No spell resistance vs. Orb spells? Why?

[FireLance]

A save negates would be better than nothing (though it would weaken them even more than just allowing SR), but all in all, you can keep them super-strong but not game-destructive if you just add SR back in (and I'd suggest swapping them to Evocation for flavour, but it isn't necessary). It's a simple fix, and it keeps with the general standard of making the only SR-penetrating spells low damage or damage over time rather than Blitzkreig blasts like an Evoker would want to do.

I was thinking save for half, actually. I definitely agree that for flavor purposes you should shunt them off to Evocation if you're going to give them SR, but I don't think SR is the problem. Essentially, if a spell is broken because it ignores SR, then it's going to be broken against an opponent without SR. If the problem is high damage potential, that should be fixed directly, instead of indirectly through SR, so that the spell is better balanced for all opponents instead of a select subclass of them.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I was thinking save for half, actually. I definitely agree that for flavor purposes you should shunt them off to Evocation if you're going to give them SR, but I don't think SR is the problem. Essentially, if a spell is broken because it ignores SR, then it's going to be broken against an opponent without SR. If the problem is high damage potential, that should be fixed directly, instead of indirectly through SR, so that the spell is better balanced for all opponents instead of a select subclass of them.

The trouble is in the balancing of it--reduce it to 10d6 cap? Not enough--that has no effect on the Orb-user until level 11, and it is still an issue with 1/3 less damage even at the end. The things that are weak at Touch AC and counting on SR are still screwed.

Reflex half? Even at half damage, it can potentially be a problem, and now unless they have Evasion, you know they're taking at least some--things that will fail a Reflex save on something other than 1 are more common than things with Evasion, so this is kind of like nerfing it to 2/3 again (1/2 assuming everyone always make their save guaranteed except for a 1, +1/6 for the net gain of times when they don't make the save minus the Evasioners = 4/6 = 2/3). The good news is that many of the things counting on SR have good Reflex and will usually take half--in a game where you changed it this way, I would expect Ring of Evasion to become an item that every dragon owned (and perhaps she owns two in case one of them is deactivated for a round by Dispel magic).

~~~

Fixing the SR is easy, and though as you mention, it still does a lot of damage against monsters with low touch AC and no SR / resistances, so does Metamagicked Scorching Ray, which is only a level 2 spell. Those monsters are designed knowing that they don't have any of those things, and they have CR accordingly. The trouble comes when the things are balanced not expecting the ultimate nuke to ignore SR (Dragons, for one, are screwed. Golems become pathetic. The AMF defense strategy, which is a valid trade normally, is rendered laughable--was it Karinsdad or Nail who had a character bite the dust from that one, I can't remember)

 

[FireLance]

The trouble is in the balancing of it--reduce it to 10d6 cap? Not enough--that has no effect on the Orb-user until level 11, and it is still an issue with 1/3 less damage even at the end. The things that are weak at Touch AC and counting on SR are still screwed.

Reflex half? Even at half damage, it can potentially be a problem, and now unless they have Evasion, you know they're taking at least some--things that will fail a Reflex save on something other than 1 are more common than things with Evasion, so this is kind of like nerfing it to 2/3 again (1/2 assuming everyone always make their save guaranteed except for a 1, +1/6 for the net gain of times when they don't make the save minus the Evasioners = 4/6 = 2/3).

The problem with this argument seems to be the assumption that the opponent is automatically doomed if it takes any form of damage. The trade-off really is, what percent of damage is the SR expected to stop? If it's a third, dropping average damage by a third has the same effect.

Now, if we're talking scalability, and you see SR as the only mechanism that will prevent PCs from defeating opponents several CRs above their level, then yes, you find spells that ignore SR to be a problem. However, I think that the scalability problem can be addressed through giving the monster better offenses, other defences, or simply fixing the other parameters of the spell, such as the base damage, or giving it a saving throw, even if it is only for half.

Fixing the SR is easy, and though as you mention, it still does a lot of damage against monsters with low touch AC and no SR / resistances, so does Metamagicked Scorching Ray, which is only a level 2 spell. Those monsters are designed knowing that they don't have any of those things, and they have CR accordingly. The trouble comes when the things are balanced not expecting the ultimate nuke to ignore SR (Dragons, for one, are screwed. Golems become pathetic. The AMF defense strategy, which is a valid trade normally, is rendered laughable--was it Karinsdad or Nail who had a character bite the dust from that one, I can't remember)

Adjust the other spell parameters and the spells get a nice niche (good against these opponents) without being overpowered.

 

[Rystil Arden]

The problem with this argument seems to be the assumption that the opponent is automatically doomed if it takes any form of damage. The trade-off really is, what percent of damage is the SR expected to stop? If it's a third, dropping average damage by a third has the same effect.

Now, if we're talking scalability, and you see SR as the only mechanism that will prevent PCs from defeating opponents several CRs above their level, then yes, you find spells that ignore SR to be a problem. However, I think that the scalability problem can be addressed through giving the monster better offenses, other defences, or simply fixing the other parameters of the spell, such as the base damage, or giving it a saving throw, even if it is only for half.

Adjust the other spell parameters and the spells get a nice niche (good against these opponents) without being overpowered.

If you adjust it to be more like Acid Arrow (low initial damage, but damage over time--so the high-powered enemy can do something about this, or just kill you), then it would be fine. The problem is that the niche of high-damage-all-at-once-nuke-that-also-ignores-SR is a bad niche to have in a typical D&D game.

There are even other issues that would be raised by increasing the attack powers of the monsters--that Dragon is a scary beast. It's attack power is high enough already to be a terrifying opponent for a CR-appropriate party. It just isn't strong enough to win if the game has escalated to "if you can't kill them on the opener, even 9 levels lower than your CR, you lose Mr. Dragon" that Orbs bring along. If you make the Dragon even stronger offensively, then it utterly annihilates any party except those with mainly Conjurers who can kill it in the first round before it can--it becomes an escalation (one that I consider unfun): Who can kill the other in one round with its super nuke before the other team can use their supernuke?

The Orbs still would have an excellent niche if they had SR: Yes and remained ranged touch--it is easy to underestimate the advantage the Orbs have over Scorching Ray, so let's take an example. An opponent with no SR who is weak against Fire but has up Energy Resist Fire for 30 (Frost Giant Shaman say--if they had SR, like a White Dragon, it wouldn't matter for this demonstration). No crazy Thesis or anything else. Just a simple Maximised Empowered Orb of Fire + Quickened Orb of Fire vs Twinned Maximised Scorching Ray + Quickened Maximised Scorching Ray: The Orb does 193. The Scorching Rays do 54. If the enemy isn't weak against the element and just resists, the Rays do nothing at all.

 

[Twowolves]

What you're fighting in a scenario isn't relevant? I doubt I could say that to my GMs. "Y'know chief, it doesn't matter what we're fighting here, because y'see I got this spell the ENWorlders tell me makes what I'm fighting irrelevant because it's so broken. Please give me the treasure and XP now."

Wow, another dismissive position that ignores all previous evidence. Never seen that before.

Yes, you can say that what you are fighting is irrelevant, because that's the point. No save, no SR, touch attack for massive damage pretty much means that 90% of what you are fighting, if it's a lone massive foe like a dragon, is dead meat.

If it's in the scenario I want it's stats. If you can't provide them then fine.

So, if people can't provide complete stats, which in itself is absurd when you have already ignored mathematical evidence previously, then you reject ALL evidence out of hand. And of course, if such a detailed example were provided, you could just as easily wave your hands dismissively saying "well, in that ONE case, maybe", prompting a second, third, fourth, five-hundred and thirty sixth specific, fully stated out example, all for you to ignore.

Quite the opposite since it's what determines if the mages are even allowed a 14 Dex.

The fact that most examples used on these forums uses 28pt buy means nothing to you, I see. Even if it didn't, you are reaching for excuses. As long as there are enough stat points to provide a 14 dex and 18 int, the rest of the stats could be 5 and it would not be germaine to this discussion and you know it. You are blowing smoke.

I've not used any sources from a third party book yet, but, he's already used a feat from Dragon (or typed the wrong name which coincidentally happened to be a feat from dragon).

Which he's said could be ignored. You haven't used ANY sources for ANYTHING, because you haven't put up a completely statted out dragon or PCs (or what's in the dragon's hoard, or what he had for dinner, or what stars are in alignment, or any of the other nitpicky useless information you demand RA put up).

No, I wanted to know if it's sleeping.

Which is still irrelevant. Do you want to also know if the dragon is reading a book, playing checkers, or sipping tea with the ladies bridge club?

The treasure can be of immense importance. If it were all treasure of gold the dragon could have melted it into fortifications, or create a lake of molten gold over the heads of the PCs.

No, it's irrelevant. Your reaching for absurd traps and other instant death scenarios outside of what's written into the dragon's stats is not germaine to the issue of the balance of the orb spells.

A dragon with equipment equal to it's CR... That dragon would have more bling than the entire east coast rapper's ball.

Which is still irrelevant. Keep dodging any real discussion of the facts, it's funny.

I simply don't see it that way. Since this was the scenario pushed by the anti-orb position I wish to see the entirety of it before deciding if it's a broken spell when used in such biased situations.

I'm beginning to think you don't want to see the entirety of anything, because no matter what proof is put before you, you will just hand-wave it away and come up with more excuses or more pointless tangents to dismiss what's right there in front of you.

I see you STILL ignore something as simple and core as Silence, Invisibility, Teleport, or just plain Resist Energy.

 

[FireLance]

If you adjust it to be more like Acid Arrow (low initial damage, but damage over time--so the high-powered enemy can do something about this, or just kill you), then it would be fine. The problem is that the niche of high-damage-all-at-once-nuke-that-also-ignores-SR is a bad niche to have in a typical D&D game.

How about medium-to-low-damage-all-at-once-nuke-that-also-ignores-SR?

The Orbs still would have an excellent niche if they had SR: Yes and remained ranged touch

SR: Yes and ranged touch is a niche that's already been filled by scorching ray and polar ray. Melf's acid arrow fills the SR: No and ranged touch niche at low levels, but there's no similar high-level spell. Continuous damage also looks better on paper than it actually works out to be in play because (in my experience, at least) most fights don't last long enough to make it really useful.

 

[shmoo2]

Thanks to RA and Karinsdad for putting in the work to bring us all some numbers to help evaluate the spells. Add me to those who've been convinced.

How about medium-to-low-damage-all-at-once-nuke-that-also-ignores-SR?

So what were you thinking of?
1d4 per level?
or 1d6 per 2 levels?

or something else?

 

[shmoo2]

I wish I had a breakdown like this for a few adventure paths...it would be useful data for my own game! (I home-brew adventures and campaigns.)

Of the 74 encounters (in 5 adventures):

• 35 are against 1 foe,
• 6 are against 2 foes,
• 4 are against 3 foes,
• 8 are against 4 foes, and
• 21 are against larger groups.

I'd claim Orbs would be optimal on encounters up to 4 creatures; if so, Orbs are used in 72% of the encounters! That's quite a few!

Here is data for the combat encounters from the last 4 adventurers in the SCAP:

Foundation of Flame
4 farastus
2 kelubars
1 morkoth
1 red dragon

Thirteen Cages
3 farastus
3 farastus
2 vrocks
1 Gau (minotaur)
2 kelubars
2 Flamewarders
2 Flamewarders
2 Flamewarders + Ti'irok (Fire Giant)
1 Dragon
1 Cleric
1 Cleric
1 Wizard + 1 Quasit
1 Cleric + 1 Shator
2 Flamewarders
4 Flamewarders + 1 Glabrezu
2 NPCs (Ardeth + Nulin)
1 Wizard
1 Dyr'ryd (advanced Shator)

Strike on Shatterhorn
1 Yuan-ti Sorcerer + 1 Mohrg
4 Medusa rogues
1 Farastu
1 Alurad (blackguard)
1 Crystal snake
1 Vampire +1 Dread wraith
2 half iron golems
1 Xokek + 2 death slaad
2 NPCs + 2 Farastus
2 Embril (cleric) + spellweaver

Asylum
10 Farastus
1 Hexavog (advanced kelubar)
1 advanced devourer
3 hag +minions
2 Dark Myrakul + Demonflesh golem
1 Adimarchus

Earlier consensus was that 1-3 opponents advantaged orbs, 5+ advantaged AoE spells.
Of the above,
36% involve 1 opponent
71% involve 1-2 opponents
78% involve 1-3 opponents

5% (only 2) involve 5+ opponents

 

[evilbob]

Rystil: Please forgive me for not reading the last ten pages' worth of argument, but I wanted to ask a quick question about your general math. You're saying that a 15th level caster with the Maximize and Quicken Spell feats could do how much damage to a single target in one round? Noting that you can't use both feats on a single 4th level spell, I figure you are calculating 90 damage from the maximized, and then avg. 45 from the quickened spell - assuming you get no energy resistance. That's an avg. of 135, x 2 spell casters = 270. In two rounds, assuming both survived (and both had at least 2 8th level spells), you're hitting 540 avg damage (min 420, max 720). That doesn't really seem high enough to kill a CR 24 red dragon with his 610 HP (on average), although I would say that's probably going to win against a CR 21 with 449 HP. This is, of course, ignoring any existing energy resistance and the dragon's ultimate response, whatever that may be. (Granting that the dragon is a 17th caster-level sorcerer, I'd imagine that spell immunity - another 4th level spell - or globe of invulnerability would be high priorities. Well, or teleport or wish or something.)

Adding Twin Spell or Energy Admixture to the mix (both add 4 levels to a spell) doesn't change anything, because you cannot quicken or maximize a twinned or "admixtured" spell (and you would probably rather maximize than twin or admixture, since you're guarenteed max damage, and the other two options would give you average damage twice). Not to mention that two twinned or admixtured 4th level spells and two quickened 4th level spells means you'd need four 8th level spell slots - impossible for 15th level specialist wizards without some kind of ultra-specialization or extra feats (or a "brokenly" high Int bonus).

Assuming the high-CR dragon did nothing intelligent against the spellcasters (like cast a spell), nor had access to any items that would help, do you mind to do the math for me on what I may have missed that bumps the average damage of those orb spells up again?


Edit: Actually, do you also mind to do the math on why the dragon couldn't kill both casters in one round? A 15th level caster with a 12 Con will have an average of 54 HP. I'm guessing that they would not have evasion, and also could not, on average, make a DC 38 reflex save, meaning the dragon's breath attack would do an average of 110 points of damage to them. Assuming 30 points of energy resistance, that's still more than enough to kill both (on average).

 

[James McMurray]

Yet more evidence that the brokenness (or lack thereof) for single target spells is at least partially dependent on the campaign style. Spells that are advantageous in less than half of the last five encounters from AoW are advantageous in over 3/4 of the last 4 adventures in SC.