Quote Originally Posted by NeoSeraphi View Post
I don't think Yitzi is worried about the extra 6th, 7th, and 8th level spells per day. I think he's more concerned about the +3 bonus to all save DCs (+4 if you include old-venerable age, +5 if you're a race that has a +2 bonus to Intelligence)

With DCs, every single point counts, because it's a potential 5% increase in every one of your offensive spells succeeding. That +5 there...that's a 25% increased success rate. That's incredibly significant, much more so than a +7 bonus to damage with a two-handed weapon (Though that itself is also pretty significant considering it applies to every attack roll)
This; it's mainly because of the effect on DCs. Of course, decreasing the number of different spells a wizard can prepare helps too, as does allowing the fighter to increase his CON with manuals far more effectively.

Plus, you have to consider epic levels. Epic spellcasting focuses on Spellcraft checks.
Epic spellcasting is broken anyway; I think a modified version of the epic metamagic replacement posted here a while back is a better way to go.

Quote Originally Posted by Glimbur View Post
Let's look at some monsters, since players mostly fight monsters in a standard game.

A Wyrm Black Dragon is CR 20, so the party should be able to take 4 of them in a day and be pretty beat up/exhausted of resources. That means a OHKO shouldn't be feasible, but it should be possible. Saving bonuses are +26/+19/+23. Core doesn't particularly have Ref or Die spells, so we will consider a hypothetical Fort Save or die spell, as well as a Will or Die spell. DC for a 9th level spell from our 20th level wizard is 10+9(level)+9 or 12 for a total DC of 28 or 31. Dragon makes that on a 5 versus an 8 assuming a will save, and that is ignoring its SR of 26... which should mostly be ignored as it will be beaten by the wizard on a roll of 6 on d20. There's about a 14.5% chance of the dragon dying to the wizard with an ability cap versus 29% chance of dying to the wizard without the ability cap, assuming the wizard knows to use a will save spell and that there is a will save or die spell at 9th level (there's Imprisonment, which is a touch spell, and Dominate Monster, which is pretty nice to land on a dragon).
That's the wizard's fault for targeting the dragon's best saves. Instead, he should be forgetting about save-or-dies (which have been nerfed anyway by the condition levels fix) and using Reflex save spells (which he does have a pretty decent chance of hitting with, and will probably do some damage even without), or buffs, or some of those no-save debuffs or combat control spells he has.

so the wizard has even less of a chance of ending the encounter in one spell.
That's a feature, not a bug.

Quote Originally Posted by YouLostMe View Post
This is quite a lot, and I do appreciate the work here. One thing I'd like to pitch in is about those condition tracks: They are bad.

One thing condition tracks do is stack with each other, and you have shown.
The intent was not that they should stack substantially except where they would anyway (and nausea, which really should include "sickened" as well). Fixed.

Now, I couldn't really understand the special DC stuff about each track, but I do believe that the more afflicted you are by an effect of a certain level, the easier it is to afflict you with an effect of the next level. That's a big deal, because it means that parties will be more effective if everyone is spamming the same kinds of abilities.
Sort of. You'll get a better chance of getting someone totally taken out of the fight, but on the flip side you get no effect if someone just barely misses their save (since two sickened effects, for instance, don't stack.)

Stun will be more useful is everyone runs stun, or everybody but the damage guy runs stun. This will encourage parties to play similar characters, which is almost against the iconic nature of D&D.
Except that if everyone plays a wizard so they can spam stun, they'll be extremely vulnerable to classes and monsters that are strong against wizards, and they will find themselves having to escape or face a TPK relatively often.

I dislike that, and would prefer that if a character is affected by ANY tier 1 effect, it becomes easier for him/her to be hit with ANY tier 2 effect.
Except that makes no sense. Why should being dazzled make you more vulnerable to nausea? Better to rely on the fact that party diversity is still needed for the same reasons as usual, and on the fact that spamming the same effect over and over is a double-edged sword.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my assumptions. I are not always the read gud.
Done.