Shortened buff spell durations: Good or bad?

[mmu1]

The designers said the same thing about feats, PrC, and several other 3e/3.5 things. If its something every caster/character would want, then its probably too powerful/too good.

I generally agree, and as my post above said, I like the new durations. No more "power-up" in the AM and remain that way most of the day crap. (Now, if WotC would just work to get the rest of the "video game on paper" feel outta 3e/3.5... )

From where I'm standing, short-duration buffs that are only useful in combat do more to give it a "video game on paper" feel than ever.

Especially when combined with the whole "high-end killer spells all do a certain number of d6 of damage now" that keeps on popping up...

 

[Bismark]

I've said something similar in the other thread, I've seen it said by other people, but I've never really seen it addressed/answered to satisfaction by someone.

I think people's reactions/outrage to this change is damning, in and of itself. The fact that people think a spellcaster is ruined because of one group of 2nd level spells? Points to just how critical and overused they were.

 

[Grog]

Put me in the camp that says "If everyone wants something, it's overpowered" is a ridiculous argument. Pretty much all high-level characters are going to want some way to fly. Is flight overpowered? Pretty much every party is going to want some way to neutrailze poisons/cure diseases/remove curses - are all those things overpowered? Pretty much every spellcaster is going to take either Dispel Magic or Greater Dispelling - are those spells overpowered?

See what I mean? If everyone wants something, it doesn't necessarily mean it's too good - it might just mean that it's very useful for common situations.

 

[Grog]

I've said something similar in the other thread, I've seen it said by other people, but I've never really seen it addressed/answered to satisfaction by someone.

I think people's reactions/outrage to this change is damning, in and of itself. The fact that people think a spellcaster is ruined because of one group of 2nd level spells? Points to just how critical and overused they were.

Admittedly, I haven't read the other thread all the way through, but I haven't seen anyone saying that spellcasters are ruined because the stat buffs have been nerfed. I've seen people saying that the change is unnecessary and/or poorly implemented, but that's it. Myself, I don't like the change because, as I said, it means that the spells will now become MUCH more useful to NPCs than to PCs - which I don't think is particularly fair to the players.

 

[Bauglir]

I disagree. HP are too broad, that is like saying all casters want spells... If HP were *so* important, than everyplayer would choose to be a warrior. Since they don't, there must be other things that are 'more important' to some players, hence balance. Heck, even if you are going to be a 'front line' type, some choose to take the feats (fighter) some choose abilities (Barb) and some *forgo* the HP's for spells (cleric). Again, showing balance.

And you answer your own question. First, the duration of the buff spells in question (there are others) made them almost universal in appeal. It promoted "buffin'" into much more than 20% of the importance; and for those specific spells. (ie. not just for buff spells in general, but Bulls Strength/cats grace specifically) Yes, just about every caster will have some utility spells, but not always the same ones. Not all casters will memorize a summoning spell at all, and definitey not always the same ones. But the power of the BS/CG/etc spells made buffing jump in importance, and almost always for the SAME spells for every caster.

The basic buffs have versatility and wide appeal, not massive power - a bull's strength has combat, and non-combat applications; for any fighting class in combat, or to help with carrying heavy goods for example. When the buffs are kept in second level, then barring at the lowest levels they will not dominate many spell lists. Also items provide extra bonuses (bonus spells for example) and are not so easily dispelled; there is a benefit to choosing the item over the spell. Sounds a lot like balance to me.

Then you introduce empower spell, and you have a problem. People begin empowering the spells to combine their versatility with power (possible to get +12 to a stat by using an 8th level slot) - this is where the real problem lies imo.

So change the d4+1 to a straight 4 and you get balance once again. Only the second level slots are used to buff, and the buffs maintain their utility out of combat. However WotC did not stop there; they also reduced the duration making them near useless outside combat; further of extremely limited use in combat (unless one is prepared for the fight they will not be in place, and given the durations of combats, it is ill-advised to use them once combat starts)

Nobody is going to want a fox's cunning except a wizard. Similarly, (almost) nobody is going to want an owl's wisdom except a cleric or druid. IME whether or not a spell is shared around is dependent far more on the player, rather than the spell itself. If these spells are so important to you, research them and make them 6th level or so (what a Persistent version would be).

Buffs' intended use are to be shared around. A wizard that keeps the bulls strength for himself is not the brightest bulb in the box. And I know wizards use int, clerics use wisdom etc. What's your point?

Secondly these spells are not 'so important to me.' Just because I have a differing point of view to you does not necessarily mean I have a vested interest. In fact I play a sorcerer (the only spellcaster) in my current game, with no buffs at all.

Clerics, druids, rangers and paladins never take identify.

Of course they don't. They can't. Common sense would tell you my post was referring to arcane casters.

Sorcerers very rarely take identify.

Not true ime.

Nobody in my game has identify. They can get that done for them in town.

And nobody in my game has buffs. They can get that done for them in items.

 

[jeffhartsell]

I say BAD. Shortening the duration of Bull's Strength and other spells from 1 hour/level to 1 minute/level is a bad idea IMO. The reason being, now these spells will become mainly NPC spells.

I think this is a good move. Prevents extended buffs for more than a day. Forces PCs to *think* about when to cast and makes magic item buffs look more attractive. Also does away with the uber empowered/maximized buffs.

I do agree that extend is now a much less sexy metamagic feat. But, it still has its place since still and silent were never must-haves.

 

[Fenes 2]

I guess Extend Spell will hold its own. Two of my PCs took that feat just for mage armor, f.e.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

IMO they're good and no, WotC isn't stupid. WotC is including some spells from splatbooks, so look them up and see if there is some alternative to Endurance in there ... preferably something that lasts long.

 

[Deset Gled]

I'm not 100% decided, but I'm pretty sure I like the change. One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet in this thread: recon could become much more usefull. Sure, you can't waltz through dungeons buffed to the nines anymore, but if you look far enough ahead, you can use them when most needed.

 

[LordAO]

Nobody is going to want a fox's cunning except a wizard. Similarly, (almost) nobody is going to want an owl's wisdom except a cleric or druid.

This is totally untrue. Wisdom and Intelligence give bonuses to some very important skills, especially Wisdom. Anyone who sees, hears, searches, tracks, crafts, or does just about anything that isn't linked to Dex or Cha will want a boost to these stats, unless of course they're just basic hack 'n' slashers who don't give a damn about skills.

And why would a Wizard need Fox's Cunning more than anyone else? He doesn't get any bonus spells from it. The only benefit to him is spellcraft and knowledges, which are useful to everyone else as well. The same goes for the Cleric and Wisdom. There is a possibility he may get a higher save DC on his spells, but most spellcasters I know have a stat boosting item for their primary stat (Headband of Intellect, etc) anyway, making such a buff virtually useless to them.