Ridiculous amount of buffs

[jasin]

I'm thinking, one attribute buff, one attack buff, one general ability buff (like speed), and one defensive buff.

Is cat's grace an attack buff or a defense buff? Is blink an attack buff, a defense buff, or a general buff?

This isn't really going to work unless you explicitly divide spells into rather artificial categories.

 

[jasin]

Because doing the same thing over and over again is pointlessly dull and boring - almost a definition of "uncreative". Why play a game where all you do is press the "WIN" button?

If buffing is the equivalent of pressing the "WIN" button, that means the opponents are either not powerful enough for the party's level, or they're not using all the powers at their disposal. Perhaps they're not buffing enough...?

Played by the book, buffing is almost mandated in order to win against high CR opponents. This might not be to your taste, but it's a different issue than "buffing = win".

 

[NanocTheCivilized]

If buffing is the equivalent of pressing the "WIN" button, that means the opponents are either not powerful enough for the party's level, or they're not using all the powers at their disposal. Perhaps they're not buffing enough...?

Played by the book, buffing is almost mandated in order to win against high CR opponents. This might not be to your taste, but it's a different issue than "buffing = win".

Fair comment on both counts.

The button is labelled "WIN" - but it doesn't always work (or at least, it shouldn't).

Your second point is, sadly, true. As I mentioned before, it's one of the reasons my group quit on 3.5.

Cheers
Nanoc

 

[molonel]

Read the books. Trolls have a 10x10 Space/Reach. Rust Monsters have 5x5. AMF is a 10' radius emanation which is centred on the caster and moves with him/her. Check page 307 in the DMG - assuming a medium (5x5) caster there is room for a maximum of 1 troll and 7 rust monsters, plus the caster in the AMF area of effect. The rust monsters must move at the speed of the caster or they leave the AMF, so running away shouldn't be a problem. If the party scatter then only one member can be attacked by the AMF group at a time. The rest can throw alchemist's fire, shoot arrows, throw rocks or tanglefoot bags etc to enable a slowly moving tank to escape. Then the party works out a better plan that does not rely on buffs and returns to defeat the enemy.

I have read the books. Many times, in fact. You're assuming several things, though:

1. You are assuming the entire troll must be within the AMF in order to be affected, and that this means anything grappled by it will fall outside the field. Grappling rules state that you move into the creature's area. They don't say WHERE within that area.

2. "Running away shouldn't be a problem." Those are always famous last words. If the DM designs the encounter so that you can run away, sure. If not? If you're in an area where fleeing might send you into the arms of another encounter, or worse? (Very typical in dungeon crawls.) Then you're hosed.

3. You also assume that there must be one caster/grappling monster combo, or that the grappling monster must be large. You then rightly point out that the encounter is only an example. It's easy to design grappling minions who aren't.

4. Alchemist's fire, throwing rocks and tanglefoot bags? How are these going to allow a slowly moving tank to escape? If he's grappled, the tanglefoot bags may very well hit him, as well, since he's in the same square.

None of this is encouraging the party to "think creatively." It's simply shutting them down, and hard.

All of this could lead into yet another discussion of why magic is so important in D&D 3.X, and perhaps too important, but the point is, right now it is important, the overuse of the AMF tactic is very uncreative.

And as for setting traps "simply delaying the inevitable" - that just reeks of defeatism. True, a trap on its own will probably not defeat the enemy, but it can disrupt their formation so that the party can attack (and that AMF formation is so beautifully grouped). It's also a chance for the party rogue to shine - to use Disable Device proactively for once.

It is simply delaying the inevitable, and that's not defeatism. That's simply a lot of experience with high level combat in D&D. As a player, I'll do whatever I have to do to win, and I leave nothing out, but there does come a point where if you are reduced to throwing pebbles, and hastily trying to string a tripwire across the hallway to stop the onslaught of an AMF and grappling trolls, and your weapons and armor are nothing more than a pile of rust on the floor, and you have no buffs, you MIGHT want to think about hoisting the white flag.

In any case, the trolls/rust monster combination was merely an example.

I know. There are many examples of how to use the AMF that are much, much worse.

No. I do feel that some groups rely on them too much, to the detriment of creative play and intelligent tactics. In the end - far from always working - this will eventually fail (unless the DM is unimaginative and uncreative).

Of course buffs can, and will fail. That's why they are simply one more tool in any adventurer's toolbox, and having buffs does not equal "WIN!"

Well, you're right to say Dispel is worse - mainly because it brings the game to a shuddering halt while everyone works out which buffs no longer work and what their bonuses now are. AMF is simpler in that it stops them all, so there's less arithmetic to do - the PCs just use their innate abilities only, which are right there on the character sheet.

As a player, I would MUCH rather have an area dispel dropped on me than have a DM who loved AMF. There is a difference, a VAST difference, between rolling for all of your buffs and having every spell and magic item you possess, and every spell-like ability shut down like a light switch.

Nor did I suggest this. The point is that a party such as described earlier in the thread - which expects to buff, teleport in, fight the monster, and teleport out again - can be forced to think more creatively (and thus be more challenged and have more fun) by the occasional use of a spell or tactic which makes them stop and think - AMF is only one option, and I mentioned it only as an example.

Part of the problem in that example is the nature of the adventure itself. The Temple of Elemental Evil was virtually DESIGNED to promote that tactic.

If you design your own adventures, particularly for high level play, there are much better ways to design your adventures to encourage creative problem-solving and combat tactics.

Simply throwing your players into AMF's all the time is at the bottom of my list. I've seen players drum their fingers, and say, "Let me guess: ANOTHER antimagic field, right?"

"I'm shocked!" the other players replied.

 

[JohnSnow]

Is cat's grace an attack buff or a defense buff? Is blink an attack buff, a defense buff, or a general buff?

Um...let's see:

From the spell description for Cat's Grace:

The spell grants a +4 enhancement bonus to Dexterity.

Hmm...since it buffs an attribute (DEX), I'd say it sounds like an attribute buff (first listed), but maybe I'm just guessing.

Blink? Technically, I think it's a general buff. The same place I'd put invisibility. On the other hand, the 1 round/level duration basically makes Blink a spell that gets cast in combat. So while I suppose it is a general buff, I think of it more as a combat effect and wouldn't bother restricting it. But that's because I personally haven't seen a lot of mass casting of blink as part of the Scry/Teleport combo.

Obviously, an exhaustive list of which spell effect went into what category (and for that matter, what categories made sense) would have to be created. But that's not exactly rocket science.

Or you could just make it as simple as:

Characters may be subject to no more than one attribute enhancing spell and no more than 4 other spell-based enchantments at any one time.

Obviously, the number can vary, but that seems easy enough to adjudicate. And it makes stat and skill boosting items significant again.

YMMV and all that.

 

[pawsplay]

When I ran RttToEE, I got sick of this particular tactic by the pcs: Wake up at 10am, buff to the gills, clear three or four rooms, and teleport back to town to rest for the day. Rinse repeat. I believe they did this because of buffs. They wanted to make sure they had them all up before each fight.

I'm not familiar with that module specifically, but in general, this tactic has limited utility. Most rooms don't sit around waiting to be depopulated by attrition. Further, teleportation has its limitations. Regular teleport is unreliable. Greater teleport is a 7th level spell. Sure, you may be buffed, but you're walking around with one less 7th level spell, or you're burning through a lot of items.

Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible.

This won't come up all the time, but it will from time to time.

Dimensional lock is part of the building of many very high level fortresses.

Some extraplanar adventures may take the PCs to places without an astral link or an acceptable substitute.

And how does a DM prepare for something like this? Its bad enough trying to create high level npcs...figuring out buff strategies for them makes it a nightmare. For those running high level games, how do you handle it?

All that fiddly stuff... every single little plus or magic item that PCs have? I totally ignore it. I focus on the big picture, and NPC gear can always fit on a single index card. Ordinary NPCs sometimes get rolled over by the PCs. Powerful ones I simply make a level or two higher than the PCs. I keep it simple, I keep the XP flowing, and for NPCs who aren't necessarily hostile, I focus on their motivations and goals rather than their stats. Surely it's a lot more interesting whether an NPC is willing to bribe the PCs than whether they have a resistance spell memorized.

Big numbers. Small character sheets. Focused strategies. Several basic contingencies. Defined conditions under which they are likely to flee. Stats adjusted for being hit with dispel magic.

It's not that much.

 

[molonel]

All that fiddly stuff... every single little plus or magic item that PCs have? I totally ignore it. I focus on the big picture, and NPC gear can always fit on a single index card. Ordinary NPCs sometimes get rolled over by the PCs. Powerful ones I simply make a level or two higher than the PCs. I keep it simple, I keep the XP flowing, and for NPCs who aren't necessarily hostile, I focus on their motivations and goals rather than their stats. Surely it's a lot more interesting whether an NPC is willing to bribe the PCs than whether they have a resistance spell memorized. Big numbers. Small character sheets. Focused strategies. Several basic contingencies. Defined conditions under which they are likely to flee. Stats adjusted for being hit with dispel magic. It's not that much.

Very nice.

That's how I handle it, too.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

Well, at higher levels, you could consider having the villains go after the PC's instead of the other way around. Have the bad guys drop in at an inopportune time, and try to take the players out before they can slap on a whole lot of buff effects.

If the players end up spending the first 6 rounds trying to buff up, that gives you 6 rounds of the players not laying into you with Disintegrate, Harm, Maximized Fireballs, or whatever else it is that your pc's cast when they aren't laying down buff spells.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Agamon]

I've only skimmed the posts of this thread, but has anyone mentioned the spell from the SC that does 1d6 damage per spell level of buff on the target? Just the threat of that spell should keep buffing down to a minimum.

I know a guy playing a wizard in LG, facing a lich. Lich teleports away for about 10 rounds and comes back. Player deduces the lich left to buff up and hits him with an empowered version of this spell (sorry, IDHTBIFOM, and can't remember the spell name) and does over 450 points of damage to it (though it got a save for half... lol)

 

[Woas]

I think all "buff" type spells should be rounds/level duration, or 'until discharged' kind of like a touch attack.

So just as a crazy example, Mage Armor would give a character +4 AC against the next attack made against the character (perhaps with a clause that grants several more 'charges' with higher levels). Once that character was attacked and the +4 AC was used to attempt to defend itself, the mage armor disappears.