Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThirdWizard" data-source="post: 2875164" data-attributes="member: 12037">It's a ranged touch attack. Compare to an archer as Benimoto says.Archer has to roll an attack roll against the enemy's full AC, not just touch. At first level the archer does around 1d8+1 damage.The wizard's spell damage will attack the touch AC of the opponent and thus deal less damage, 1d6 damage. At 2nd level the wizard can attack two opponents and deal 1d6 to each or 2d6 to one vs. the archer's 1d8+1.At third level the archer gets 2d8+2 damage (rapid shot so -2 attack) and the wizard goes up to 3 rays at 1d6 damage each. Things are keeping up with each other quite nicely.Now the question becomes, since the wizard is giving up more resources than the archer, shouldn't he be doing more damage than the archer? Well, he is. He's rolling touch attacks so he hits more often, or more precisely, he's able to end the battle more quickly than the archer. If the wizard is ending the battle more quickly, then he doesn't need to do more damage to be equally as useful to a party.EDIT: Oh yeah, 3d6 damage is out, because its practically an automatic kill at a range. Make it a melee attack that has to hit full AC and you're golden. I don't even see 1st level fighters and barbarians doing 3d6 melee damage per hit.</blockquote>