Pissed about the reduction of the Spell Focus Feats

[Zogg]

As I've already said, Free the Slaves, a +2 cloak of resistance costs a measly 4K gold. It offers a +2 to ALL saves. No need to "bump three ability scores" or take 3 feats. Furthermore, every PC has at least 1 "good save" - and so really they only need to take the 2 feats that bump their "bad saves" and you can quickly see how useless the new SF/GSF becomes.

So really, I'd like a good feat or two with that frickin' cheese you are offering. You got any?

 

[Grog]

I got the point. A high-level wizard's spells are more powerful. They are not supposed to work 50% of the time.

So are you saying that, as spells get more and more powerful, they should work less and less often to balance things out?

Because if so, then the wizard never really improves relative to the enemies he faces. He has exactly the same effectiveness at 20th level as he did at 1st level; the only difference is you've introduced a lot more randomness into the equation.

Now, I don't like save or die spells. I would have been happy if WotC had done away with all of them in 3.5 (for example, they could have made Finger of Death do Con damage instead of killing outright). But if you mean to use high SR as a way to balance save or die spells, all you're doing is really screwing over wizards who don't use those spells. And I don't think that's very fair, myself.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Cloaks of resistance are needed to retain the save to DC parity that existed at level 1.

They are cheap because they are needed to be used by all to simply keep saves competitive regardless of abilities.

No Zog, no cheese for you.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Grog

So are you saying that, as spells get more and more powerful, they should work less and less often to balance things out?

Because if so, then the wizard never really improves relative to the enemies he faces. He has exactly the same effectiveness at 20th level as he did at 1st level; the only difference is you've introduced a lot more randomness into the equation.

The fighter's attack bonus goes up, and his opponent's AC goes up. His damage goes up... and his opponent's hit points go up.

The wizard's save DC goes up, his opponent's saving throws go up. His spells get nastier (eg Dominate Monster is nastier than Hold Monster) so his opponents get special resistances (eg SR).

What Reflex save-or-consequences spells are there?

Otiliuke's Resilient Sphere is the one that comes to mind ... but of course that won't work on a Huge creature.

The titan also has a pretty good Will save.

Yes, and the titan is an outsider with three good saves and SR. It's obvious that some challenges will be harder on the wizard than the fighter, and vice versa.

IME most creatures, even at high CR, have a poor save, and the wizard will defeat a creature a lot more than 12.7% of the time with a single spell.

I think the titan is a confounding variable in this discussion, due to it's obviously anti-magical nature. I really wish WotC would release some more non-outsiders.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Half of the problem is monster design ... far too many monsters have wimpy ACs and wimpy saves. Of course, a full-round attack is a lot less effective than a save-or-consequences spell.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I would say that depends on both the damage the full attack does, and the consequences of the spell.

I've seen fighters on the 'net who can do 400+ damage a round, without crits, but you need 12 different supplements to do it.

The only way a core-only fighter can do that kind of damage is if he's fighting an ooze, with a two-handed weapon, using Power Attack.

Generally speaking, dominating a creature is a lot more effective than killing it.

As for Hold Monster ... it's a 5th-level spell. It isn't supposed to be as good as finger of death but with a Will save.

 

[Darklone]

As I've already said, Free the Slaves, a +2 cloak of resistance costs a measly 4K gold. It offers a +2 to ALL saves. No need to "bump three ability scores" or take 3 feats. Furthermore, every PC has at least 1 "good save" - and so really they only need to take the 2 feats that bump their "bad saves" and you can quickly see how useless the new SF/GSF becomes.

So really, I'd like a good feat or two with that frickin' cheese you are offering. You got any?

Have you ever heard about campaigns where the players can't go shopping what they want? Neither can they build all the items that they want?
And no, these campaigns could be run strictly by the rules.

If your DM runs a campaign with titans as most encountered monsters, then it's not a SF/GSF problem that your wizard is useless.

 

[Al]

Have you ever heard about campaigns where the players can't go shopping what they want? Neither can they build all the items that they want?

Rarely, but these would injure the wizards as well, since their save DCs cannot be augmented by headbands, tomes et al. Indeed, since monster saves are reasonably static (i.e. not dependent on items), this may even hamper wizards in the long run.

The fighter's attack bonus goes up, and his opponent's AC goes up. His damage goes up... and his opponent's hit points go up.

True, but then opponents with high AC and high hit points are the fighter's equivalent of an opponent with good saves and SR. It seems odd that whenever a fighter analysis is taken in mind he seems to be fighting equivalent fighters or martial classes; if the wizard goes up against monks or outsiders, it's apparently a flawed example. Some consistency, please.

Cloaks of resistance are needed to retain the save to DC parity that existed at level 1.

Which means that, presumably, Luckstones and Ioun Stones are in addition to that parity. What could match that I wonder- perhaps a special feat that gives a +2 to DCs?

3.0 D&D requires the spellcaster to boost one ability with magic items to improve DCs and two feats to bolster them by 4.

No, that would be sixteen feats to bolster his DCs by 4. Two feats can bolster his DCs *from one school* by 4. Not every spell memorised will be from that school. Not every spell from that school will be useful in all situations. And in any event, I've already conceded GSF.

Oh joy. Find me a rogue who can make a Fortitude save, average +20, at 20th-level, and I'll show you a nerfed wizard.

Base save: +6. Cloak of Res: +5. Luckstone: +1. Pale Ioun Stone: +1. Constitution 18 (base 12, +6 item): +4. Great Fortitude: +2. Is +19 good enough? Given that a wizard with standard Int 16, all level ability raises put in Int a +5 tome and a +6 headband (at roughly triple the cost of the rogue's items) has a spell DC of 30 for his top-level spells, that's a 50/50 chance to save- on the rogue's worst save (NB Will saves can be partially circumvented/offset via Slippery Mind).

Now let's see your nerfed wizard .

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Nup, I don't buy this sixteen feats (14 actually because divination has only detect thoughts). The reality is that the wizard will primarily use one school where the bulk of their favourite spells are.

The big deal is the spellcaster pumping one stat while the defending spellcaster has to pump three.

Luckstones and Ioun stones are more expensive and give smaller bonuses than cloaks of resistance. Freshly made higher level characters will not always have them for that reason. In response to these items there is a feat you can take to boost DCs, heighten spell.

But with GSF giving +4 to DCs noone would take heighten spell would they? Pretty similar to the haste/quicken scenario.

 

[Darklone]

That lvl20 rogue... well. Does he have money for haste/fly items left?
I still think these comparisons are flawed... Sorry, I never had such characters with a shopping list of "must have" magic items.

Strangely, this resulted in apparently better balance.

 

[ruleslawyer]

So every Wizard in your world has Spell Penetration, GSP, SF(Evoke), SF(Trans), SF(Ench) and one or two GSFs?

Does every single Wizard need to take Spell Focuses and Penetrations? Does any Wiz that spends his feats on MM or IC die horribly?

Are you really saying that there is only one way to build an effective Wizard?

Why, Yes! I do believe you are!

Nerfing SF to +1 just reduces the spellcasters feat selection and spell selection. Bad, Bad, bad idea.

This is about the most egregious example of a strawman argument that I've ever seen on these boards. Where the heck did you get from a relatively straightforward post that I think this? Please do not put such words in my mouth.

The entire point is that a wizard who doesn't take Spell Penetration shouldn't have all that great a chance of lobbing spells at a spell-resistant foe. The titan's SR is one of its principal defenses. It's a CR 21 monster. If you're a 20th-level wizard without Spell Penetration facing a CR 21 outsider, you'd better be aware that fewer than half the spells you cast are going to get through. That's how the system works. Complaining that wizards have no chance of affecting the titan with direct-damage spells misses the point that, unless you're reasonably optimized (ONE feat! Count it!) to deal with an SR creature, you're not supposed to be throwing spells at it.

A wizard who doesn't have Spell Focus and Spell Penetration shouldn't be throwing save-or-consequences spells at a titan. The wizard's better off using metamagically-enhanced buffing spells or metamagicked evocation spells (target the titan's weak save AND do damage even on a successful save). And yes, that is how it works.

Moreover, wizards have a really nice advantage; they don't need to expose themselves to damage in order to deal it. A wizard faced with a spell resistant creature with good saves and immunities is merely going to find that he's forced to spend more resources to fight it than, say, one or two spells (hardly 20% of the wizard's resources, let alone the party's). Even were the wizard forced to sit out the combat, that would only be comparable to what other classes are faced with in different situations: The rogue vs. undead and constructs, the fighter vs. invisible/ranged attacking creatures or deadly bricks like the remorhaz, colossal monstrous scorpion, or tarrasque; the cleric vs... well, any monster that requires him to spend his actions healing fellow party members.

 

[Dimwhit]

That lvl20 rogue... well. Does he have money for haste/fly items left? I still think these comparisons are flawed... Sorry, I never had such characters with a shopping list of "must have" magic items.

Strangely, this resulted in apparently better balance.

This is kind of the thing on both sides of this debate. The only way, IMO, that Wizards get out-of-control DCs is when DMs are out of control and give their PCs whatever they want. Same goes for insanely high save bonuses. Who has a +5 Cloak of Resistance, 2 ion stones, +5 tomes, etc., etc.? If that's happening, I blame the DM.

I'm in a campaing at about a 14-15 average party level. We don't have CLOSE to that kind of magic there. Even with SF/GSF, our spellcasters wouldn't have anywhere near too high a DC for his spells. Because our DM doesn't leave 100,000gp worth of magic items at every tough encounter, and we don't get to take a shopping list down to Greyhawk and purchase all those items whenever we want.

Those are just my thoughts. I'll say it again, and I don't care who agrees with me, Wizards chopped Wizards (pun intended), in particular SF/GSF, because of the munchkins out there, not because of a natural game imbalance.

Edited for grammar