Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Al'Kelhar" data-source="post: 3495709" data-attributes="member: 7884">I missed the original discussion on the merits or otherwise of the orb spells, but thought I'd just put in my 2c.While the excellent stats provided above establish the relative benefit of orb spells over evocation spells, it seems clear to me that the designers of the spells simply realised that SR combined with energy resistance and escalating hit points in 3E truly stuffed the archetype blaster mage, and wanted to compensate somehow without revising the SR mechanic - which by the time Complete Arcane came out, was far too deeply embedded in the ruleset.  That is, I reckon the orb spells are a deliberate attempt to make damage-dealing arcane spellcasters viable at higher levels.  The designers did this by shoe-horning a type of spell - the instantaneous effect energy damage spell - into the wrong school of magic.  And even then they broke the general spell design principle that energy damage Conjurations are subject to SR.I've adopted three house rules in order to properly categorise energy damage spells and make their use sensible at higher levels:- spells causing energy or force damage instantaneously (even if they have non-instantaneous secondary effects, e.g. nausea, deafness, stunning etc.) are Evocation spells;- spells causing energy or force damage over time are Conjuration spells, and are always subject to SR (which is checked the first time the resistant creature becomes subject to the spell, e.g. by entering its area of effect);- the energy damage from Evocation spells is not subject to SR (although any non-eneregy damage secondary effect is).Cheers, Al'Kelhar</blockquote>

Verification