Rystil Arden said:
You can say that all you like, but making a claim of truth without backing in does not prove it to be so. If that was the case, the pro-Orb people would have won this argument long ago
I think I've made clear why I feel my points are true, but we can go back and forth. En garde!
1) Of course it isn't the end of the world--it's an RPG. Claiming that others are saying this is a strawman. However, the Orb spells make the average game of D&D less fun. That is all it takes to make a fix a good idea--you don't need the end of the world.
I haven't put words in anyone else's mouth, I'm just stating what I consider a fact. Just because the orbs don't acknowledge SR -- since the magic involved conjured non-magical substances -- doesn't spell 'end-game' to me. Yes, it's a powerful option, but one that has very elementary defenses.
3) The no-SR is not balanced at all by single-target restriction. You yourself mention Polar Ray. That spell allows SR and is single-target.
Polar Ray does 10d6 more damage and similarly offers no save, however; no one is complaining about that here. Why? SR, apparently, and maybe spell level. SR is a golden idol that to tread on is tantamount to insulting? Really, is polar ray's spell level saving it from scrutiny? If the orb spells were 7th level or 8th level, with an appropriate increase in damage (say 20d6 for the elements and 15d6 for the force) would this thread be 10 pages long?
4) I know you haven't read the whole thread--my point is that we need to not go into crazy splatbooks to make factors either way that probably cancel each other out. If you have to do all that just because of one spell, you've already proven that the Orbs are broken.
No need for the splatbooks; stick to the Core Rules. And you don't
have to do it, but the very fact that it could be done will only go to prove
nothing but the fact that two resourceful and clever debaters will never win the other over to their side given a strong enough well of resources from which to draw their counter points. This means that the orb argument is dead in the water and comes down to subjective scrutiny. In my mind, the orb spells are too easily countered to cause such a fuss. But that argument goes out like a moth in a flame as soon as someone acquiesces to Twin and Admix.
6) Huh? Twin and Energy Admixture are not that good. Honest! Particularly if you think Empower is balanced. Empower gives you 50% extra damage for +2 levels. Admixture gives you +100% damage for +4 levels--it's exactly the same gain to cost ratio, just expanded. Energy Admixture + Fireball gives you 20d6 as a level 7 spell. So does just casting Delayed Blast Fireball. The feats are perfectly fine.
Yes, the math looks good on paper, but these feats stack until the cows come home. Admix fire and acid? Sure. Empower twice? No. Twin and admix? Sure. Empower more than once?
Lemme check one more time...
... uh... no. With a good setup these feats start to look cheesy; take them into epic and they stink up the whole house. Twin is broken because it's Quicken without the loss of another spell slot or swift action for the round. Yeah, it only doubles up one spell, so tactical options are out, but who needs tactics when you're flinging two admixed orbs with each action?
So, no: Admix and Twin are not fine, they are strongly open to serious abuse and are the primary cause of spells like polar ray or the orbs looking too powerful on the table. But its not their fault, these spells. It's the fault of boxed-in DMs and cheesy metamagic feats.
