Sick of Magic Missile

[diaglo]

He doesn't have to "unlearn" anything. A crafter can set the power of a magic item (i.e. caster level) anywhere from the minimum required for the spell up to a maximum of his own caster level.

yeah, i know... i was just playing with Numion.

 

[Wish]

I don't really see magic missile as all that great, in terms of even first level attack spells. It's usually the third thing my wizards prepare, after ray of enfeeblement and color spray (at high levels, it's 2x ray of enfeeblement, no color spray). It comes in just before one of the lesser orb spells from Complete Arcane. Unless you consider dealing direct damage to be the only form of combat magic worth discussing. I like having one or two around for incorporeal creatures or where a small ammount of precision targetted, long range damage is appropriate, but it's not something I tend to use continuously. If your players are doing so, I would suggest using some NPC wizards to demonstrate the utility of alternative combat spells.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Another option that one of my DM's used is the Arcane Bolt spell (from the Wizards site) - it's 1d6+1, with the same number of bolts as a magic missile, but has "reflex-half" save applied.

 

[I'm A Banana]

MM is dull. But so is a longsword, ne? It's all in how you spice up the description: dodge, parry, weave with the sword, fingers, words, flight patterns, and colors for the Magic Missile.

MM is still mechanically dull. It doesn't allow interesting tactics or shape the battlefield. But I wonder: how is it you encourage tactics and the like from your fighters? MM is basically a sword swing, after all. Or an arrow hit. I'd be tempted to bring the battle to the mages, myself (MM is a great aggro drawer in my campaigns -- an assured 3.5 damage is often more scary to a beast than a fighters' 50% chance of 20 or more damage).

 

[Quickbeam]

What really drew me to this thread topic is that our group had a discussion about this very spell two sessions ago.

I'm DM for a low level party that recently commenced the Age of Worms adventure path. During one encounter the group became rather frustrated with the party sorcerer because he did not have Magic Missile in his repetoire and they were facing a foe that possessed damage reduction. The thing about this player is that he never chooses the more common spells for reasons of personal principle. He would much prefer to find clever uses for less commonly employed spells (which I respect and appreciate), but it occasionally makes him less effective in combat situations. Obviously this leaves his companions a bit frustrated at times, but one can understand his desire to think and play outside the spellcasting box.

 

[Slobber Monster]

MM is dull. But so is a longsword, ne? It's all in how you spice up the description: dodge, parry, weave with the sword, fingers, words, flight patterns, and colors for the Magic Missile.

MM is still mechanically dull. It doesn't allow interesting tactics or shape the battlefield. But I wonder: how is it you encourage tactics and the like from your fighters? MM is basically a sword swing, after all. Or an arrow hit. I'd be tempted to bring the battle to the mages, myself (MM is a great aggro drawer in my campaigns -- an assured 3.5 damage is often more scary to a beast than a fighters' 50% chance of 20 or more damage).

Hmmm... the aggro effect is worth considering. I'll give that one some thought. I don't want to unfairly pick on those PC's just for boring me, though.

I actually think MM is mechanically speaking, much duller than a sword swing or fired arrow. The big reason for this to me is the combination of no-save, medium range, and autohit. Basically it's one of the few attacks in the entire game that completely ignores every standard defensive quality of an opponent except for hp's and spell resistance. So the dex based opponent doesn't get to avoid it with touch AC, Reflex save, or Evasion. It's also not affected by armor, energy resistance, size bonuses, flight, cover, firing into melee, or risk to the caster based on proximity to foe.

The primary counter is shield, and that totally nullifies MM, so it's not something I'd want opponents to use all the time. I like to design challenges that take away some of the group's standard options, but I don't like screwing over players so they can't use their abilities all the time. I know I have other options for designing to make magic missile less effective - things like attacking the group from long range, using hordes of week foes, or attacking from total concealment. I will be using them, but these things hinder all kinds of other spells and abilities just as much as they do magic missile.

 

[Brottor Dankil]

Somewhere down the road if I ever start a new 3.5e campaign I think I'm either going to eliminate MM, or maybe rebalance it as a ranged touch attack spell.

I don't think the problem is MM, it's that 3.5 has reduced the effectiveness of many other interesting spells. For example, one of my personal favorites was Color Spray, but the reduced range (& cone size) makes it practically impossible to effect more than one enemy, unless you get really lucky.

Hold Person is another. It makes it practically useless against a 5th level enemy or higher, because the odds are they will make their saving throw if not the first round then the second.

Endure elements is now neutered. Shield is neutered. Hypnotism is reduced in effectiveness. Expeditious retreat is reduced, Haste is neutered. The list goes on and on.

I just hope WotC doesn't think that spellcasters need more "balancing" when 4.0e comes out. It's getting to the point that I don't want to play spellcasters anymore.


IMHO ranged touch for MM is a bad idea; spell casters have a hard enough time defending themselves, they need to have an "auto" damage option. They just don't have the attack bonus or feat volume to provide them with the bonuses necessary to hit consistently, even on touch armor classes. And they will waste a round of spellcasting and a spell slot every time they miss. Unlike a hand to hand melee character, a spellcaster will run out of attack power at some point. Spellcasters must do some damage before the power runs out.

An alternative to a Ranged Touch MM might be reducing the damage a little, say just 1d4/2 levels, or 1d3+1/2 levels. Just a thought.

Brottor

 

[ForceUser]

I don't think the problem is MM, it's that 3.5 has reduced the effectiveness of many other interesting spells. For example, one of my personal favorites was Color Spray, but the reduced range (& cone size) makes it practically impossible to effect more than one enemy, unless you get really lucky.

Hold Person is another. It makes it practically useless against a 5th level enemy or higher, because the odds are they will make their saving throw if not the first round then the second.

Endure elements is now neutered. Shield is neutered. Hypnotism is reduced in effectiveness. Expeditious retreat is reduced, Haste is neutered. The list goes on and on.

The spells that you mention are all low level. Why should a 2nd-level spell like hold person be especially effective after 5th level? Why should a 1st-level spell impart a +7 bonus to AC? Why should a mere 3rd-level spell allow spellcasters to cast two spells per round? In the 3E paradigm, metamagic feats must be made to have value. If you're unsatisfied with hold person as a 2nd-level spell, take the Heighten Spell feat and cast it as a 4th-level spell. If you're unsatisfied with being limited to one spell per round, then Quicken Spell will have value for you. I don't have a problem with the fact that certain low-level spells have been reduced in effectiveness--low-level spells should not be as desirable to cast as higher-level spells once your PC reaches certain level thresholds.

I happen to agree with most of the 3.5 nerfs. I feel they were warranted. If you want lower level spells to be more effective, modify them with metamagic feats; that's what they're for. Not surprisingly, the usefulness of a metamagic feat tends to be inversely proportional to the level of a spell; Quicken Spell has great value when applied to 1st- and 2nd- level spells, but no value at all to 6th-level spells and above. You cannot apply the most powerful metamagics, such as extra damage, higher save DCs, and extra spells per round, at low character levels by design. It's a design decision I agree with. Quicken Spell was nearly useless while 3.0 haste existed. It had to be changed to give the feat merit; that spell and several others were way too good for the levels at which PCs achieved them.

MM isn’t horribly broken, but it certainly makes other more balanced 1st-level attack spells useless in comparison. That’s why I’m sick of it. If spellcasters still use MM constantly in double digit levels, it’s probably too good as a 1st-level spell. That’s why I want to slaughter the sacred cow.

 

[Arkhandus]

Maybe 2nd-level spells should still be useful around 5th-7th level because they form about a third or more or your wizard's effective arsenal at those levels? Yeesh. A 5th-level wizard is casting mostly 1st and 2nd level spells, and even at 6th and 7th-level those 2nd-level slots are needed. Ya only get a few 3rd/4th level slots early on. If Magic Missile, Chill Touch, Resist Elements, Blur, Charm Person and such can still be somewhat effective at middle levels, why not Hold Person, Shield, and so on?

3.5 nerfs are absurd. Shield is now just Mage Armor with about 1/100th the duration, and horribly blah. A duration of a few rounds, effectively one combat, is quite fine for a 1st-level spell giving +7 AC, especially when it's self-only for fragile mages that can't effectively use armor. If a 2nd-level wizard uses 2 slots for Mage Armor and Shield, he's only got 1-2 slots left to cast Burning Hands or Sleep against enemies; wasting half his power for the day to protect himself well for 1 combat? Considering that the game is designed with and average of 3-5 encounters per day in mind (when dungeon-crawling at least) that's not at all unreasonable. If you want to run a game with less frequent combat, then by all means, implement a simple houserule that casters can only replenish spells once or twice per week, and you'll find the spells being just as effective in the infrequent-combat game as in the dungeon-crawling game.

Mages do need some way to contribute in battle beyond casting short-lasting Bull's Strength and such. With their pathetic BAB, they can't be expected to hit a lot of enemies even with touch spells. And what's the group going to do when they encounter a Shadow at 3rd-level, if the mage doesn't have Magic Missile? Sure, he might have Magic Weapon instead, but it's such a weak and uninteresting spell that the mage is unlikely to prepare it more than once, and it's not very fun for the mage to spend one round enchanting an ally's weapon and then sitting out the rest of the combat.

Edit: And besides, everyone knows that Scorching Ray and Ray of Enfeeblement are the new Magic Missile! RoE no longer allows a saving throw and Scorching Ray makes venerable and interesting Flaming Sphere seem pathetic......

 

[tetsujin28]

Magic Missile is the sine qua non of magical conflict, just like the firearm is today. It's reliable, it does its job, and it does it darn well.