No spell resistance vs. Orb spells? Why?

[Felix]

<Connie & Evan v. 4 Cornugons>

Nicely done.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Crush is fairly easily thwarted by Contingency-Polymorph (Colossal dragon can't crush Huge opponents), Contingency-DimDoor, or Projected Image, just looking at core spells. Not sure if a dragon can crush flying opponents; that sounds like a DM judgement call to me.

Also much like Orb spells are easily thwarted by Contingency-Mirror Image.

DS

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Also much like Orb spells are easily thwarted by Contingency-Mirror Image.

True. But wizards have higher-level spells available than even a much higher-CR dragon. The only chromatic dragons that can cast Contingency are CR 20 and up, whereas a wizard gets that spell at level 11. And because dragons cast as sorcerers, it takes up a very valuable "spells known" slot that could be used for something like Greater Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field, or (for the ones with cleric spells) Harm and Heal. So it generally won't be "easily" thwarted by a dragon. Buying scrolls is effectively a cost of 150 gp per day, or 54,750 gp per year. A CR 20 dragon would spend its entire hoard in 4.4 years using this tactic for protection.

Now Antimagic Field: that's a great dragon tactic to thwart the orbs, assuming you have Sudden Widen so the field covers your entire space. And assuming the DM doesn't rule that the orbs are unaffected by AMF. I *think* you can Widen an AMF, although technically that would be increasing both the range and the area.

 

[James McMurray]

It can be proven true that the average touch AC in the SRD is ~10.5 and 93+% of creatures there have touch AC 14 or less.

Hence, it isn't opinion.

That's for supporting my POV.

Who said it was an opinion? I said that I didn't believe the numbers and was too lazy to check them. I never said they were an opinion.

What does it matter what the average dragon touch AC is?

Orb spells also make the SC "Ray of Deanimation" spell useless. If the Ray is balanced, the orbs should not be.

I agree. That ray definitely blows chunks.

'Orbs optimal' encounters with 1-3 Opponents: 44/74 = 59.5%
'AoE optimal' encounters with 5+ opponents: 21/74 = 28%

I consider area effects to be optimal in fights with 4+ opponents, and a wash at 3 opponents. The actual usability of each depends too much on terrain.

Ok, let's stack the deck against the Orbs instead. (I'll try and show all my math.)

Why is a character that relieds on bypassing SR not getting both SP and GSP? And why is either caster using cold against a devil? Presumably they'd both have knowledge (planes)?

Notably, they do have better SR for their CR than the dragons did

So what you're saying is that if you're stackingt he deck against orbs you have to find a monster with higher than average SR and energy resistance (which is multiplied by the number of monsters when taking off area damage) for it's CR in order to make it so that the evoker does only slightly more damage? LOL

If you were really being honest about wanting to stack the deck you'd use 4+ monsters with low reflex saves and no SR. How about 4 elder earth elementals? Their +7 reflex save and no SR means the evoker does around 200 damage compared to the conjurer's 75-ish.

 

[James McMurray]

You've fabricated a number for all touch ACs, and now you are lieing about how you did it in an attempt to make a point.

That's too bad. I guess I'll be responding to other posters from now on.

You mean to say you thought I was serious? Of course I was making the point that telling someone if they can't disprove someone's numbers they automatically agree with them. I assumed that would have been obvious to everyone reading due to the fact that I chose 50 (or thereabouts) as my supposed average touch AC. I could have used fewer books and a more reasonable number if I'd actually been trying to lie about it and use the inflated average as an argument int he ongoing orb debate. You'll note I never once referred to it except while making a point about the burden of proof being on the one making the claim.

 

[James McMurray]

Now Antimagic Field: that's a great dragon tactic to thwart the orbs, assuming you have Sudden Widen so the field covers your entire space. And assuming the DM doesn't rule that the orbs are unaffected by AMF. I *think* you can Widen an AMF, although technically that would be increasing both the range and the area.

It would require a house rule for the AMF to negate the orbs, as they're instantaneous creations. AMF is an emanation, so you can definitely widen it.

 

[Felix]

You'll note I never once referred to it except while making a point about the burden of proof being on the one making the claim.

You'll note that those who have crunched the numbers have offered multiple times to submit their calculations to your scrutiny, but you have not yet publicly accepted.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

It would require a house rule for the AMF to negate the orbs, as they're instantaneous creations. AMF is an emanation, so you can definitely widen it.

Ah, that's right, the little balls of force piling up.
In your opinion, would the orbs affect incorporeal creatures? On the one hand, they are immune to all nonmagical attack forms (except holy water if undead). On the other, they can be harmed by spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities.

 

[Rystil Arden]

If you were really being honest about wanting to stack the deck you'd use 4+ monsters with low reflex saves and no SR.

Go back to the post of mine that you quoted (558) and read past the part you quoted--I already mentioned that I knew someone would say that, and I preemptively told you why it is irrelevant.

 

[shmoo2]

Why is a character that relieds on bypassing SR not getting both SP and GSP? And why is either caster using cold against a devil? Presumably they'd both have knowledge (planes)?

Spell Penetration was already an extra feat for the Evoker. I gave the Conjurer no specific boost feats at all. The Evoker needs even MORE to be competitive with the Orbs?

They are using Cold because they know the Devils are immune to Fire and Acid, and also have Electricity Resistance 10. Cold is actually a pretty good choice.

So what you're saying is that if you're stackingt he deck against orbs you have to find a monster with higher than average SR and energy resistance (which is multiplied by the number of monsters when taking off area damage) for it's CR in order to make it so that the evoker does only slightly more damage? LOL

If you were really being honest about wanting to stack the deck you'd use 4+ monsters with low reflex saves and no SR. How about 4 elder earth elementals? Their +7 reflex save and no SR means the evoker does around 200 damage compared to the conjurer's 75-ish.

What Rystil said.

But also:
This is hardly a cherry picked encounter to optimize orb spells.

The dragon example was 'rejected' because it was against a single opponent, and with a very low touch AC.

I brought forth an example against multiple opponents, with high touch ACs (the highest available at that CR in the MM).

Now you are rejecting this one, based on the opponents having Energy Resistance and SR.
Lots of fence post moving, again.

Also, the elder earth elementals are CR 11. One of the points of the high-powered-ness of orb spells (at high level) is that almost everything at say, CR 15+ has SR and multiple energy resistances.

If evokers are only balanced in encounters with multiple high touch AC, low SR, low Energy Resistance opponents (Air Elementals?) then I think the overpowered-ness of orbs is evident.