How Often Does Your Group Cast Stoneskin?

[Mistwell]

Of course, it's now been replaced by Heart of Earth from Complete Mage.

4th level for wiz/sorc and druids.

Normally lasts for 1 hr/level and gives bonuses to checks to resist being tripped and bull rushed. However, as a free action you can activate it for 1 rd/level (basically, a single battle) during which you gain the effects of Stoneskin. (After which the spell expires.)

Have it active in conjuction with another "Heart of" spell and you gain 25% fortification. Active in conjuction with all three other "Heart of" spells and you get 100% fortification.

No material component.

Why would any wizard learn Stoneskin when they could learn Heart of Earth?

Because you have more than one battle a day?

 

[hanniball]

If it matters, it used to be used semi-frequently in the group that I played in in 2E.

Yeah, 2nd edition Stoneskin was just phenominal. Completely negating the next several attacks was just too good to pass up (was it 1D4 or 1D4 plus something?)

It does not prevent 150 in one batch, though.

Note the use of the word 'potential' in my previous post .

 

[Whimsical]

My multiclass barbarian/spirit shaman cast it somewhere between sporatically and regularly. Around one out of four combats.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

In 2E, all the freaking time.
In 3E never.

 

[was]

every once in a while

 

[Evilhalfling]

in 2e it was one of my few spell nerfs
in 3e the party cast it in 2 separate fights, near the end of game (17th lvlish)
both times it was used on 2-3 frontline fighters. (druid, dire bear, fighter possibly shadow-dancer) never on the wizard.

 

[Rhun]

My group casts it quite a bit...that spell alone is responsible for their survival in several instances.

 

[phindar]

In 2e, didn't get out of the sleeping bag without it. (It lasted forever and our GM was actively trying to kill us all the time.)

In 3e, much more rarely. I think the 3.5 version is much more balanced than the 2e (skipped 3.0 so I can't really say for that), so it only gets used occasionally in the lead up to big fights. It's also dependent of if the buffers want to take, which they don't always. My current group doesn't use it because the mage hasn't taken it. I'm one of the front-liners and I'm thinking of picking it up on some scrolls just so I can get him to cast it on me if I really want it for something.

 

[Nail]

My opinion is probably highly influenced by my groups typical campaign style:...

...and there's no arguing with campaign style. Seriously.

But once you get to 12th level, blowing 250 gp per battle is peanuts. A typical EL 12 has 9,800gp of treasure. Using 250 gp for the fight means you've used a bit less than 3% of the treasure. It becomes even a smaller percentage as you go up in level or the ELs get higher.

I find that many players don't like spending gp or XP on spells. It's a great deterent. But it is almost completely a psychological deterent.....if you do the math, you find that spending 250gp (or 300 XP, for Limited Wish, say) is really trivial.

"the lottery is a tax on people who can't do math."

You ain't jus' whistlin' Dixie, bro.

 

[Infiniti2000]

But once you get to 12th level, blowing 250 gp per battle is peanuts. A typical EL 12 has 9,800gp of treasure. Using 250 gp for the fight means you've used a bit less than 3% of the treasure. It becomes even a smaller percentage as you go up in level or the ELs get higher.

I find that many players don't like spending gp or XP on spells. It's a great deterent. But it is almost completely a psychological deterent.....if you do the math, you find that spending 250gp (or 300 XP, for Limited Wish, say) is really trivial.

That's really not an appropriate argument, however. It's not like you have to spend 3% to gain the remaining 97%. Balance-wise, stoneskin should be equal to any other 4th-level spell. If I can win the fight with stoneskin, I should be able to win it with another 4th-level spell that doesn't even cost the 3%.

So, my opinion on this is that I have the general philosophy that spells should not have high gold piece costs unless it really makes sense and is required for balance. For example, the cost on raise dead is okay, but stoneskin and true seeing are just too high. IMO, they are about 5 times too high. Make it a slight deterrent, say, at 50 gp, which plays a lot better IMO. Anytime that you force the players into calculating percentages and ROI, it merely creates Suckage™.