Orbs vs. Evocations II- with level by level data

[Rystil Arden]

Nah, I've never liked the 15d6 vs 10d6 fireball vs. cone of cold example either, or the 20d6 admixtured fireball vs 13d6 delayed blast fireball, etc. etc. etc.

They seem to break the spell level system in fundamental ways to me, or at least the ones that scale damage do. I was happy to see 3.5 take away stacking empowers on one spell, but admixture (for example) just basically puts it back in.

EDIT: That said, I'm not sure I'm comfortable totally removing them in a game that has psion blasters in it.

Hmm...that's interesting. Keep in mind the trade-off: The 15d6 Fireball has 2 lower DC, and the 20d6 Fireball has 4 lower DC, and every caster level increase continues to catch Cone of Cold up to the 15d6 Fireball in damage with the higher DC, ditto for Delayed Blast Fireball to the 20d6 Fireball. In my mind, this is an extremely fair trade in those cases. It isn't fair for Orbs, in a sense, because they don't have any piper to pay with DCs being lower. Let's look at an example case of the 15d6 Fireball vs the 10d6 Cone of Cold using the chart for Ref saves--

At level 10, enemy Ref saves average at +8. Your DC will probably be around 19 on the Fireball and 21 on Cone of Cold. Thus, you expect 39.375 from the Fireball and 28 from the Cone of Cold. Not quite as bad, right?

Now we'll look at Admixture--

At level 13, enemy Ref saves average at +10. Your DC will probably be around 19 for the Fireball and 23 for the Delayed Blast. Thus, you expect 49 damage from the 20d6 Fireball and 36.4 from the Delayed Blast.

But for both of these cases, the Fireball with metamagic never improves, and the normal spell adds ~3 to damage with each level increase

Also, note that if the enemy has Evasion, the numbers jump even more in favour of the non-metamagicked version. The 13d6 DBF does more damage to the level 13 Rogue NPC in the DMG than the 20d6 Fireball.

 

[Slaved]

I think that both of them would have Empower Spell, though.

That said, if you must add in an extra feat to give the Disintegrate-user an added advantage, I do agree that Spell Focus would be much more fair for comparison than Sudden Metamagic. Spell Penetration works too.

This is not a comparison of one build to another though, it is a comparison of one spell to another.

They are of different levels though, which makes it tough. If you do it straight out of the box then there are problems because one guy is using a higher level slot, but that comparison could tell us how those spells do relative to one another. Spell versus spell comparison.

If we give one guy a feat so that the same slot is used though then we have another problem, one guy got to use a feat while the other did not. Spell + feat versus spell comparison.

If we give both guys one feat and have them use the same slot then that is about the closest one on one comparison I think we could make that might address the power level of that slot. Spell + feat versus spell + feat comparison.

I think that each of these tells us something different. All of the results tell us something but I think that the second option tells us the least useful information about the spells and effects themselves.

Spell penetration is definately a good idea though! spell focus or spell penetration, depending on taste. I think that spell penetration would make the average damage go higher in this comparison though.

 

[Nail]

And would you add SR: Yes?

Yep.

(This is how our group currently plays it.)

 

[Plane Sailing]

But it does make an interesting comparison with disintegrate. Does anyone feel that disintegrate is a good spell to take and use against big bad guys?

Since the 3.5 revision, no I don't think disintegrate is worth taking. When it was save or die, the touch attack plus fort save plus SR was OK. Now it does an average of 7 points per level. It wouldn't even kill the NPC fighter of the same level if he failed his save.

In 3.0 wizards got their save or die (disintegrate) a level before the clerics did (destruction). When do wizards get a save or die now?

 

[Rystil Arden]

Since the 3.5 revision, no I don't think disintegrate is worth taking. When it was save or die, the touch attack plus fort save plus SR was OK. Now it does an average of 7 points per level. It wouldn't even kill the NPC fighter of the same level if he failed his save.

In 3.0 wizards got their save or die (disintegrate) a level before the clerics did (destruction). When do wizards get a save or die now?

As a level 4 spell (Phantasmal Killer), three levels before Clerics get Destruction, but Destruction isn't the lowest-level Cleric killing spell anyway, Slay Living is as a level 5 spell

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Yeah, the Sudden feats are their own kind of brokenness by not increasing spell level.

What the?

Sudden metamagic trades unlimited-uses-a-day for not-increasing-spell-level.

Who would ever take a feat that let them use metamagic once a day WITH a level penalty?

DS

 

[Rystil Arden]

What the?

Sudden metamagic trades unlimited-uses-a-day for not-increasing-spell-level.

Who would ever take a feat that let them use metamagic once a day WITH a level penalty?

DS

No one, of course.

What he's saying is that in his opinion, breaking the level cap is still broken, even if you only have limited uses. Just because a feat has limited uses per day does not mean we have to accept that it is balanced--imagine a feat that killed all enemy targets in line of sight (no save, no SR, and not a death effect) once a day. That is still not a fair feat, even though it is limited by uses per day.

 

[Grog]

As a level 4 spell (Phantasmal Killer), three levels before Clerics get Destruction, but Destruction isn't the lowest-level Cleric killing spell anyway, Slay Living is as a level 5 spell

Phantasmal Killer isn't a save or die spell, it's a two-save or die spell.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Just because a feat has limited uses per day does not mean we have to accept that it is balanced--imagine a feat that killed all enemy targets in line of sight (no save, no SR, and not a death effect) once a day. That is still not a fair feat, even though it is limited by uses per day.

Really...because I would TOTALLY allow that feat in my campaign. And everyone would have it at 1st level. And the entire world would implode.

Back to reality....

We are comparing Empower with Sudden Empower. You can already Sudden Empower three times a day by purchasing a metamagic rod, so doing so once a day without a magic item seems fair to me.

Am I the only person who plays DnD that says to himself "Man, there used to be a day where a wizard could expect to kill someone with direct damage." If the internet existed in its current form when 1st edition came out would be having these same discussions about Fireball and Disintegrate because god forbid they can kill monsters with one shot.

DS

 

[Rystil Arden]

Phantasmal Killer isn't a save or die spell, it's a two-save or die spell.

Quite true. And Disintegrate 3.0 was an attack roll, then save or die spell, but since PS listed it as a save or die spell, it seemed clear he didn't mean it as literally as you took it