two said:
Is it familiarity with the spell? Or preparation? Make up your mind.
I did include the qualifiers "much" and "most", right? You're responding as though I'd said "all".... anyway, it depends on the spell:
Those spells with wildly disparate effects (e.g., Planar Binding, the Polymorph line, the Summon line) need preparation - if you were going to list out all the stats for all the critters on the Summon Monster list, for every level of Summon Monster I-IX, you'd be looking at about a hundred different monsters; printing the stat blocks with the spells would cause those spells to take up a chapter or two in their own right. If you include the Summon Nature's Ally line in that list, you're pretty much having to double it. That's what the Monster Manual is for. Working on your own, you don't need the entire list - just those you plan on Summoning (when was the last time anyone Summoned up, oh, a Fiendish Octopus?). Likewise, for Polymorph, it's difficult for WotC to print up what's permitted - as worded, you've basically got half the monster manual available. Oh, and not everything of the new form is fixed - it takes some of your stats, after all. Most the time, those that use them have done some searching for semi-ideal forms anyway; why not have them pre-stat things at the same time? Seriously. Likewise, with the Planar Binding line, you've probably already decided what you're liable to Call. Why not have the page refference, or better, the critter already statted out? And when you get to it, unless you're on a rocking ship or something, there's fewer rolls to make than when you Fireball a squad of low-level drow. If you use the Calling Diagram, you've got one will save (to call the critter), one opposed charisma check (to bargain), and if that fails, you have a charisma check for the critter and an opposed charisma check for each day you don't come to an arrangement. Four rolls a day. Max. Compare to using a Fireball on multiple targets. There's as many reflex saves as you have targets in your area. And you may have to roll SR penetration checks for each. And then there's still the damage dice. Does Fireball need streamlining? Sure, there's 2-4 spells involved for any given Calling (A Magic Circle against Alignment, a Dimensional Anchor for those critters with Planar Travel, a Dismissal or Banishment or two if you're worried about losing control, and the Planar Binding spell itself). So? Most Wizards capable of using the Planar Binding cast more than that in normal morning and evening preparations.
Those with effects nobody much deals with, but have fixed effects (Web, Entangle, Mirror Image,
Evards Spiked Tenticles of Forced Intrusion Black Tentacles, et cetera) it's just a familiarity issue. They've got fixed effects. If the caster is well familiar, and the DM's got enough of a grasp on them to nix lies, the caster can go over what everyone needs to do, and what penalties they take - Web: If caught in the area, you're Entangled (half move, no run, no charge, -2 attack, -4 Dex, Concentration check DC 15+spell level to cast); if you make your reflex, you're stuck unless you can make a strength check DC 20 or an Escape artist check DC 25 - takes a full round. Getting through the thing means a Str or EA check DC 10, +5 for each 5 feet you want to move. Five feet gives cover, 20 feet gives total cover. The caster that's using it needs to be familiar with it. If you're not sufficiently familiar with it, don't use it. Because that will bite you and everyone at the table.
two said:
I am fully aware of how Mirror Image works. It's still a pain. And it's not well defined. Can you cleave off an image? Do all the images stay in one square or spread out? Do you provoke AOO's if you are MI'd? (if you do, then doesn't that give away your location?) Etc. You also need to remember the AC of the images which is not the same as the caster, and etc. etc.
The spell needs clarification and streamlining.
Ah, now you've changed arguements - I didn't say none of the listed spells were vague - (to paraphrase) I said most of the complaints in the original post were a matter of not being overtly familiar with the spells. That or we've got a language issue - I don't usually consider clarification and streamlining to be the same thing - but then, in this segment you used them next to each other....
And you'll usually be mirror imaging yourself. Not overly hard to have the AC - it's 10+size+dex; how hard is it, really? Can you not be bothered to write down a single, rarely-chaning number for a spell you plan to use? For a goodly portion of your career, it'll be your touch ac.
two said:
Yes, the SPELL needs streamlining.
If I have to do an hour of prep ahead of time in order to cast a spell without slowing up the game (aka summon monster X), that is a spell problem.
Make the spell castable on the fly. Print the monster stats in the spell for a limited number of choices. Done.
Aaand then somebody comes along and picks up Augment Summoning. Or duplicates one with something in the Shadow Conjouration line. Or takes the Thaumaturgist prestige class. Or finds themselves on a plane that gives certain critters penalties. And then those nifty little tables are now all basically useless, except as starting points... of course, you can use the MM for that, and, oh, look - you're having to check different stats from standard anyway... I'm going to have that class feature forever... might as well write up the ones I plan on using.
Sure, you can do compressed stat blocks... but the handy elementals have a few special qualities that aren't usually going to make a standard compressed stat block. Of course, if you're typing them up, you can write in the essentials.....
Oh, and all the elementals are listed right next to each other in the Monster Manual - they've got their own section! You want a shorter listing of easy-to-find critters? There ya go! They're even all true neutral and so won't tick off your diety (unless opposed to a particular element, of course, but we can't cover all possible bases, that's what DM's are for). Just bookmark that section. Doesn't work for Summon Monster I and II, but it covers most of the Summon line.
two said:
Defending ALL WOTC spells against claims of undue complexity seems like a fan-boy reaction, nothing more. Some spells could easily be simplified without hurting their in-game fun factor. I take that as overwhelmingly obvious. The question is: which spells, and how many are there?
Umm, strawman much?
Where did I say
ALL WotC spells aren't unduly complex? Quote me, please. I'm fairly certain I qualified my statments with Many and Most.
You're finding a spell unfun? Don't use it. Seriously. It's not that hard. A particular spell getting too complex to track when the DM uses it on you? Talk to him about it quietly. You'd be amazed at how many problems that will fix.
But you know what? I'm done. You've made it reasonably clear that you're not actually reading what I type particularly carefully, so there's no point. Have a nice day.
