Author Topic: Reducing the level of blasting spells  (Read 11058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Reducing the level of blasting spells
« on: May 13, 2011, 12:02:55 PM »
A while back, in the Pathfinder boards, FrankTrollman made a post about fixing Evocation by redoing spell levels.  The idea was if you weren't blowing your highest level spell slots on blasting, it might be worth it to use a lower level slot.  Here's his original post:

[spoiler]
Quote from: FrankTrollman
Polar Ray is an insult to god and man. It's not a long legacy, it was introduced in 3.5 and before that it was merely one of several options for the much lower level Otiluke's Freezing Sphere. And of course, in Pathfinder, that would have to be called Freezing Sphere for copyright reasons, but that is neither here nor there.

The point however, is that in the conversion from AD&D to 3e D&D, the amount of hit points and energy resistance that creatures have has increased literally exponentially. And damage output from Evocations has not kept up in the slightest. And while we could plausibly attempt to push the envelope and pump up damage output to match, that would only be an arms race that no one would win.

Evocations in 3rd edition rules are primarily spells which serve to devastate low level opposition or to slowly but surely chip away at the defenses of opponents that pose reasonable threats. These are sometimes valid tactics, but they are not valid tactics to use one's highest level spells to accomplish. It takes a lot of magic missiles to bring down a Shadow, meaning that there is frankly no way that any Wizard is going to have enough spell slots to dedicate to doing that to make it a viable way to eventually beat such an opponent.

So here's the solution: reduce the spell level of these underperforming evocation spells. Since they scale in damage to your level, nothing actually bad happens if you get these spells early. Even a dozen or more levels early is perfectly fine because the damage scales to something level appropriate at low level. A polar ray cast by a 1st level character does just 1d6 of damage - half the damage that the same character could achieve by purchasing a vial of alchemist frost and throwing it at a target (same to-hit roll as well at any kind of close range).

So here's what the Evocation list should look like:

Evocation Cantrips

    * Burning Hands
    * Dancing Lights
    * Light
    * Magic Missile
    * Shocking Grasp


Evocation 1st Level Spells

    * Fireball
    * Floating Disk
    * Gust of Wind
    * Lightning Bolt
    * Polar Ray
    * Sending


Evocation 2nd Level Spells

    * Chain Lightning
    * Cone of Cold
    * Continual Flame
    * Darkness
    * Daylight
    * Flaming Sphere (this spell badly needs to be better than it is, but that's another subject)
    * Scorching Ray
    * Shatter


Evocation 3rd Level Spells

    * Delayed Blast Fireball
    * Ice Storm
    * Shout
    * Tiny Hut
    * Wall of Fire
    * Wind Wall


Evocation 4th Level Spells

    * Fire Shield
    * Interposing Hand
    * Resilient Sphere
    * Wall of Ice

Evocation 5th Level Spells

    * Forceful Hand
    * Freezing Sphere
    * Mage Sword
    * Sunburst
    * Wall of Force


Evocation 6th Level Spells

    * Contingency
    * Grasping Hand
    * Shout, Greater


Evocation 7th Level Spells

    * Clenched Fist
    * Force Cage
    * Prismatic Spray



Evocation 8th Level Spells

    * Crushing Hand
    * Meteor Swarm
    * Telekinetic Sphere


Evocation 9th Level Spells

    * 9th level Spells must be written for this discipline. Seriously, timestop? Shapechange? Wail of the Banshee? Astral Projection? Shades? Weird? Most disciplines have two game defining, god-fighting spells to choose from at 9th level. Evocation hasn't been given anything remotely decent for their top tier, so new, mountain leveling spells must be written for Evokers to have.

There. It's pretty much completely backwards compatible, but nonetheless puts Evokers in at being able to do something legitimately valuable - Killing Fools.

And no, having unlimited magic missiles or shocking grasps is not ungamebalanced at 1st level, or any level. Magic Missile tops out in damage at level 9, when it does 17.5 damage against any opponent who doesn't have concealment, cover, or spell resistance. But at level 9, a Rogue is literally inflicting 17.5 points of sneak attack damage with every single attack. And that's not total damage for the round, that's just the extra damage from a sneak attack. He still gets to do his weapon damage, and make his other attacks for that round. Shocking Grasp is very likely to hit, and it does a d8+1 damage. A Longsword in the hands of a Fighter is also very likely to hit and does a d8+4. While the shocking grasp is quite likely to have a better chance of hitting an orc warrior than the longsword is, it is also much more likely to do insufficient damage to drop the orc. Indeed, the Orc Warrior out of the SRD is more likely to drop in one attack from the 1st level Fighter than he from the 1st level Wizard - even factoring in the discrepancy in hit chances.

And no, casting fireballs at 1st level isn't unbalanced either. At 1st level it only does a d6 of fire damage, it's barely worth doing against many opponents. It certainly isn't putting color spray out of a job.
[/spoiler]



Now, all in all, I like the idea, but there's still a lot of unfinished work there.  He specifically mentions that one or two good 9th level Evocations need to be created and certain spells (like Flaming Sphere) need to be reworked to be worth while.

Another issue is these are just core spells, but there are plenty of blasting staples from other sources (such as Spell Compendium), and I'm curious where you all think they should go.  Some of the ones that jump out are the Lesser Orb spells and regular Orb spells.  I know these are Conjuration and not Evocation, but they really get left in the dust by changes like these.  It seems the Lesser Orb spells would fall at about 0.5 level, and the regular Orb spells are maybe 1.5 or so.  What are your thoughts on this?

What about Maw Of Chaos?  It's better than other 9th level blast spells, but I'm still kind of iffy about it (yes, I know it's Abjuration).

What other blasting spells do you like that you think should be reduced?
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

wotmaniac

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • Emperor's Enforcer
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2011, 02:09:00 PM »
well, FWIT, I personally disagree with the general direction ....
Frank's general direction is a serious power-up.  For me, 3.x was already a bit much in the power-up department from 2e; and he just pushed down on the accelerator.  (note: yes, I realize that Frank is not alone in this; but he does get quoted a lot ..)
For my money, evocation should be the intended balance point.  the only problem with that is that it's easier to re-balance evocation than to re-balance everything else.

:shrug

[spoiler]
If you stop ignoring 289 pages telling what the intent is to stretch "more power" in your own god complexion of your interpretation trumps all to cover ability adjustments from aging then I will ignore a quarter page of rules that exist within a sidebar.
I think in this case the grammar is less important than whether the Str and Dex bonus provided to your created undead scales.

Greenbound Summoning RAI
Expanded Gestalt
More Savage Progressions[/spoiler]
Report any wrongs I have done here.

SneeR

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • Sneering
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2011, 05:21:04 PM »
Unfortunately, wotcmaniac, the rest of 3.5 is already, for the most part, hugely powerful, especially at high levels. I think that, due to the scaling nature of evocation spells, the only thing evokers get from casting higher level spells earlier is versatility, not really damage.

I would submit, though, that a swarm of kobold warrior 1s will find themselves annihilated by fireballs at first level. Just incentive to give them one more HD, eh?
The answer to everything:
[spoiler][/spoiler]
SneeR
[spoiler]
I don't know if the designers meant you to take Skill Focus for every feat.
Sounds a little OP.

The monk is clearly the best class, no need to optimize here. What you are doing is overkill.

It's like people who have no idea what a turn signal is. They ruin it for everyone else.
When another driver brandishes a holy symbol and begins glowing with divine light, seek cover or get spattered with zombie brains. I do not see what is so complicated about this.
[/spoiler]

Eldritch_Lord

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 31
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2011, 05:51:00 PM »
Now, all in all, I like the idea, but there's still a lot of unfinished work there.  He specifically mentions that one or two good 9th level Evocations need to be created and certain spells (like Flaming Sphere) need to be reworked to be worth while.

I'm personally not in favor of lowering the spell level of evocations per se, as I'd rather make new spells for lower level and give the iconics some extra benefits to make them worth using your highest-level slots on, but for the purposes of this conversation I agree that fixing evocation is easier than fixing everything else.

Quote
Another issue is these are just core spells, but there are plenty of blasting staples from other sources (such as Spell Compendium), and I'm curious where you all think they should go.  Some of the ones that jump out are the Lesser Orb spells and regular Orb spells.  I know these are Conjuration and not Evocation, but they really get left in the dust by changes like these.  It seems the Lesser Orb spells would fall at about 0.5 level, and the regular Orb spells are maybe 1.5 or so.  What are your thoughts on this?

The orbs aren't valuable for their damage, they're valuable for being conjuration spells, which means they're SR: No and can be fired into antimagic fields, and the regular orbs for having a rider effect like blinding or entangling.  Unless you're an incantatrix focusing on those spells, you're not using orbs for primary damage, you're pulling them out against golems and beholders, and dropping those spells to lower levels is not a good idea.  If you want to make orb-like evocation spells at those lower levels (lesser orb at 0 and regular orb at 2), or just move the orbs to evocation, that's fine, but changing the level of damage-dealing conjurations is something the already-too-good Conjuration school doesn't need at all.

Quote
What about Maw Of Chaos?  It's better than other 9th level blast spells, but I'm still kind of iffy about it (yes, I know it's Abjuration).

Simple: Move it to Evocation.  It should really never have been in Abjuration to begin with.  I'd also support moving it down to 8th level with the other 9th-level evocations; yes, it's better than they are, but they're close enough in power level and 9th level spells should be much closer to apocalypse from the sky than maw of chaos.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2011, 10:43:49 PM »
The orbs aren't valuable for their damage, they're valuable for being conjuration spells, which means they're SR: No and can be fired into antimagic fields, and the regular orbs for having a rider effect like blinding or entangling. 
Yeah, that's why I figured they're at least half a level higher, if not a level higher than the Evocation equivalents.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Otto the Bugbear

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 66
    • Email
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2011, 11:15:05 AM »
I'm with wotmaniac on this one. The reason 3.5 is perceived as so powerful is the spells. Reducing the spell levels, even of a weak school like evocation, does ratchet up the power level.

As SneeR points out, the AoE spells would be problematic. Changing the number of HD all those monsters have (not to mention villagers and other NPCs) ends up being a pretty big project, just like changing all the non-evocation spells would be. It also heads down the 4ed path of amping up 1st level hit points.

If one wishes to head down this path anyway perhaps think about scaling the AoE aspects as well.

Look at the AoE of 1st level spells right now and bring the reduced spells more in line with that when cast at 1st level. Then bring the AoE into line by the time they reach the standard SRD intended CL.

Fireball scales from 5 ft. burst @ 1st CL up to 20 ft. burst @ 5th CL.
Lightning Bolt scales from 20 ft. line @ 1st CL up to 100 ft. line @ 5th CL.

A different thing to consider is to reintroduce the AD&D aspects of evocation spells lost in the conversion. If a fireball is constrained to a small space, it instead expands to fill the entire 44 squares. Lightning bolt bounces off walls. That sort of thing.

Prime32

  • Administrator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 7534
  • Modding since 03/12/10
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2011, 11:39:24 AM »
If one wishes to head down this path anyway perhaps think about scaling the AoE aspects as well.

Look at the AoE of 1st level spells right now and bring the reduced spells more in line with that when cast at 1st level. Then bring the AoE into line by the time they reach the standard SRD intended CL.

Fireball scales from 5 ft. burst @ 1st CL up to 20 ft. burst @ 5th CL.
Lightning Bolt scales from 20 ft. line @ 1st CL up to 100 ft. line @ 5th CL.
I have some stuff like this.

Quote
A different thing to consider is to reintroduce the AD&D aspects of evocation spells lost in the conversion. If a fireball is constrained to a small space, it instead expands to fill the entire 44 squares. Lightning bolt bounces off walls. That sort of thing.
On that note...
My work
The tier system in a nutshell:
[spoiler]Tier 6: A cartographer.
Tier 5: An expert cartographer or a decent marksman.
Tier 4: An expert marksman.
Tier 3: An expert marksman, cartographer and chef who can tie strong knots and is trained in hostage negotiation or a marksman so good he can shoot down every bullet fired by a minigun while armed with a rusted single-shot pistol that veers to the left.
Tier 2: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything, or the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.
Tier 1: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything and the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.[/spoiler]

ninjarabbit

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
    • Email
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2011, 12:39:55 PM »
A lot of blasting spells are underpowered for their spell level.

For example polar ray should have been a 1st level spell not an 8th level spell. By comparison the psionic power energy ray is a 1st level power and is superior to polar ray since you can switch its energy type. Even fireball would be okay as a 2nd level spell since there's plenty of AoE spells at that level like glitterdust and web.

bkdubs123

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2724
    • Email
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2011, 02:50:22 PM »
Reducing the spell levels, even of a weak school like evocation, does ratchet up the power level.

How does this happen at all? Swordswingers deal anywhere from 2d6+6 to 3d6+9 damage everytime they hit right there at 1st level.

Quote
As SneeR points out, the AoE spells would be problematic. Changing the number of HD all those monsters have (not to mention villagers and other NPCs) ends up being a pretty big project, just like changing all the non-evocation spells would be. It also heads down the 4ed path of amping up 1st level hit points.

There is NO reason you would raise the number of HD on monsters to compensate for low level AoE blasting spells. The spells still deal 1d6 damage, with a reflex save for half. Unless you regularly throw huge mobs of 1hp monsters at your PCs instead of using legitimate encounters against CR 1/2 - CR 1 monsters (9hp - 15hp), evokers will not be coming anywhere near one-shotting whole encounters. Of course, Enchanters and Illusionists still will be, using Sleep or Color Spray.

wotmaniac

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • Emperor's Enforcer
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2011, 03:15:40 PM »
here's the thing ..... if you get fireball at 1st level, you're not just doing 1d6 -- you're doing 1d6 to everything in a 20-ft radius.
so, you're not just one-shotting a goblin ... you're one-shotting an entire platoon
The martial equivalent of this (whirlwind attack) isn't available until 6th level.

So, the issue isn't just damage, it's how many creatures take that damage; with Reflex save replacing AC in the chance-to-hit matrix.

[spoiler]
If you stop ignoring 289 pages telling what the intent is to stretch "more power" in your own god complexion of your interpretation trumps all to cover ability adjustments from aging then I will ignore a quarter page of rules that exist within a sidebar.
I think in this case the grammar is less important than whether the Str and Dex bonus provided to your created undead scales.

Greenbound Summoning RAI
Expanded Gestalt
More Savage Progressions[/spoiler]
Report any wrongs I have done here.

SneeR

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • Sneering
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2011, 03:25:56 PM »
There is NO reason you would raise the number of HD on monsters to compensate for low level AoE blasting spells. The spells still deal 1d6 damage, with a reflex save for half. Unless you regularly throw huge mobs of 1hp monsters at your PCs instead of using legitimate encounters against CR 1/2 - CR 1 monsters (9hp - 15hp), evokers will not be coming anywhere near one-shotting whole encounters. Of course, Enchanters and Illusionists still will be, using Sleep or Color Spray.

Well, I was thinking more goblins and kobolds and things that normally use swarm tactics. Are you honestly telling me that you've never played a game where the DM just drew the next room on the map and dumped kobold minifigures onto the table?

But a single d6 has a good chance of eliminating a kobold warrior as presented in MM1, since they have poor abilities scores, Reflex Saves, hp, and energy resistance at first level. The DC for an average wizard's first-level spells is about 14, since any half-decent CO puts minimum 16 into INT.
The answer to everything:
[spoiler][/spoiler]
SneeR
[spoiler]
I don't know if the designers meant you to take Skill Focus for every feat.
Sounds a little OP.

The monk is clearly the best class, no need to optimize here. What you are doing is overkill.

It's like people who have no idea what a turn signal is. They ruin it for everyone else.
When another driver brandishes a holy symbol and begins glowing with divine light, seek cover or get spattered with zombie brains. I do not see what is so complicated about this.
[/spoiler]

bkdubs123

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2724
    • Email
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2011, 03:55:16 PM »
There is NO reason you would raise the number of HD on monsters to compensate for low level AoE blasting spells. The spells still deal 1d6 damage, with a reflex save for half. Unless you regularly throw huge mobs of 1hp monsters at your PCs instead of using legitimate encounters against CR 1/2 - CR 1 monsters (9hp - 15hp), evokers will not be coming anywhere near one-shotting whole encounters. Of course, Enchanters and Illusionists still will be, using Sleep or Color Spray.

Well, I was thinking more goblins and kobolds and things that normally use swarm tactics. Are you honestly telling me that you've never played a game where the DM just drew the next room on the map and dumped kobold minifigures onto the table?

But a single d6 has a good chance of eliminating a kobold warrior as presented in MM1, since they have poor abilities scores, Reflex Saves, hp, and energy resistance at first level. The DC for an average wizard's first-level spells is about 14, since any half-decent CO puts minimum 16 into INT.

Certainly, DMs will fill a room with Kobolds. That room was never meant to be a serious challenge anyway, in fact every DM I've ever had do that, including myself, is using it as free XP. Depending on how large the room is and how many Kobolds are actually in it, a Wizard using any number of spells (including Color Spray and Sleep obviously) might one-shot the encounter. Moving fireball to 1st level simply makes it somewhat on par with other spells that are better and have always been 1st level. This is the type of encounter that a Wizard is supposed to shine in. It's the Fighter's job to efficiently take down the Grimlock waiting at the end of the corridor.

@Wotmaniac: Yeah, and Whirlwind Attack is a trap. Of course, a human Fighter can get Great Cleave, which is still a trap, but it'll cut through swathes of soldiers far more efficiently than Whirlwind Attack would at 1st level. A platoon of CR 1/2 warriors by the way, will have at minimum 6 hp each, and really some of them should have up to 10 or more, and most of them ought to have something close to 8. Unless we're talking about warriors with Int 1 on a featureless white plain 400ft away, the Fighter will slay them faster than the Wizard and with fewer resources expended. It will still take the Wizard at least two fireballs, perhaps three (half or more of his spells per day).

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2011, 10:12:24 PM »
here's the thing ..... if you get fireball at 1st level, you're not just doing 1d6 -- you're doing 1d6 to everything in a 20-ft radius.
so, you're not just one-shotting a goblin ... you're one-shotting an entire platoon.  
The martial equivalent of this (whirlwind attack) isn't available until 6th level.

So, the issue isn't just damage, it's how many creatures take that damage; with Reflex save replacing AC in the chance-to-hit matrix.
Actually, given a goblin warrior (2-9 HP), if you deal 1d6 damage, on a failed save, any one goblin has a 31.25% chance (15/48) of dropping/being disabled (assuming you roll for HP).  If you take the average HP, you have a 33% to bring them to 0 or lower HP.

So, the wizard isn't wiping out entire squadrons of goblins; he's taking out a third of whatever MC throws at them.  And if that number is anything more than three, it's already above an EL 1 encounter.  I know spacing and board placement really matters, but this is nothing that Color Spray or Sleep couldn't also do.

So, yes, that 1st level Fireball could take out 10 goblins for one slot, but that means that there are probably 20 more standing that will likely murder the group next round.  1st level Fireball is really no big deal.


Edit:
And you know what Fireball won't do at 1st level?  Kill a gnoll, or about any other CR 1 monster.  You're focusing on what Fireball does best: kill bunches of mooks.  What's the problem with the wizard having the ability to kill mooks at level 1?
« Last Edit: May 15, 2011, 10:14:03 PM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

wotmaniac

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • Emperor's Enforcer
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2011, 12:43:36 AM »
rogue with 2 short swords = 2 attacks @ 2d6 each (provided he's flanking) = 4d6 damage
wizard with fireball = 1d6 x number of creatures in a 40-ft diameter circle (that's 44 squares)
sleep caps @ 4HD of creatures
color spray is only 6-7 squares

it's not just how much damage, it's total effect; otherwise we should knock acid cloud down a few levels for only doing 2d6 damage and a minor status effect.

[spoiler]
If you stop ignoring 289 pages telling what the intent is to stretch "more power" in your own god complexion of your interpretation trumps all to cover ability adjustments from aging then I will ignore a quarter page of rules that exist within a sidebar.
I think in this case the grammar is less important than whether the Str and Dex bonus provided to your created undead scales.

Greenbound Summoning RAI
Expanded Gestalt
More Savage Progressions[/spoiler]
Report any wrongs I have done here.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2011, 01:16:12 AM »
Well, for area, Fireball might actually, barely, warrant a level 2. 1st level areas are about half that size.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

bkdubs123

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2724
    • Email
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2011, 02:07:01 AM »
rogue with 2 short swords = 2 attacks @ 2d6 each (provided he's flanking) = 4d6 damage
wizard with fireball = 1d6 x number of creatures in a 40-ft diameter circle (that's 44 squares)
sleep caps @ 4HD of creatures
color spray is only 6-7 squares

it's not just how much damage, it's total effect; otherwise we should knock acid cloud down a few levels for only doing 2d6 damage and a minor status effect.

Think before you post and make a real argument.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2011, 10:13:42 AM »
rogue with 2 short swords = 2 attacks @ 2d6 each (provided he's flanking) = 4d6 damage
wizard with fireball = 1d6 x number of creatures in a 40-ft diameter circle (that's 44 squares)
sleep caps @ 4HD of creatures
color spray is only 6-7 squares

it's not just how much damage, it's total effect; otherwise we should knock acid cloud down a few levels for only doing 2d6 damage and a minor status effect.
Yeah.  You're also neglecting that fireball does that damage to everyone in the area, so there are lots of times that wonderful area is a liability.

My point is, at 1st level, Fireball isn't doing much more than what Color Spray or Sleep do other than killing about a third of the mooks in the area at a really nice range in a really wide area.  Color Spray and Sleep actually have a real chance or taking out stronger guys.

The whole reason you lower the spell levels isn't to try to make the good top level spells obsolete; because this isn't doing that.  It's so you don't have to spend your top level spells to blast.  That way, when you're 5th level and you want to throw around a Fireball, you don't have to give up a slot for something like Stinking Cloud or Fly.  Instead, you give up a slot competing for Color Spray, Grease, or Silent Image... when you're 5th level and don't care about those things as much.  It also allows you to do it more times per day, which is important, because in 3E, monsters have more HP than earlier editions and it literally takes more spell slots of blasting to bring them down.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2011, 10:15:14 AM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

wotmaniac

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • Emperor's Enforcer
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2011, 11:00:43 AM »
:surrender

[spoiler]
If you stop ignoring 289 pages telling what the intent is to stretch "more power" in your own god complexion of your interpretation trumps all to cover ability adjustments from aging then I will ignore a quarter page of rules that exist within a sidebar.
I think in this case the grammar is less important than whether the Str and Dex bonus provided to your created undead scales.

Greenbound Summoning RAI
Expanded Gestalt
More Savage Progressions[/spoiler]
Report any wrongs I have done here.

veekie

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • WARNING: Homing Miko
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2011, 02:53:03 PM »
My personal considerations:
Single target, Xd6 - 1st level
AoE - Justification for increased level
Rider effect - Justification for increased level

That was pretty much it. Fireball IS worth a level 2 slot because it does more than deal CL d6s, it does CL d6s to everything in a dungeon room.
The mind transcends the body.
It's also a little cold because of that.
Please get it a blanket.

I wish I could read your mind,
I can barely read mine.

"Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. At 2:15, it begins rolling up characters."

[spoiler]
"Just what do you think the moon up in the sky is? Everyone sees that big, round shiny thing and thinks there must be something round up there, right? That's just silly. The truth is much more awesome than that. You can almost never see the real Moon, and its appearance is death to humans. You can only see the Moon when it's reflected in things. And the things it reflects in, like water or glass, can all be broken, right? Since the moon you see in the sky is just being reflected in the heavens, if you tear open the heavens it's easy to break it~"
-Ibuki Suika, on overkill

To sumbolaion diakoneto moi, basilisk ouranionon.
Epigenentheto, apoleia keraune hos timeis pteirei.
Hekatonkatis kai khiliakis astrapsato.
Khiliarkhou Astrape!
[/spoiler]

There is no higher price than 'free'.

"I won't die. I've been ordered not to die."

bkdubs123

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2724
    • Email
Re: Reducing the level of blasting spells
« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2011, 05:22:52 PM »
My personal considerations:
Single target, Xd6 - 1st level
AoE - Justification for increased level
Rider effect - Justification for increased level

That was pretty much it. Fireball IS worth a level 2 slot because it does more than deal CL d6s, it does CL d6s to everything in a dungeon room.

And yet that's exactly mine and Robby's point. A spell that simply deals 1d6 damage to one target is definitely not worth a 1st level spell slot. A spell that deals 3d6 damage to one target wouldn't even be worth a 1st level spell slot because a Fighter or Rogue does that much damage with their basic melee attack every round of every combat.