quickly and simply.

Except you have too 1) like it, as a whole totally different aproach to magic from what we are used to and 2) get a DM to use it.

Part of the point of this thread, unless I am mistaken, is to throw out the idea of changing how these two schools are defined, and possibly combining them

Basically, I think they need to go back to the old Conjuration/Evocation relationship, or Evocation just needs to be folded into Conjuration. I'd rather keep the variety really, but I mostly want consistency and non-redundancy.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

That aside, my concern is less with what mechanical effects the may have on the game, and more with the fact that the designers are doing it at all...blurring a long existing paradigm for little or no reason, thats only hurting in game logic. Its another sympton of a seeming overall trend to focus on mechanics and throw in-game logic (not neccesarily real logic, but basic common sense and within-the-world consistency) out in favor of "balance".

But they're not. The new "Conjuration" spells hurt both in-game logic *and* balance, they do not sacrifice one in favor of the other. Introducing energy-damage spells in the Conjuration school has two balance problems:
1) It hurts the Evocation school by making it redundant, as you've noticed. A Conjurer can now duplicate most of what an Evoker can do, but the converse is not true. The Conjurer is simply better.
2) It creates unbalanced spells that ignore Spell Resistance. This is a major, major advantage at higher levels. The Conjurer is even more superior to the Evoker now. "Balance" means in part that there are a variety of good options, not one that is so good that everybody always takes it or so poor that nobody ever does.

Notice that Acid Arrow, which is Conjuration and ignores SR, is less effective at dealing damage than a lower-level Evocation spell (Magic Missile). Acid Arrow requires a hit roll, doesn't do its damage all at once, and does total damage only slightly better than MM.

In general, effects that ignore SR should be about two levels above those that don't (Acid Arrow's hit roll would knock that down to a one-level increase). And, as non-magical effects, they should not be able to affect incorporeal creatures. A "Conjure Lava" spell that does 1d6/level and ignores SR should be 5th-level.

 

[Merlion]

But they're not. The new "Conjuration" spells hurt both in-game logic *and* balance, they do not sacrifice one in favor of the other.

But they think they are. Thats why I said balance in quotation marks Its just that the designers ideas of balance have been shifting lately, not always in a good way.

In general, effects that ignore SR should be about two levels above those that don't (Acid Arrow's hit roll would knock that down to a one-level increase). And, as non-magical effects, they should not be able to affect incorporeal creatures. A "Conjure Lava" spell that does 1d6/level and ignores SR should be 5th-level.

I'm not sure I neccesarily agree with all of that. I often feel spell resistance is a little to all inclusive.
And as it is at high level damage dealing is often a very sub optimal offensive choice, for a lot of reasons. A big one is that especially at higher levels damage spells often have at least 3 hurdles to deal with: SR, energy resistances, and then almost all of them allow a save which especially in 3.5, the enemy will probably make. There are many reasons besides those as well, a whole other thread's worth really.

I have considerable sympathy for the house rule one of the designers printed in Arcana Unearthed, which is essentialy that SR does not apply to energy damage. Its logical (depending on your concept of how magic works) and makes damage spells more atractive and useful at high levels.


That however isnt my problem...the balance issues arent really what bother me with this Evocation/Conjuration thing...its the logical and thematic ones I'm really worried about.