Greater Spell Focus: balanced?

[ruleslawyer]

Where the hell is the Grey Elf? I looked through the FRCS's Index and I can't find a single mention of Grey Elf. Gray Dwarf, but not elf.

As hammymchamham said, they're in the MM, but grey elves also are in the DMG.

Sure. As long as Bull's strenght doesn't increase damage, or Cat's Grace doesn't increase AC.

Right, but my point was that if you're really that worried about fighters being shafted due to casters being able to boost their spell DCs through the roof, then removing non-core spells like fox's cunning would rebalance things a bit. I was addressing Rav's concern that casters had more ways to improve their chances of dealing damage than did fighters.

 

[Grog]

Ok, so if i can get this right, after spending two feats we have the following...

10th level sor with SF/GSF and a 22 cha after items and such tosses a 10d6 fireball with a ref23 save doing 10d6.

10th level sorcerer with 22 cha and empower spell and SF throws a 10d6x1.5 fireball with a REF21 save.

The former case is one of clear imbalance and is going to cause balance issues in a campaign while the second is Ok and fine?

While it may not seem like it, there's a BIG difference between a wizard/sorcerer throwing out spells with a DC 21 reflex save and a DC 23 reflex save.

Look at the Monster Manual. It's not uncommon for monsters (especially big "tank" type monsters, like ogres, hill giants, etc.) to have reflex saves in the range of +2 to +4. Against the DC 21 fireball, they at least have a chance to save, albeit a slim one. Against the DC 23 fireball, they can only save with a natural 20 (or occasionally a 19). So a great deal of the time, there's more of a difference than you'd think.

This gets to be less of an issue as the PCs start fighting more powerful monsters with higher save bonuses. So I think adding a level requirement to GSF might be appropriate, but I don't have a problem with the feat in general.

 

[Xarlen]

Then how's this suggestion: remove stat raising items.

It's not the Spells problem because they can easily be removed (A good Dispel, duration end, etc). However the Items have a fixed set, and last all the dang time. Also the items raise the availible levels of spells casters may cast.

This would allow people to rely more on buffs, ergo meaning more teamwork, spellcasters to study more buff spells instead of DC death spells, and also put a larger reliance on magical items. The market seems Flooded with just stat items because Everyone seems to have one.

 

[Petrosian]

Look at the Monster Manual. It's not uncommon for monsters (especially big "tank" type monsters, like ogres, hill giants, etc.) to have reflex saves in the range of +2 to +4. Against the DC 21 fireball, they at least have a chance to save, albeit a slim one. Against the DC 23 fireball, they can only save with a natural 20 (or occasionally a 19). So a great deal of the time, there's more of a difference than you'd think.

Asusuming you have a +3 reflex save, then at DC23 1 tank in 20 will save. Against DC 21, 3 in 30 will save.

Sorry but thats not a significant difference to me.

Sure, you can portray it as "THREE TIMES THE CHANCE" but its still a difference of 855 fail vs 95% fail.

Now, lets run the munbers...

10d6 averages 35 points (95% and 17 points (5%)

1d6 EMPOWERED averages 52 points (85%) and 26 points (15%)

Thats 34.1 points of damage vs 48. The empower option works best.

its not that big of a deal.

Besides... ogres and hill giants or other tanks are not supposed to challenge reflex saves.

I started throwing ogres at mny groups at level 2-3. The highest bonus to DCs was still +3. over 75% of the ogres were never able to get to the party. Entangles and grease spells forced them to make poor reflex saves and they got stopped or delayed long enough to get whammied by ranged attacks.

I did not see that as a bad thing. They FEW ogres who got thru did significant damage.

TANKS are typically earmarked by two things...

1. tough and damaging as all get out ONCE they get on you. Hard to nail with brute force.

2. Seriously vulnerable to spells.

if you decide to remove the second part, or to reduce it, the former becomes critically important.

********************

That said... most of my experience is with regular DnD not with non-standard PC races which give spell stat bonuses or with campaigns where stat increaseing items are ubiquitous.

 

[Ravellion]

Hammycamham: When I said there were no damage enhancing feats for fighters, of course I was talking about the splat books. The ones I mentioned in the last paragraph of my first post - granted I wasn't that clear... Anyway, whereas the Splatbooks and FRCS introduced many things that helped wizards, fighters got... well, nothing for that which they do the most: making simple attack rolls. Sure they got better grappling feats and tripping and arrow grabbing and god knows what - Wizards actually got to boost their main attack form.

So why do core rule wizards need this boost? They are a bit too weak?

Rav

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Not knowing your stats and the headband I'll make up random mage #5. 18 int start+2levels+[snip]

Why are we assuming that the mage started with Int 18? How often does someone roll a stat like that?

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

IMO greater spell focus shouldn't really exist as is, it is unbalanced in that it one ups the dc/saves arms-race.

Given that some spells have effects that ignore most of the higher level benefits, i.e. hps, ac, other than saves. This feat empowers these spells whilst the fighters have no comparable feat to counter until epic levels.

If GSF exists, there should be feats to better boost weapon spec./focus, iron will and other saves, dodge, imp. init., etc...

Or, GSF should be an epic feat.

 

[Lucius Foxhound]

Why are we assuming that the mage started with Int 18? How often does someone roll a stat like that?

Three out of four of the dice come up sixes.

 

[Xarlen]

So why do core rule wizards need this boost? They are a bit too weak?

Rav

Save or Die spells aside...

A 10th level Fighter can have 100+Con Hps max.

A 10th level Wizard can have 40+Com max.

A 10th level fireball does 60 points max.

A save DC is 13+Mod. So, let's take 16 int, that's 16 DC. The standard fighter has a Ref save of +3, before any feats or Dex bous. That's a 40% of making it. Add Spell Focus: DC 18. 30% of making it.

The average roll of a 10d6 fireball is 35 points of damage (10/2+.5).

It would at least take 2 or 3 fireballs to really hurt the fighter.

By 10th level, that fighter SHOULD have something to increase his saves, else he's not thinking defense very well, and thus is likely getting Held all the time.

How long do you think he's going to get those spells off facing off a fighter? Because once the Fighter is ontop of him, he's Dead. And that's a Melee fighter. If we're talking an Archer, good bye mage.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Why are we assuming that the mage started with Int 18? How often does someone roll a stat like that?

I was just fleshing out his example to see how bad it could get. End result against equipment using foes even assuming a 18 start stat, it probably isn't that bad.(and is almost needed) There are wisdom boosting items, cloaks of resistance, spells like prayer, and god knows what else. Against non-equip type or those who don't spend money/spells on increasing saves well their SOL, heck even if I assumed a 16 start stat they'd still be screwed. Simple matter is IMO the save range is way too wide. At 10th level you can easily have a rang eof saves in the aprty from 3-12+, if you design your character to have a semi resonable chance of succes in getting spells off on the 12+ crowd, you just flatten the 3 crowd.