Wizards with bows... WTF

[Krug]

Definitely overpowered and pretty silly for a first level spell. I agree with Stevelabny; just play a warlock from Complete Arcane.

 

[Psimancer]

My main problem with this spell is its potential for damage. 1d6/attack for the whole day is immense, along the lines of epic immense.

ElectricDragon, thanks, yours is the first bit of constructive criticism that has been posted.

Let me just say, this spell was designed initially (sans all the trimmings) to be nothing more than a bow alternative for Wizards and Sorcerers – nothing more. So on that point, okay, limit the number of uses to 20/day. A quiver of arrows cost 1 gp, same at the material component. And I will review most of the other bonuses & effects...

The way I see it, by 20th level most characters will have access to +5 weapons, so scaling up 'to hit' and 'damage' to +5 over 20 levels should be more than fine... beyond +5, maybe not...

And it was supposed to be Int/Cha instead of Dex and Str, not in addition to...

In my latest version, piercing damage, is affected by DR, etc... in other words, nothing more than a bow...

In all honesty, this spell isn't about the crunch, in fact the opposite, its all about fluff... a rose by any other name...

…and a potion of Cure Light Wounds…

Huh? The focus cost is 1000 gp/level, where does this come from? This is in additonal the material components, not replacing them...

Why not just play a Warlock?

As I said, this is for an existing campaign, not a new one, or even a new PC coming in…

 

[Gez]

Wizards with bows? Only elves, or wizards who spent a feat, or who were multiclassed in a fighting class.

Wizards with crossbows, on the other hand, is OK. And why not? It's better than wizards charging in melee with their 8 Str and d4 HD...

 

[Thanee]

I find it pretty cool that wizards now have the ability to use decent weapons.

It seems pretty reasonable to use mundane weapons from time to time. Heck, even Gandalf used a sword (ok, not really a mundane one, but still).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Nellisir]

It's too powerful at the moment, requirements are peculiar, and needs clarification in the spell description.

Change casting time to 1 action or 1 round.
Change duration to 1 minute per level.
Clarify what the spell -creates-. It doesn't give the caster the ability to make a ranged attack -- he can already use bows, crossbows, slings, stones, turnips, etc to make a ranged attack. The spell should create a physical object that inflicts nonmagical piercing damage, or possibly blunt damage (good against skeletons). Said object should be vulnerable to deflect arrows and the like.

Drop the focus.

Cheers
Nell.

 

[gamecat]

...An academy mage would never, IMHO, resort to such a primitive device as a mechanical weapon, but ‘may’ use this spell...

Pray tell what "academy mage" would be slogging through dungeons hunting for treasure? I think adventuring wizards are distinguished from academic wizards by the fact that adventuring ones have less compulsions about "style" and more about "survival", which includes resorting to primitive devices as mechanical weapons...

 

[Agamemnon]

So we all should just restrict possible character concepts willy-nilly. Hey, what's a lightly-armored fighter doing wandering around dungeons? Away with him, too. A cleric without a weapon? No, can't have that, either.

Frankly, I feel stupid about playing a wizard with a throwing dagger and crossbow too.

 

[Corlon]

Well, you said you wanted this as an alternative to bows and crossbows, so I'm assuming this would be used at fairly low levels. This said, why do you keep saying "well in comparison to a 20th level fighter," that's just a bit of a high level. Also, the 1000gp/level priced focus seems a bit costly for some of the lower levels. The only way to scale back the focus would be to lower the cost, but then you run into the balance problem. I'd say make it on a more need-right-now basis (such as a standard or full round action to cast and minute or 10 minute/level casting time.) Also, I'd take away the damage and attack bonuses from caster levels, maybe just a +to hit from one of the respective abilities? Also I'd just make it a flat 1d6 damage.

This would make it slightly better than using a bow (you get the plus to hit) and let the wizard make it pop out of no where for a 1st level spell slot. With these changes I'd probably make teh focus something really small, or even non-existent.

This would also cause it to fade a bit in power as level increases, hmm, doesn't this sound familiar for first level spells?

 

[KarinsDad]

ElectricDragon, thanks, yours is the first bit of constructive criticism that has been posted.

Actually, there has been several constructive criticisms (e.g. Hellhound's and Dr Awkward's), you just do not necessarily agree with them.

Frankly, I feel stupid about playing a wizard with a throwing dagger and crossbow too.

Fine.

Go into the dungeons without a dagger or a crossbow if that is your character conception.

Or, use a feat to get a different weapon.

But, if that IS your conception, then people should not complain about that conception and turn around like Psimancer did and create an uber spell just to handle this one minor nit issue and then be shocked when everyone thought it was uber and unnecessary.

Wizards are not fighters and should not be fighting all day long, with a spell or not. At least with a crossbow, they have to pay for the bolts, it is obvious that they are armed, and the crossbow can be sundered, disarmed, taken away, etc.

The entire point of this spell is to shore up a game weakness which was explicitly put in on purpose due to the power potential of wizards and sorcerers.

This spell solution is just a way to avoid that game weakness.

This spell, even at 20 times per day, is more potent than any other first level spell. Plus, the caster does not need to lug around the weight of that crossbow and bolts to get the same effect. Plus, the 1000 GP per level focus would prevent anyone from taking it anyway.

I think this spell is a poor idea and merely a way to avoid some of the limitations of being a wizard or sorcerer. IMO.

 

[JoeGKushner]

At the end of the day, I want this to be no more powerful that a bow or crossbow, so theoretically, it <shouldn’t> effect the power level of the either the individuals within the group or the group itself…

then in a way, you've failed. The character has access to the ability for a whole day. If he was using a bow, he could run out of arrows. His bow could be cleaved. His comrades stripped of their items.

The spell lasts for a day. Mage Armor, one of the most common buff spells around, doesn't last that long.

In my opinion, way too powerful.