"Over the Top" Spells

[Mordane76]

Complacency?

Perhaps players have just become complacent -- they find a tactic that works and stick with it. And DMs are forced to either outlaw the tactic, combat the tactic, or stop playing the game. I think a lot of things boil down to people wanting to win, and once they find that perfect combination that allows them the upper hand, and then they stick with it.

 

[CypherSmith]

I have actually been in a game where the fly spell took a lot of the fun out of it for the non-mage PCs. This was a mid-level group, 9th level or so, and the characters were supposed to be privateers. Well, our mage had the Extend Spell feat, and improved invisibility. When we got near a ship that we were going to attack, he would go invis, fly up, and cast extended fireballs. At this point, he is so far away from the ship he is fireballing that it is very hard to figure out where the fireball is coming from. Basically, he roasts the crew. It got even worse when one of the characters in the party decided, quite in character, that she would retire. The player then brought in a mage who was designed to use these kinds of tactics. It got ugly, and those of us who were not able to get in on the fun were getting pretty angry. The game was no longer fun for us, and it ended (although that's only part of why the game ended, the other reason is that two of the players moved).

 

[Old Fezziwig]

I think I'd be pretty annoyed by this use (abuse?) of the fly spell, too, if it happened in every combat (my party's still only level two, so we aren't at the point where fly's an issue).

Some quick thoughts, though —

Maybe alter the spell's duration or split the spell into two spells — limited fly and fly (or something like that — I'm thinking of this on the spot). The first could require more concentration, a lower maneuverability, less speed. The second would be the normal spell. This could have some other ramifications that would be bothersome, but I haven't given it much thought. The other metagame solutions I'd suggest would be (1) nerfing it or (2) talking to the players and explaining the problem and why those tactics make things not fun. Of course, they might resent either of these. And they might resent the stuff below, too...

If your campaign has recurring villains or something like that, eventually someone will hear about or see the tactic and prepare for it, even if it's only by summoning fiendish hawks or remembering to bring missile weapons. It's not something I'd do every time, but once in a while, here and there, people will be prepared (particularly if they're smart). Granted, this gets into the whole thing where the DM and the players become adversaries or at least competitors, but I really do believe that enemies should be prepared sometimes. As a connected idea, although people seem dead set against this, what's good for the goose... The PCs (if they're in a typical campaign world) likely aren't the first people to figure this stuff out.

Weather and environmental. Sometimes you just don't want to fly — snow, rain, fog, wind — all these things would effect the viability of those tactics. Are all these combats taking place in open fields or in huge rooms with extremely high ceilings? I'm only kind of being facetious, but it seems to me, again, that these tactics won't work as well inside/underground, in dense forest/jungle/swamps, or even in cities. Or if they do, what about the effect of the fireballs on the environment? What if the party's fighting a battle with gnolls on a rickety rope and plank bridge suspended over a huge gorge and rapids? How does the mayor of Peopletown feel about the flying wizard firebombing her city? I guess my point in this last item is to make the environment dictate the party's tactics — they'll be able to dictate things at times, but at other times, they'll have to figure out how to deal with a different situation.

Just some thoughts...

Best,
tKL

 

[Xarlen]

I agree with Kaj and Mordane, on this one.

 

[Indigo7]

I'm with ya, Paul. It can give a little too much superhero silliness to the game when fighters are regularly swooping around like sword-swinging kites. What bugs me, however, is the standard combo of fly+invisibility so the mage can float around unseen and unthreatened until he takes a potshot at an unsuspecting baddie with a lightning bolt. It probably wouldn't bother me so much if it weren't so damn common - apparently, it's one of the earliest rules drummed into apprentice wizards' heads.

Likewise! None can deny the effectiveness of the fly/invlisible tactic, but it's not very heroic, is it? That sounds more like an evil scourge, not a champion of good and order.

It seems that more players approach the game like a video game which must be "defeated" by any means possible, rather than approaching it like a piece of interactive, heroic fiction.

 

[Inez Hull]

I don't think Fly is ridiculous. There are some situations where you Need it. But you can limit the usages, to have it happen only Once in a great while, to up the mystique of it.

Just had a thought. In quite a bit of fantasy fiction, notably LOTR off the top off my head, wizards can wield tremendous powers but choose not to most of the time. Is there an in game way of representing this kind of magic? Perhaps XP penalties for spells which break the laws of nature in obvious ways. I might have to check out White Wolf's Mage on this, from what I've heard it has great rules for balancing magic based on how overt and obvious it is.

 

[Eben]

The point of this thread should be that the Vanceian magic system in d&d is not generic enough. The good news for you is that d20 is versatile enough to allow different magic systems, that may or may not be more fitting for your campaign. The ones i know are Wheel of time and Slaine, but I'm sure there are others.

The easiest solution is to ban some spells. The way we play (since our AD&D days) is that th DM has to okay spells before you can use them. Reason: we also found out that Fly was just silly in some campaign settings.

Inez, a way of achieving this would be to tie magic in with items. Thats the way I see magic working in LotR. Gandalf is powerfull because he has a nice staff and has one of the Elven rings (fire I believe) (not to forget Glamdring.) Galadriel manages to protect Lothlorien because she also is a ring bearer and has stuff like her mirror, ... Even the Valar themselves work their magic through the creation of different "items."
You could translate this into d20, by giving magic through items and keeping the spells per level. Essentialy the items would replace the spellbook. That way a DM would have greater control over the spells a player can select.

 

[Darkness]

I dislike teleport. Or rather, its range; I have no issue at all with something like dimension door.

 

[isoChron]

We (7Characters at 13th level) had an encounter with 3 Wizards in the plains. Open sky ! First they used enlarged Fireballs, then they hasted, casted improved invisibility and next round fly. Later Stoneskin and some other protections.
They took us out like sitting ducks. No chance to find them. We didn't know where they were so it was hard to ready spells on them. Most of the time they were out of range for See Invisibility. Faerie fire caught one of them but only one ! Close Combat Body Guards kept the fighters busy. One mage concentrated on counterspelling our mage. One mage threw out Summon Monster and Wall Of Force.
We were doomed but luckily the great red wyrm decided to intervene (we called him before the battle started). So we survived ... this time.

Another example: Hasted, Flying, Imp. Invis. Wizard with Maximized, Quickened and Empowered Magic Missile and a second Empowered Maximized Magic Missile in the surprise round. Took out our wizard in a second. Next round he won Initiative and blasted the second mage with similar spells and a fireball took the rest of the group in dire straits.
He used no special or fancy spells, just the ones described and killed our group alone, without support. OK, we survived because it was a special kind of dream, but in reality (D&D-reality) we couldn't survive one wizard.

Hm, that seems no fun but it's unreasonable for a DM not to play a wizard as effective as he could. Remember the high INT of the wizards in higher levels. No way to play a wizard stupid.

Just a little comment on magic in D&D ...

By the way, I play a fighter type, so I can blame all wizards ...
Next time I play a wizard I will blame the fighters for unrealistic high damage every round ....

Bye

 

[Oni]

I wouldn't be unhappy to see the duration on spells like fly or improved invisibility changed to something like concentration light, i.e. require a concentration check of some sort to keep up while casting another spell. It would make casters a little more judicious in how many spells they fling standing in the middle of enemy territory or 300 ft up in the air.