No spell resistance vs. Orb spells? Why?

[James McMurray]

So do someone's work for them or accede the point? Interesting idea.

The average touch AC of all creatures in the MM2, MM3, MM4, FF, Creature Catalogs 1&2, tome of Horrors, and Dungeon Magazine special features combined is 49.95. Orbs blow against anything noncore.

I'm assuming you'll be conceding the point that orbs should probably be powered up a bit just to make them worthwhile in a game where so many creatures are so hard to hit with them?

 

[Notmousse]

Huh?

I don't believe your numbers.

Okay then, how can you say that with the analysis in front of you? I thought that's why you said the dragon analysis was unfair--because you saw that the Conjurer destroyed the dragon.

Because it was blatently one sided. Single target, low touch AC (as it was appearently surprised or too stupid to have scintilating scales ready), non-resistant to damage, high saves, still a single target (this point is big enough to list twice).

Surprise rounds could go to either side. It's only fair to nullify that possibility and just roll Init for both of them.

I have a problem swallowing that a couple of blaster build mages are going to get the drop on a creature with 40+ listen and spot ranks (white dragon, the weakest dragon, CR 21 IIRC).

Are you saying that I'm lying to you or that standard logic is false?

I feel your logic is false (or flawed if you prefer), so please feel silly and offended if you like.

 

[hong]

So do someone's work for them or accede the point? Interesting idea.

Ah. This must be a new meaning of "do someone's work for them" that I wasn't previously aware of.

 

[hong]

I don't believe your numbers.

See, not believing numbers is a privilege to be earned.

Because it was blatently one sided. Single target, low touch AC (as it was appearently surprised or too stupid to have scintilating scales ready), non-resistant to damage, high saves, still a single target (this point is big enough to list twice).

The bulk of high-level encounters involve only a few opponents, rather than an army (and indeed, sometimes just the one). In this case, taking out one opponent is weakening them by a significant margin.

I have a problem swallowing that a couple of blaster build mages are going to get the drop on a creature with 40+ listen and spot ranks (white dragon, the weakest dragon, CR 21 IIRC).

D00d, stop it. So what if the dragon gets init. Are you suggesting that it's going to do enough to take out the mages, plus their party members, in one round? Because that's all that's required; for the mage to get one attack off. Are you suggesting that all the opponents in your game are powerful enough to regularly TPK the party in one round?

 

[Land Outcast]

See when you open a door and just say "Yeesh! I DON'T want to get in there!"?
Well, this thread has turned exactly into that.

Don't take it as an insult, it's just an observation.


EDIT: But if you feel insulted, I assume it is because you do recognize you have earned the right to be insulted.

 

[Notmousse]

If you don't prove them wrong, then you have conceeded the point.

It's really quite simple.

What?! Hold up, so the default is a widgit is broken unless it's proved not to be broken? I just don't buy that.

 

[Land Outcast]

If you don't prove them wrong, then you have conceeded the point.

It's really quite simple.

What?! Hold up, so the default is a widgit is broken unless it's proved not to be broken? I just don't buy that.

No man, it's the other way around:
Unless you show your reasons for stating something is wrong, then you are admitting it is right (or implying your reasons aren't good enough, which is quite similar).

 

[PallidPatience]

It's more along the lines of this:

If a dragon is attacking your town and you do nothing to stop it, it will destroy the town.

Rystil Arden is the dragon. Your position is your town. His examples, numbers, and arguments are his fiery-breath, talons, and claws. If you don't offer a defense for your town against his fiery-breath, talons, and claws, your town will fall.

Or, put another way, where's your counterargument? Where's your proof that his numbers are wrong? If you just don't believe them (even after he's explained how he got them), state why.

 

[Notmousse]

The bulk of high-level encounters involve only a few opponents, rather than an army (and indeed, sometimes just the one).

In your campaign, possibly in many campaigns, but not in all campaigns to be sure. I know I prefer larger numbers of opponents as it keeps people from the whole bumrush the big guy and supernova attitudes.

D00d, stop it. So what if the dragon gets init.

Then said dragon does 42 points of damage (still white dragon here, weakest of the true dragons) and the 39 hp mages both drop.

Are you suggesting that it's going to do enough to take out the mages, plus their party members, in one round?

They have additional party members now? I didn't get the memo. I could have sworn the idea was that these two guys (mostly the conjurer, because it's broken) were going to bring down the dragon 9 CR above their level (which I don't recall being specified) all on their own because the orbs were broken.

 

[Felix]

You expect me to check your math for you?

But if you don't believe them, don't you ground your basis of disbelief in that you have already checked the numbers?

Or do you disbelieve Rystal Arden's numbers on other grounds?

RA argues (very well) that the orbs are overpowered because they do X damage in Y situations, while evocations only manage Z damage in the same situations. Then he provides numbers.

Do you argue against the numbers he provides (as Notmousse seems to be doing), or do you argue against the hypothesis behind the numbers (If the numbers show greater damage for orbs than evocations in listed situations, then orbs are overpowered)?

Because if it's the second, then there's no need to argue if he's done his arithmetic correctly.