Shortened buff spell durations: Good or bad?

[LokiDR]

LokiDr

Hey.

I hope this changes. Lots of creatures in the Fiend Folio had dispel magic, but we've only seen, I think, four official 3.5 monsters so far, and the pit fiend's abilities weren't all listed.

I don't. I would rather see variety in methods in dealing with buffs. Variety is usually more fun.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't permanency count as a higher-level buff? And can't the permanency itself be dispelled?

Anyway, I prefer targeted dispellings, especially if someone is obviously buffed out. My players counter with mirror image, one of the sweetest spells in the game.

If it is the permancy you dispell, what is the difference between a permant detect magic and a permanent teleportation circle?

I perfer to open with area dispells to stop GMW and magic vestments, as well get a buff or two off of each person. If they have more buffs than that, I go to targetted, but many characters will only have 1 or 2.

 

[Grog]

Ok, now you are just being petulant. Obviously, if they PCs make it clear they will come back in few minutes, it won't work. Haven't you ever heard of hit and run tatics? Have you heard of tatical combat at all? Retreat is a tatical option and should be used as such. A party that notices a caster is buffed up should consider running for a few minutes, to let the buffs go down. If a DM stops this option by simplely having the wizard always chase them, the wizard should chase them when they are near dead or you are just metagaming the whole thing.

Okay, let's assume the wizard lets them flee. What happens when he scries the people who just broke in to his inner sanctum and finds them standing in the stairwell 100 feet or so away from him? Do you think he'll just stand there thinking, "Well, I'm sure they're just catching their breath - they're sure to run away soon. I'll just stand here and let my spells wear off"? Of course not. He's going to realize that they're still a threat, especially since they ran away before he even really hurt them, and take action before his spells wear off.

Like I said, there's a big difference between running away because you're about to die, and running away to let spells wear off. If the wizard sees them fleeing his stronghold entirely, and running for the hills, he might be satisfied he's driven them off. You can't usually completely flee your opponent's stronghold and go back within a matter of a few minutes.

Wizards are smart. A wizard is going to be just as aware of the duration of his buff spells as the party is - more so, actually, since he knows exactly what he cast and when. Any wizard stupid enough to let the party run out the clock on his buff spells would never have survived to get to a high enough level to cast all those buff spells in the first place.

You have never seen a low level party with a sorcerer that knows invisiblity. You have never seen rogues. You have never seen a tatical assult. If the NPC always knows the PCs are comming, you are bending the situation to make the PCs lives more difficult. In my experience, from my own games, being a player, and judging Living Greyhawk events, the NPCs know the PCs are comming about as offten as the PCs know the NPCs are comming.

Sure, if the PCs meet a group of NPCs in the wild, it's an open question as to which group would detect the other first. But not many DMs set up a group of powerful NPCs as a random encounter. Those groups are usually used as major enemies, and as such, are probably fought in their own territory and/or know a lot about the party.

NPCs don't always know the PCs are coming, but they often will.

I have done it more than once. Point blank and rapid shot are two feats, and apply to many spells. A 12th level wizard with those feats (2 of 8 for a human) can fire 3 times a round, +22 for 1d8+10. That is hardly a slouch considering they can fire 50 times, more if they take more GMW spells. They also have many other spells for the day, the ability to create and use scrolls, use wands and staves, and have skills like spellcraft to figure out the tatics of other spellcasters.

To my knowledge, you can't Rapid Shot with spells.

So your wizard just spent a very significant amount of resources (feats and spells) to turn into a poor man's archer. That is far from the most effective use of your character. If I was playing in the party and I had a choice between my friend the wizard

a) shooting his bow and doing 40 or so points of damage to one target

or

b) casting a fireball and doing 35 or so points of damage to six targets

I know which I'd pick. Or, instead of fireballing, casting confusion and potentially disabling eight targets or so. Or, if we're up against one big monster, casting hold monster or disentegrate and potentially taking it out in one shot. All these are much more effective uses of the wizard's power. Not to mention that this wizard won't be able to create items, or metamagic, or whatever, as effectively as another wizard could because he took archery feats instead.

Point being, if I want a wizard in my group, I'm not going to go looking for a wannabe archer.

Dwarfs don't have prefered class wizard or an extra feat at first level. Are you saying because a PC can have darkvision without a spell, the permancy is useless? First, that is narrow and flawed reasoning, and second it doesn't explain See Invisibility or any others on that list.

I will pay 1000 xp after a good many adventures (the chance you will face a spellcaster AND they will dispell you) for an ability that no other PC has without an expensive magic item.

Do you know how disruptive a simple permanent detect magic can be if players wants to get annoying? See through doors, around corners, never miss magic items, see nearly every magical trap, and almost always identify people trying to decieve them by magic. I have done it to a DM and had it done to me. I won't let people in my game do it again.

See through doors? See around corners? What are you talking about? There are no spells that you can make permanent that do that.

And as for the spell lasting "a good many adventures," what happens if you get dispelled on the adventure right after you cast it? Will you pay another 1000 xp to make the spell permanent again? What if you get dispelled again? It's the uncertainty, more than anything, that makes permanency a bad spell. Sure, maybe your spell will last 10 adventures - or maybe it won't even last for one. IME, most players won't pay 1000 xp for something like that.

 

[LokiDR]

Okay, let's assume the wizard lets them flee. What happens when he scries the people who just broke in to his inner sanctum and finds them standing in the stairwell 100 feet or so away from him? Do you think he'll just stand there thinking, "Well, I'm sure they're just catching their breath - they're sure to run away soon. I'll just stand here and let my spells wear off"? Of course not. He's going to realize that they're still a threat, especially since they ran away before he even really hurt them, and take action before his spells wear off.

Like I said, there's a big difference between running away because you're about to die, and running away to let spells wear off. If the wizard sees them fleeing his stronghold entirely, and running for the hills, he might be satisfied he's driven them off. You can't usually completely flee your opponent's stronghold and go back within a matter of a few minutes.

Wizards are smart. A wizard is going to be just as aware of the duration of his buff spells as the party is - more so, actually, since he knows exactly what he cast and when. Any wizard stupid enough to let the party run out the clock on his buff spells would never have survived to get to a high enough level to cast all those buff spells in the first place.

And the wizard wouldn't let them run to heal up and try again. All you are saying is kill them all. PCs had better never lose a fight in your game.

If the wizard can cast scrying, he will get attacked in the middle of casting the spell. Ya for the PCs. The smart thing for the wizard would be to kill them right away or get to better defended position. PCs are free to come back any time that day after a few minutes and try to attack the now unbuffed wizard.

You are only making retreat in general imposible, for any reason.

Sure, if the PCs meet a group of NPCs in the wild, it's an open question as to which group would detect the other first. But not many DMs set up a group of powerful NPCs as a random encounter. Those groups are usually used as major enemies, and as such, are probably fought in their own territory and/or know a lot about the party.

NPCs don't always know the PCs are coming, but they often will.

No, they won't.

A nemesis often will. If most encounters are with your nemesis, you run a very strange game. Most random encounters won't, or those PCs meet as they try do something like sneak into a castle to rescue a princess. Run through a published module some time and see how many of the encounters the NPCs know, within a couple of minutes, that the PCs are comming.

To my knowledge, you can't Rapid Shot with spells.

My bad, one wasted feat.

So your wizard just spent a very significant amount of resources (feats and spells) to turn into a poor man's archer. That is far from the most effective use of your character. If I was playing in the party and I had a choice between my friend the wizard

a) shooting his bow and doing 40 or so points of damage to one target

or

b) casting a fireball and doing 35 or so points of damage to six targets

I know which I'd pick. Or, instead of fireballing, casting confusion and potentially disabling eight targets or so. Or, if we're up against one big monster, casting hold monster or disentegrate and potentially taking it out in one shot. All these are much more effective uses of the wizard's power. Not to mention that this wizard won't be able to create items, or metamagic, or whatever, as effectively as another wizard could because he took archery feats instead.

Point being, if I want a wizard in my group, I'm not going to go looking for a wannabe archer.

2 feats and 4 spells to be effective even after they normally would have run out of spells. That is what to a 12 level wizard?

This does not use up an 6th level spells for disintegrate.
He still has at least 2 more spell slots for fireballs.
He could have a wand of fireball and use charges off that as neccessary.

The archer wizard is much more effective over the long run, only using spells as needed, on tough encounters. Are you going to laugh off 40 damage 16 times? More fool you. While your fireball throwing friend is destroying hordes of goblins, I pick off a few and let every one else in the party do the same. If the goblins look like a threat, I let loose with a fireball or five. When we have our 5th combat in the day, your friend is well out of spells and I hardly breathing hard.

See through doors? See around corners? What are you talking about? There are no spells that you can make permanent that do that.

Read detect magic. You can see aura through up to 3 feet of organic material, a foot of stone, or a inch of common metal. Don't know if there is a person on the other side of the door: use detect magic. You will see their buffs (since the obviously know you are comming) and any magical equipment they have.

And you can avoid a whole lot of magical traps. 500xp after several adventures is a small price to pay.

Originally posted by Grog And as for the spell lasting "a good many adventures," what happens if you get dispelled on the adventure right after you cast it? Will you pay another 1000 xp to make the spell permanent again? What if you get dispelled again? It's the uncertainty, more than anything, that makes permanency a bad spell. Sure, maybe your spell will last 10 adventures - or maybe it won't even last for one. IME, most players won't pay 1000 xp for something like that.

I will and so will every person I have ever seen play a wizard of 10th level or better. If your experience tells you players won't pay this cost for such an ability, MY experience tells me you are playing with inexperienced or paranoid players.

On average, given the number of creatures that can cast dispel or greater dispelling, you will go many encounters before you hit another creature/character that has it. Uncertainty is part of adventuring. You might die tommorrow, why worry about relatively small things like minor quantities of xp? If it happens more often than the player wants to deal with (because of DM tatics most likely), they can stop paying the 1000xp. Can you say the same of losing items? I sunder your pretty +5 flamming burst bow, you are out a lot more than a dispelling cost me.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If it is the permancy you dispell, what is the difference between a permant detect magic and a permanent teleportation circle?

Actually, an Area Dispel hits the spell with the highest caster level first.

It will strip the Mage Armor (1st level spell) cast by the 16th level Wizard before it touches the Holy Aura (8th level spell) cast by the 15th level Cleric...

-Hyp.

 

[LokiDR]

Actually, an Area Dispel hits the spell with the highest caster level first.

It will strip the Mage Armor (1st level spell) cast by the 16th level Wizard before it touches the Holy Aura (8th level spell) cast by the 15th level Cleric...

-Hyp.

That only means it will be less likely that permanent spells will be dispelled, as they have a good chance of being cast last level.

 

[Grog]

And the wizard wouldn't let them run to heal up and try again. All you are saying is kill them all. PCs had better never lose a fight in your game.

And I guess they never lose fights in yours.

Like I said, there's a big difference between running in, seeing a wizard, and running away, and running away after several rounds of battle with said wizard. In the first case, the wizard has no reason not to chase them. In the second case, the wizard may have been damaged, may have used up a lot of spells, etc., so giving chase might not be the best idea.

A nemesis often will. If most encounters are with your nemesis, you run a very strange game. Most random encounters won't, or those PCs meet as they try do something like sneak into a castle to rescue a princess. Run through a published module some time and see how many of the encounters the NPCs know, within a couple of minutes, that the PCs are comming.

Most modules I've seen include a method for monsters to find out that the PCs are invading their home (alarms and such). It is possible for the PCs to avoid setting off the alarm, but no group is going to be able to do that forever. I can't remember the last module I read that had monsters just sitting in separate rooms doing nothing while the PCs were fighting in the next room.

2 feats and 4 spells to be effective even after they normally would have run out of spells. That is what to a 12 level wizard?

Wizards also aren't proficient with longbows, so you had to burn another feat to become so. And if you don't want a -4 penalty to hit for shooting into meele, you need Precise Shot as well. So that's 3 or 4 feats.

With those same 3 or 4 feats, I could take Greater Spell Focus, Greater Spell Penetration, Empower Spell, etc. I could also take item creation feats and have a lot more magic items than you. In short, I could be a very effective wizard, instead of a somewhat effective wizard and a poor man's archer.

The archer wizard is much more effective over the long run, only using spells as needed, on tough encounters. Are you going to laugh off 40 damage 16 times? More fool you. While your fireball throwing friend is destroying hordes of goblins, I pick off a few and let every one else in the party do the same. If the goblins look like a threat, I let loose with a fireball or five. When we have our 5th combat in the day, your friend is well out of spells and I hardly breathing hard.

Of course, since my wizard has been casting spells and yours has been shooting arrows, we have a much better chance of making it to that 5th combat of the day. Do you really expect to be fighting goblins at 12th level?

Let's take a closer look at this wizard archer of yours. +6 BAB, poly into an 18 Dex form, we'll give you a good roll on your Cat's grace, 22 Dex for a +6, +4 bow and arrows from GMW means you're +20 to hit with the bow, +18 when rapid shotting.

A cloud giant (CR 11) has a 21 AC. When the party fighter is in meele with it, you're at +14/+14/+9, assuming you didn't take Precise Shot (if you did, you would have spent fully half your feats on archery). On average, that will give you 1.85 hits per round. You're doing 1d8+8 damage, or 12.5 damage on average. 23 damage total, on average. The cloud giant has 178 hit points.

Meanwhile, my wizard casts Hold Monster on it. He has a 24 Int (17 starting, +3 level increases, +4 item), so the save DC is 22. A cloud giant has a +6 Will save. He needs to roll a 16 or better to save. My wizard has a 75% chance of ending the fight in the first round.

Yeah, I know which I'll take.

Let's say we're up against 3 frost giants (EL 12). First round, no one's in meele, so you have a +18/+18/+13 against their 21 AC. You get 2.45 hits with your bow, on average, doing 12.5 damage per shot, about 31 damage on average, to one of the giants. They have 133 HP each.

On the other hand, my wizard throws a fireball at them. 10d6 damage. His DC is 24 (with Greater Spell Focus Evocation, which he can take since he hasn't been taking archery feats), so the giants (+3 Reflex save) need a natural 20 to save. That's 35 damage on average. Since frost giants are cold subtype, they take double damage unless they manage to make their save (since they need a natural 20, it's not likely), so all three giants take 70 damage.

70 damage to three frost giants vs. 31 damage to one frost giant. The choice is obvious.

I will and so will every person I have ever seen play a wizard of 10th level or better. If your experience tells you players won't pay this cost for such an ability, MY experience tells me you are playing with inexperienced or paranoid players.

I could easily say the same thing to you. Since we're both talking about anecdotal evidence, we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

 

[LokiDR]

And I guess they never lose fights in yours.

Like I said, there's a big difference between running in, seeing a wizard, and running away, and running away after several rounds of battle with said wizard. In the first case, the wizard has no reason not to chase them. In the second case, the wizard may have been damaged, may have used up a lot of spells, etc., so giving chase might not be the best idea.

PCs running after a single round of wizard, noticing he is buffed, and after 3 or 4 rounds of dying. A few more AoE spells will kill them off and any smart wizard would do it. If they are dead and running, they won't be able to grab the boddies for later ressurection. Unless the wizard is out of spells, they will pursue for at least a few rounds, at least under your "kill them if they run" concept.

If the wizard throws a few spells at them, and they break, I say the wizard would throw more minions at them (less risk to himself). Minions should be able to clear up the intruders if they run after a round of combat with the wizard. Or the wizard would move to a more deffensive position, in case this is a feint or they intend to lead him into a trap.

The difference is that your wizard wants to walk into traps and wants to let people get away to harm him again. Mine thinks of tatics.

Most modules I've seen include a method for monsters to find out that the PCs are invading their home (alarms and such). It is possible for the PCs to avoid setting off the alarm, but no group is going to be able to do that forever. I can't remember the last module I read that had monsters just sitting in separate rooms doing nothing while the PCs were fighting in the next room.

Alarms should be disabled by any sort of smart (long lived) party. What is the listen check through stone? Most modules I have seen become hard to impossible if you provoke the whole dungeon, hence you won't do it. If you do, you die. End of story.

Wizards also aren't proficient with longbows, so you had to burn another feat to become so. And if you don't want a -4 penalty to hit for shooting into meele, you need Precise Shot as well. So that's 3 or 4 feats.

With those same 3 or 4 feats, I could take Greater Spell Focus, Greater Spell Penetration, Empower Spell, etc. I could also take item creation feats and have a lot more magic items than you. In short, I could be a very effective wizard, instead of a somewhat effective wizard and a poor man's archer.

So I need Greater Spell Focus, Greater Spell Penetration, and Empower Spell, to be an effective wizard? You have a very narrow defination of what makes a wizard effective. I could get two of those anyway, with my remaining feats.

Of course, since my wizard has been casting spells and yours has been shooting arrows, we have a much better chance of making it to that 5th combat of the day. Do you really expect to be fighting goblins at 12th level?

Let's take a closer look at this wizard archer of yours. +6 BAB, poly into an 18 Dex form, we'll give you a good roll on your Cat's grace, 22 Dex for a +6, +4 bow and arrows from GMW means you're +20 to hit with the bow, +18 when rapid shotting.

A cloud giant (CR 11) has a 21 AC. When the party fighter is in meele with it, you're at +14/+14/+9, assuming you didn't take Precise Shot (if you did, you would have spent fully half your feats on archery). On average, that will give you 1.85 hits per round. You're doing 1d8+8 damage, or 12.5 damage on average. 23 damage total, on average. The cloud giant has 178 hit points.

Meanwhile, my wizard casts Hold Monster on it. He has a 24 Int (17 starting, +3 level increases, +4 item), so the save DC is 22. A cloud giant has a +6 Will save. He needs to roll a 16 or better to save. My wizard has a 75% chance of ending the fight in the first round.

Yeah, I know which I'll take.

Let's say we're up against 3 frost giants (EL 12). First round, no one's in meele, so you have a +18/+18/+13 against their 21 AC. You get 2.45 hits with your bow, on average, doing 12.5 damage per shot, about 31 damage on average, to one of the giants. They have 133 HP each.

On the other hand, my wizard throws a fireball at them. 10d6 damage. His DC is 24 (with Greater Spell Focus Evocation, which he can take since he hasn't been taking archery feats), so the giants (+3 Reflex save) need a natural 20 to save. That's 35 damage on average. Since frost giants are cold subtype, they take double damage unless they manage to make their save (since they need a natural 20, it's not likely), so all three giants take 70 damage.

70 damage to three frost giants vs. 31 damage to one frost giant. The choice is obvious.

Very nice. You could have added strength from a mighty bow, but it doesn't matter. You have proved you can outpace me in an encounter that you shouldn't have to worry about using powerful spells for. You have also made the rest of the party look like smucks. You also won't be able to do that more than 4 times a day. When you really need that hold monster in the 5th combat, it won't be there. Mine will.

I can do my moderate damage consistantly, enough to help out. The fighters also get a workout, outdamaging me. 4 spells and 3 feats is a small price to pay to be a decent archer all day.

Play 6 or 7 encounters out and see which wizard is still going. I never said I was better in the short run.

I could easily say the same thing to you. Since we're both talking about anecdotal evidence, we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

I have statitistics on my side, you have fear. Probablility says, given all the posibilities, it will be several encounters time before a permanent spell is dispelled. Fear says it could go down next encounter.

In some campaigns, you can't buy magic items. Permancy is available. Some campaigns have less money, permancy costs no money. Some campaigns give little time for creating items, permancy is fast.

If you don't want to discuss it, that's fine. I didn't say it was anything more than my opinion.

 

[Negative Zero]

while i still say, wait and see, i can't imagine why there are so many people here who thought the 1hr/lvl was such a bad idea. i saw someone post something about the evils of a double empowered and extended buff spell. if a wizard wants to spend a 7th level spell to walk around all day with an enhanced stat, then why should he be able to? after all he would have to not only be at least 13th level, (at which time he should be able to do cool stuff like that) but he's also spent two of his valuable feats to allow him to do that. oh and in case you missed it, that's one 7th level spell he's not casting today. the balance is already built in.

so i guess it comes down to this; should a 7th level spell, AND two feats, allow you to increase the bonus of one stat by +5 for the day? i don't see why not.

~NegZ

 

[Grog]

If the wizard throws a few spells at them, and they break, I say the wizard would throw more minions at them (less risk to himself). Minions should be able to clear up the intruders if they run after a round of combat with the wizard. Or the wizard would move to a more deffensive position, in case this is a feint or they intend to lead him into a trap.

The difference is that your wizard wants to walk into traps and wants to let people get away to harm him again. Mine thinks of tatics.

Your wizard obviously doesn't think of tactics, if all he does after the party runs away is go somewhere else and meekly wait for his buff spells to expire.

You also assume that the wizard is going to be running after them and blundering into traps the party has set. He won't. He's a wizard, he has other options. He can dimension door to get ahead of them, for instance.

And as for people harming him again, if the wizard thinks there's a good chance of that, he can always beef up his defenses. He's not stupid.

Alarms should be disabled by any sort of smart (long lived) party. What is the listen check through stone? Most modules I have seen become hard to impossible if you provoke the whole dungeon, hence you won't do it. If you do, you die. End of story.

You don't necessarily have to provoke the whole dungeon. For instance, RttToEE divided the dungeon into sections, and the inhabitants of each section would have their own defenses and tactics for reacting to intruders. Some were better than others.

So I need Greater Spell Focus, Greater Spell Penetration, and Empower Spell, to be an effective wizard? You have a very narrow defination of what makes a wizard effective. I could get two of those anyway, with my remaining feats.

I didn't say you needed those feats to be effective, I said you will be more effective with those feats than without them. And yes, you could get some of those feats, but you couldn't get all of them. I could. I could take all of those feats and a few item creation feats besides. Or take Improved Initative, or something else useful.

Very nice. You could have added strength from a mighty bow, but it doesn't matter. You have proved you can outpace me in an encounter that you shouldn't have to worry about using powerful spells for. You have also made the rest of the party look like smucks. You also won't be able to do that more than 4 times a day. When you really need that hold monster in the 5th combat, it won't be there. Mine will.

I'll say it again - my group has a much better chance of making it to that 5th combat than yours does. In all likelihood, that cloud giant would have dished out a large amount of damage to the party's front-line fighters if my wizard hadn't paralyzed it. This would have consumed resources for healing. Against the frost giants, my wizard's actions allow the party to kill them much faster than your actions do, again saving the party resources. Your wizard is saving his own resources, true, but because of that, the party as a whole is expending more resources. The result is a net loss to the party.

To take a simplistic example, let's say the party fights four cloud giants in a row, in seperate encounters. Your wizard is shooting them with his bow and mine is casting Hold Monster. By the odds, three of the four will fail their saves. So your party has taken a beating from four cloud giants, while mine has only taken a beating from one. My party is easily in shape to face a 5th encounter - can you say the same about yours?

And saving spells for future use is not always certain to be beneficial. Suppose the 5th encounter is with a vampire - Hold Monster won't do you much good there, will it? Against the cloud giant, you know the spell will be useful.

I have statitistics on my side, you have fear. Probablility says, given all the posibilities, it will be several encounters time before a permanent spell is dispelled. Fear says it could go down next encounter.

You can't apply probability here, because not all D&D campaigns are the same. If your DM doesn't use enemies that dispel very often, your Permanency has a good chance to last a while. If he does, it probably won't last long. But even if the DM doesn't use dispellers very often, a lot of players probably won't even want to take the chance of basically flushing XP down the drain.

But you're right - it is a matter of opinion.

 

[LokiDR]

Your wizard obviously doesn't think of tactics, if all he does after the party runs away is go somewhere else and meekly wait for his buff spells to expire.

You also assume that the wizard is going to be running after them and blundering into traps the party has set. He won't. He's a wizard, he has other options. He can dimension door to get ahead of them, for instance.

And as for people harming him again, if the wizard thinks there's a good chance of that, he can always beef up his defenses. He's not stupid.

You aren't reading what I am writing. I never said the wiz was standing there drooling. Minions, deffensible position, or an entirely different location. You also forget the arrogance many wizards have.

If the buffed wizard does go after them, he may well be falling into a trap. Dim door in front of them and he might be attacked from both sides.

You don't necessarily have to provoke the whole dungeon. For instance, RttToEE divided the dungeon into sections, and the inhabitants of each section would have their own defenses and tactics for reacting to intruders. Some were better than others.

CotSQ had similar set-ups. It never stopped my group from trouncing them.

I didn't say you needed those feats to be effective, I said you will be more effective with those feats than without them. And yes, you could get some of those feats, but you couldn't get all of them. I could. I could take all of those feats and a few item creation feats besides. Or take Improved Initative, or something else useful.

So having a good archer isn't useful for a party of adventures.

I'll say it again - my group has a much better chance of making it to that 5th combat than yours does. In all likelihood, that cloud giant would have dished out a large amount of damage to the party's front-line fighters if my wizard hadn't paralyzed it. This would have consumed resources for healing. Against the frost giants, my wizard's actions allow the party to kill them much faster than your actions do, again saving the party resources. Your wizard is saving his own resources, true, but because of that, the party as a whole is expending more resources. The result is a net loss to the party.

To take a simplistic example, let's say the party fights four cloud giants in a row, in seperate encounters. Your wizard is shooting them with his bow and mine is casting Hold Monster. By the odds, three of the four will fail their saves. So your party has taken a beating from four cloud giants, while mine has only taken a beating from one. My party is easily in shape to face a 5th encounter - can you say the same about yours?

And saving spells for future use is not always certain to be beneficial. Suppose the 5th encounter is with a vampire - Hold Monster won't do you much good there, will it? Against the cloud giant, you know the spell will be useful.

I have the option of using hold monsters if the cloud giants if it becomes a problem or we face another one in the same day. You don't have the option of decent archery. If we face lots of weak encounters, I will fare far better than a wizard should. That is the point about long term buffs.

You can't apply probability here, because not all D&D campaigns are the same. If your DM doesn't use enemies that dispel very often, your Permanency has a good chance to last a while. If he does, it probably won't last long. But even if the DM doesn't use dispellers very often, a lot of players probably won't even want to take the chance of basically flushing XP down the drain.

But you're right - it is a matter of opinion.

"...because not all D&D campaigns are the same" That is WHY I use probablity. The more creatures that have dispel, the more likely it will be used. I am talking about the rules as a whole, not a specific campaign.

Permancy is my personal beef with long term buffs, right up there below Persistant spell. I don't like them because I know they can be abused and are one more thing that makes a caster more apealing than non-casters. I know because I have broken them, over and over.

I won't convince anyone by saying it over and over, so I won't bother any more. Everyone gets to form thier own opinion and that is what makes this game, and these boards, fun.