Shortened buff spell durations: Good or bad?

[LokiDR]

Really, I thought we were going to be nice on this thread. Because if all you're going to do is post "ha ha ha, you can suck it" the appropriate response is "F@!#k you too." And I think we want the dialogue on these boards to be more friendly than that. But it won't be if people persist on making posts like this.

I agree with Simulacrum tha buffing characters take a lot of fun out of the game, forcing long series of dispel checks and becoming unbalance in power when they aren't dispeled.

This not the same as saying a person who plays a buffing character can "suck it". They found a niche where they have lots of power. I don't agree with it, and I would perfer not have characters like that in a game I run or play, but that is not the same as calling the person playing the character annoying.

Opinions about character types are not the same as opinions about players.

 

[Henry]

That's enough sucking, thank you.

I need to remind posters today across the board, apparently. Let's please be more civil. We can get our points across without insults.

Two points:

Grog & LokiDR: Are you both familiar with the phrase: "Six of one and a half-dozen of another?" You both sound like your wizards would have similar tactics. No fool of a wizard would sit there and do nothing while intruders invade his home; both of you sound like your NPC's would have sound plans for dealing with such an invasion. Not all NPC's would react to the same situation the same way, but both your reactions are sound to me.

Elder-B and Simulacrum: There is more the issue of extended buffs than empowered ones. The quote I saw in the PHB about buff spells not giving spells etc. I also believed mentioned that it was because the spells didn't last for 24 hours; if an effect lasts over 24 hours, I believe it does give additional spells, etc.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Elder-B and Simulacrum: There is more the issue of extended buffs than empowered ones. The quote I saw in the PHB about buff spells not giving spells etc. I also believed mentioned that it was because the spells didn't last for 24 hours; if an effect lasts over 24 hours, I believe it does give additional spells, etc.

There are no spells that grant enhancement bonuses to mental abilities in the PHB.

And there is no 24 hour limitation placed on the three mental buffs from T&B. The spell descriptions simply state, unambiguously, "a wizard does not gain bonus spells from Fox's Cunning", or the appropriate phrase for Cha and Wis.

-Hyp.

 

[Simulacrum]

Really, I thought we were going to be nice on this thread. Because if all you're going to do is post "ha ha ha, you can suck it" the appropriate response is "F@!#k you too." And I think we want the dialogue on these boards to be more friendly than that. But it won't be if people persist on making posts like this.

And what is your problem lately?
I noticed you guys have set your flamedar very low?
I didnt call any name nor did I attack any actual persons.
LokiDR thank you for explaining it to the *angry policemen* here, even if its something obvious and needs no explanation.
I think the concept of *buffing characters* can suck it, and yes they can suck it this BIG AND LONG.
So I dont mean the players, I mean the *concept*.
If that above is the apropriate answer to anything that doesnt fit your angry little self then I suggest to take it elsewhere.
The tons of smileys at the end of my post was an indicator for NOT TAKING IT SERIOUSLY.
I accept apologies

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Adding smileys and saying "don't take this personally" doesn't change the fact that those are still fighting words Simacrulum. They communicate nothing other than hostility towards the concept (and by implication those who like the concept) of buffing characters--no argument no reasons, just hostility. They are designed (by the English language, not necessarily by you) to start a fight. They're the crude modern equivalent of slapping someone in the face with a glove and saying, "I demand satisfaction", "pistols at dawn" or some similar challenge to combat.

Don't pretend to be surprised when people react to such posts with hostility. It's the only thing they generate.

 

[LokiDR]

While I do agree with the sentiment, Simulacrum, I don't approve of staying on that line communication.

"I hate buff monkeys, the make my game misserable."

is different than

they "can suck it"

One comment might be taken as ammusing, but if you continue doing things that annoy others after they have said they are annoying, you won't do well in any public forum.

Also, people play differently, so buffs for others might be life savers. I see that as need to change the situation that requires all those buffs all day long, but that doesn't mean they do. The best I can hope for is that others understand why I don't like buffs.

I don't want every one to agree on what is good and bad, that would be boring. I do want people do more than just throw insults at concepts. I don't want to be insulted either. I'll talk to my mother if I want abuse. I come to the rules forum for D&D rules.

 

[Negative Zero]

Well, IMC, the caster casts everything before he goes to bed on a quiet day, if he knows next day is going to be hell. That way, he has both the spells and the bonusses. And what else is he going to spend the feats on? Toughness?

well, he still needs to memorise the spell in a 7th level slot, right? or perhaps, leave it open and risk not having anything prepared if he gets jumped. either way, he's giving up the slot. besides, like i said, at 13th level what's wrong with that kind of power?

ANY feat you take means that you're not taking something else. item creation freats, for example, or other metamagic feats. or perhaps even skill focus or other feats to benefit the character's roleplaying. or still, yes, even toughness; which at 1st level could be a really big deal. there are always options.

~NegZ

 

[Ravellion]

well, he still needs to memorise the spell in a 7th level slot, right? or perhaps, leave it open and risk not having anything prepared if he gets jumped. either way, he's giving up the slot. besides, like i said, at 13th level what's wrong with that kind of power?

Admittedly, it's a Psion. He just needs power points. But a sorcerer had the exact same benefit. The problem with such power is that it is free, and is not intended to be in the system (hence the revision). In general I'd jsut like to say: Get your frickin' Amulet of Health and stop whinging. Oh, wait: you have to PAY for that! You wanted freebies, right, well, tough luck.

Also, instead of casting empowered, they just cast extended, but multiple times per stat if needed. (+4 or +5 will happen 50% of the time, and is entirely feasible at earlier levels: as soon as 8th basically)

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Whether or not this is a good plan depends upon the level of magic in your campaign world. In what seems to be the typical D&D world, this is a very high risk strategy--especially for constitution buffers.

Since the Psion is manifesting 7th level powers, he can expect to be up agains foes with 3rd-6th level spells quite regularly. And I can guarantee you he'll want to get an amulet/bracers of health the moment his party is hit by a chained dispel magic or Greater Dispelling (targetted on him) and a chain lightning followed by a quickened fireball (if he's up against an equal level foe). That strategy is fine around 8th level or so but keeping it up past 10th level is playing with fire--unavoidably perhaps if you're significantly short of the DMG wealth guidelines but it's still dangerous. One dispel magic and not only can you lose your defenses, you also stand ready to lose not only your defenses but also 28+ hit points.

Admittedly, it's a Psion. He just needs power points. But a sorcerer had the exact same benefit. The problem with such power is that it is free, and is not intended to be in the system (hence the revision). In general I'd jsut like to say: Get your frickin' Amulet of Health and stop whinging. Oh, wait: you have to PAY for that! You wanted freebies, right, well, tough luck.

Also, instead of casting empowered, they just cast extended, but multiple times per stat if needed. (+4 or +5 will happen 50% of the time, and is entirely feasible at earlier levels: as soon as 8th basically)

 

[ruleslawyer]

Actually, they still do. All spellcasters have spells per day not per 8 hour rest period. Consequently, spellcasters who want to have all day stat buffs have to either:
1. Prepare and cast such extended buffs at the beginning of the day. This prevents the slots from being available for other purposes that day.
2. Cast such extended buffs at the end of the day just before resting. This enables a character to potentially have the buffs AND a full spell preparation the next day. However, in order for wizards to do so they have to either know when the "next day" is in advance (fairly rare IME) or leave a high level slot empty for either preparing an extended buff if it isn't "the next day" or a full spell loadout when the wizard finds out that it is "the next day."

Sorcerors don't have to pay the opportunity cost in open slots to pull the trick off but wizards do and always will have to pay a significant opportunity cost in high level slots if they want to have multiply empowered extended buffs.

You'll note that I addressed this. My point is that unless you're on a multi-day quest (and parties that are high enough level to use all-day buffs are almost never in this position, since they can teleport), the night-before preparation isn't really an issue. My experience is quite the opposite of yours, I guess; high-level PCs have sufficient access to scrying, teleportation, and secure lairs that they pretty much always have the "initiative." In fact, most high-level adventures IME assume that PCs will do their level best to gain the initiative, because failure to do so generally leads to higher casualties.

This is a common house rule but the mental stat buffs that appear in Tome and Blood all specifically state that they Do Not grant extra spell slots. If a house rule makes spells broken, it might be a good idea to change the house rule before changing the core rules.

My bad. Unfortunately, eagle's splendor (FRCS), the only buff spell to which I have access, contains no such provisions. WotC might have done well to harmonize the spell descriptions.

This assumes that the PCs have the initiative and are engaged in a relatively stable and long-term quest. If the PCs are investigating adventures as they come to them on a short-term basis or are engaged in a long-term quest in which the initiative is not solely theirs but they need to engage for multiple consecutive big days, they cannot get around the need to spend multiple 8th or 9th level slots to have always on (or almost always on) triple empowered stat buffs.

You're only right on the second point, AFAICT. If the PCs are "investigating adventures as they come to them," they can buff the night before they investigate. If they just wander the wilderness looking for things to do... well, that's not really a comfortable life for a bunch of 12th-level characters, is it?

You are clearly misinterpreting the argument. The argument is that the 20th level fighter relying upon a triple empowered extended bull's strength for his average +6 strength is more vulnerable to dispel magic than the 20th level fighter who spent a tiny fraction of his wealth on a +6 belt of giant strength. IMO, by the time a +6 statboost item is affordable, it is almost always a better deal than relying on spells. Heck, by the time a +4 statboost item is available, it's usually better than the buff spells.

No offense, E_B, but your argument lent itself to misinterpretation. If you're talking about the fact that this strategy is worse than using items: well, yes it is, but OTOH you're comparing a zero-cost situation (buff spells) with a positive-cost situation (items). I'm comparing spell to spell, not spell to item. Of course a party that spends 36,000 gp per ability per PC should have a better chance of withstanding dispelling than a party that spends 0 gp! That wasn't what previous posters were saying.

And a +4 buff item shouldn't "usually [be] better" than a buff spell; it should be universally superior. It costs 16,000 gp and takes up an item slot; that's a pretty big deal compared to a free (count it) spell. The good thing about lowering the buff durations in 3.5 is that folk actually will spend their hard-earned cash on the buff items, rather than just using the spells for free.