What kind of cracked out spell is this?

[Veril]

Spell Vulnerability has a saving throw. The monster saves, your spell is wasted.

Assay Resistance has no saving throw. Assay resistance is a swift action, so you can do something else that round...like throw a spell (with SR but no Saveing throw) at the monster.

Differences in duration mean nothing. These are spells you cast when you want to blast someone with other spells. You want it dead in 1-2 melee rounds, not in 10-20 melee rounds.

Here's a typical combat.
Round 1 : wizard casts Assay Resistance, the follows it up with Polar Ray.
Or
Round 1 : wizard casts Spell Vulnerability, monster saves. Spell wasted.

 

[Thanee]

Here's a typical combat.
Round 1 : wizard casts Assay Resistance, the follows it up with Polar Ray.
Or
Round 1 : wizard casts Spell Vulnerability, monster saves. Spell wasted.

Well, the save is no issue at -15, but the chance to lose the spell from damage in addition to always losing the action you need to spend is. Sure, you can still cast a quickened spell before SV, but that's not quite the same as a 'real' spell.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Li Shenron]

Assay Resistance
Sor/Wiz4
Swift Action
Lasts 1 round/level
No Saving Throw or SR
Gives you +10 to caster level checks to defeat a single creatures SR, per casting, as long as you can see the creature when you cast the spell.

Spell Vulnerability
Sor/Wiz3
1 round casting time
Lasts 1 min/level
No SR
Fort negates
Reduces a creatures SR by -1 per caster level. Cannot lower it below 0. The target takes a penalty on the saving throw equal to your caster level.

Thanks, this sets the balance between the 2 spells much more clearly for me.

I thought AR gave a normal ST, instead there's no ST at all. I also thought AR was a standard action, not a SWIFT, which means you can cast AR and the other spell in the same round. (a good difference for the first round at least)

I don't know anymore if SV is better, because the "no ST, no SR" of AR is frankly quite disarming. Basically you give up 1 move action (not even a round...) and one 4th level slots to dramatically increase your chances of hitting a monster with SR. A +10 bonus probably means that you win SR almost always; I can't say what's the typical SR score of monsters you usually meet, but I think it's 2-4 higher than your caster level typically, or is it much more usually?

 

[Thanee]

The only really relevant differences are...

1) 1 swift action -vs- 1 round casting time
2) works only for you -vs- works for everyone

I consider 2) to be only a moderate advantage for SV (unless the party is spellcaster-heavy, or you have a cohort to cast SV), while 1) is a HUGE advantage for AR.

A nice use for SV would be to imbue your familiar with it.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Infiniti2000]

Wrong name you're quoting there, but nevermind.

My apologies. Multiple quotes in the same post are sometimes nontrivial apparently.

An archmage is still probably only walking about with 6 or so 4th level slots.

And it's not like 4th level spells are totally useless to a high level character.

If you're investing 2 slots on a spell that's only useful when you hit a spell-resistanced individual that you have no other spells to use on, then it would seem that spell resistance is quite a lot more common than the average.

I agree with your points except that I think at those levels SR will be much more common than you think. I suppose we could do some kind of analysis on this -- Nail might do it as he seems to be crazy on analyses -- and if someone proves me wrong I'd happily concede. Even should it be merely 'my fault' that I have a lot of SR bad guys, I'd still say that it would be foolish for any wizard/sorcerer of that level not to have at least one assay resistance.

Also - something I just noticed. I believe that the second level spell nondetection can somewhat thwart assay resistance...

Well, it's a minimum 3rd level, but I don't I agree. It prevents detection, not targeting.

 

[Thanee]

I'd still say that it would be foolish for any wizard/sorcerer of that level not to have at least one assay resistance.

I agree with you on the general idea, not on the words, tho.

It would be foolish not to have some means to counter/negate/ignore SR.

I chose Assay Resistance for my sorceress, because my only relevant multi-target spell ignores SR, anyways, but with more area effects, I might have picked (Greater) Spell Penetration instead. It really depends on the application.

And AR works well enough from a scroll, too, if you happen to run into a HUGE SR opponent.

Bye
Thanee

 

[noeuphoria]

Also, AR does not affect a creature. I think that counts in its favor. No spell turning, no rod of absorbtion. It's doesn't actually target anything, which means you don't even need line of effect, just line of sight. You can assay resistance on a creature in an antimagic field, or behind a wall of force

 

[ThirdWizard]

Also, AR does not affect a creature. I think that counts in its favor. No spell turning, no rod of absorbtion. It's doesn't actually target anything, which means you don't even need line of effect, just line of sight. You can assay resistance on a creature in an antimagic field, or behind a wall of force

You can, but you still need line of effect to cast other spells on it. The spell doesn't actually do anything to the creatures. And since it lasts one round per level and is a swift action there's no reason to cast AR unless you're also casting an SR: Yes spell on the creature in question that round...

 

[Saeviomagy]

Well, it's a minimum 3rd level, but I don't I agree. It prevents detection, not targeting.

Well, it SAYS that it prevents detection by spells such as...

But it then goes on to say that any divination against the subject requires a caster level check.

Note that such a ruling would also make true-strike subject to such a roll.

Personally I'm totally fine with that - I think that more counters to spells is a good thing.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I don't know if that's right. I think the best conclusion to draw from your archmage "always" preparing assay resistance is that assay resistance is a spell he generally finds useful to have prepared. But concluding more than that on the basis of the archmage "always" preparing it could be misleading.

For instance, my fighter/mage "always" prepares mage armor, "always" prepares anticipate teleportation, and "always" racks a dimension door and a greater invisibility spell. Does that mean those spells are broken? Does it mean that I'm in a campaign where opponents constantly teleport in next to us and start attacking? Does it mean that I'm always being grappled? No on all counts.

My experience playing wizards is that both I and other people generally make our characters good at a few strategies that are generally applicable and usually have the same core of spells prepared. Even when we get advance information and a chance to prepare, we generally only switch out spells around the edges like a magic player with his sideboard. Thus, if we prepare a spell, odds are pretty good that we "always" prepare it whether it's magic missile, mage armor, false life, see invisibility, haste, fireball, dimension door, greater blink, banishment, bigby's grasping hand, anticipate teleportation, or assay resistance.

Similarly, my experience is that a situation doesn't need to happen all the time for a high level wizard to spend a few lower level slots preparing a contingency plan for it. My fighter/wizard rarely uses his bow but he often casts an extended greater magic weapon on his arrows just in case. Because if he does need to use it, he'll want the greater magic weapon. Similarly, I've never actually had enemies teleport next to him and attack. But I keep anticipate teleportation up just in case. Some day it will happen... and he'll be prepared. I even prepare spells that I haven't used in three or four levels (like greater invisibility) because they're good spells that could be the right tool sometime and if they're not... that's what Arcane Strike is for. It certainly doesn't mean that I don't think other 4th level spells are worth my time.

As for assay resistance itself, I think it's a very good spell but I'm not convinced that it's broken outside of an environment that severely limits both encounters per day and creatures per encounter.

OTOH, that archmage could simply memorise spells which don't allow SR...

Those top-tier spells tend to have something holding them in check IN ADDITION to SR. Like a range of touch, or expensive components etc.

Otherwise EVERY MONSTER AND BBEG would have to have SR. They don't.

So - if your archmage ALWAYS prepares assay resistance, then it's because he obviously doesn't feel that any of his other 4th level spells are worth the time. Which would seem to suggest that every opponent and his buddy has SR. Which in itself is a "screw the magic user over" sort of scenario. Having a spell to help with that isn't a terrible thing.