Results 1 to 30 of 66
Thread: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
-
2019-10-31, 09:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
A suitable nerf for orb spells?
our party wizard is concerned that he has trouble affecting monsters with high spell resistance or saving throws. he was looking into stuff because we'll have to fight some augmented great wyrms at some point as bosses, and he discovered the orb spells. good damage, no spell resistance, no saving throw, an easy touch attack. with metamagic they get very strong. the dm banned ocular spells, but it still leaves quickened twinned maximized empowered. and the wizard is an incantatar with several metamagic rods, and an archamge for elemental substitution.
Problem is, that's way above the power level we want for our table. this metamagic combo would mean that the wizard could deal a bit over 220 damage to anyone, in one round, from afar, without any kind of defence available. high touch AC (which is very difficult to get) would force him to cast quicken true strike and only deal 110 damage or so, but that's it. sure, it would work as intended against dragons, keep the wizard relevant. but it would also mean that the wizard could insta-gib any humanoid foe. tricks to protect against it (like having a summoned devil with a readied action to cast a wall of ice to block line of effect) are way too high op for what we want, and most especially for what our DM can prepare.
while a balance problem, it's also annoying for me, because my character is a monk whose major goal was to make himself resistant to magic, and i devoted a lot of my build to it - under the premise that the campaign would stay at a power level where it's still possible to do so. and it's not nice that your whole build can be invalidated by a single spell.
We are a tight group of friends, we will not have animosity over it. the wizard does not want to become exceedingly op. I do not want to bring him down. However, we are at an impasse.
the problem with orb spells is that they are so universal. they have no defence, no counterplay, and while direct damage is frowned upon because there are even more broken combos out there, it's still enough damage to wipe out most opponents before the combat even began.
So I was considering if it was possible to nerf them in some way. Some way that
- would make orb spells still a relevant source of damage against a foe with high spell resistance and saving throw, such as a wyrm dragon
- would make them weak enough that they can't destroy a humanoid with impunity
my only passable idea so far is to give them a damage penalty on smaller targets (perhaps "justified" in saying that a person will be pushed back more than hurt, while a dragon will take the full brunt of the impact), so that they deal full damage to a colossal creature but won't one-shot a humanoid.
I'm sure this forum can come up with many more.
Alternatively, it is also possible to suggest alternative ways for the wizard to contribute in the fight against creatures that can pass easily all his saving throws and will manage spell resistance most of the times. One idea we have was to use shapechange to turn into a dragon and use the breath weapon, that should provide a decent-but-not-overpowered source of damage.
what we don't need are spells/combos that are even more powerful. we don't want to go to those power levels. defences against orb are useful only if they can be used by most creatures; if they are too complex to implement (like the aforementioned readied action with a wall) they are not the direction we want to push our campaign.
thanks to everyone who will contribute.In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.
Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you
my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert
-
2019-10-31, 09:40 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
The orbs themselves aren't actually your main problem here; the true problem is that the wizard player is using two of the most powerful prestige classes in the game, has items that make them even stronger., and is playing alongside party members that are on the weak end of things so the DM is unable to increase the challenges accordingly without leaving everyone else in the dust.
More importantly, this is not an in-game problem - your player is either unaware of, uncaring about, or unable to deal with the effect his extreme power disparity is having on the group. Your first course of action should be to talk it out as a group, figure out which one of those it is, and then come to a solution based on that. If he's unwilling or unable to tone himself down, then the power of his prestige classes and items are the root cause to be addressed, not of the specific spells he is using.Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2019-10-31, 09:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2017
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
It sounds like an OOC issue. You did somewhat address that in your original post, but I do think just talking about it is best. As a close group of friends, your wizard friend should understand that his power level is too high.
Failing that, maybe just decrease the damage dice to d4 and/or put a hard cap of how many dice can be used per spell. (Max of 10d4 for example)3.5 Cast - A GitP member made, third edition podcast
D&D 3.5 Discord Chat, Come one come all
The Master Specialist Handbook
Truly Complete List of 3.5e Base Classes
-
2019-10-31, 09:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
I agree with the above, but if you want suggestions on dealing with a Mailman without upping the ante even further:
Mirror Image is a pretty accessible spell effect which hurts ranged-touch-attack effects, and the bigger dragons should easily have enough spellcasting ability to apply it. Other similar options include invisibility, displacement, blink effects and illusions - the Orb doesn't have an exceptional range, and it costs a lot of resources to throw them out at everything, which means a few duplicates would make it such that he can't afford to throw one out until he's certain his target is the real thing.
Energy immunity options would also hurt him - while he has elemental substitution, he needs to pick the right effect for the target anyway, and if he's known to throw high damage energy effects around then Disguise Self is also highly accessible to any opponents of the caliber he's facing.
Globe of Invulnerability also stops Orbs - they're still a 4th level spell effect, regardless of the metamagic applied to them, unless they are Heightened.
Regarding other options for contributing to a fight against an enemy with good saving throws, you could summon creatures which can contribute to combat, or provide battlefield control. If you're worried about spell resistance, then spells like Assay Spell Resistance could let you get through that more easily.
If you have Shapechange access, then turning into something relevant also applies. There's a Shapechange handbook which has good options in it if you want details there, but it does basically everything.Last edited by Gauntlet; 2019-10-31 at 09:46 AM.
-
2019-10-31, 10:04 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2018
- Location
- Nottingham, England
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
One simple way is to allow a reflex save for half damage. IMO though, the real problems are the way metamagic stacks and how metamagic reducers work. Allowing metamagic other than Maximise and Empower to stack in the way most beneficial to the caster leads to absurd levels of damage in high-level high-op games; making them all work separately as Empower and Maximise solves this problem.
Likewise allowing metamagic reducers to stack can allow multiple metamagic feats to be added to a spell for little of no cost. In my games I also make Improved Metamagic reduce the total level increase by 1, not each feat applied by 1, it goes a long way towards making the Incantatrix a merely good class rather than a clearly OP one.
That's my 2p worth anyway.
Also, if spell resistance is a problem, Assay Spell Resistance (SpC) and True Casting (CM) can solve it very effectively.
-
2019-10-31, 10:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
What level is the group at? Other characters? I am seeing talk about fighting Augmented Great Wrym dragons and a wizard who is an Incantantrix AND Archmage. However I have to ask, is 220 damage really that big of a deal at this point, especially with the hoops he has to jump through to pull it off and the limited number of times he can pull it off? And if a dragon doesn't have a few (dozen) defenses up that might help with most tactics, then there is something wrong on the dragon's end.
You mention the DM isn't capable of handling something this OP. The better suggestion might be to retire the characters and start over, because things aren't going to be getting easier at this point, but that should have already been obvious several levels ago. At this stage of the game, unless the wizard is not very optimized to be on par with your monk, it's really like an adult and an infant are both part of the group and expected to contribute equally. Not likely to happen.
The orb spells are good because they bypass SR, and that's about it. However unless you really jack them up, they are worse than good old Fireball and barely better than Magic Missile.
As for what else the wizard can do. Buffs? Summons? Area Control? Other spells that don't offer saves? Heck, I have a strong suspicion your group is fairly high level, so the wizard can just Shapechange into a dragon and go toe-to-toe with the other one? Or Gate in his own?
-
2019-10-31, 10:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- Vacation in Nyalotha
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
The problem is incantatrix with how it hands out way too many metamagic enabling goodies. Nerf orbs and incantatrix still breaks ten+ other things.
Scintillating scales is a wonderful option if the base creature has casting and natural armor.If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?
-
2019-10-31, 12:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Location
- California
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Quickened Twinned Maximized Empowered is a +9 adjustment even for a 10th level incantatrix. Are we talking Arcane Thesis here?
Rhymes with "Protracted."
Handbooks: The Warlockopedia | The Warmagepedia (WIP) | Tier List (2019 Update)
Spreadsheets: Spellcasting classes | Deities | Useful items
Homebrew: Gestalt Theurge | Fighter and Monk fixes | Warlock stuff | Houserules and quick fixes
Original Fiction: The Wizard's Familiar
-
2019-10-31, 12:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Our fix to orbs in one of my groups was to make them Evocation and add in Spell Resistance. Mostly because we felt that the orbs were in the domain of Evocation, and not Conjuration.
Also, the way I look at things, Spell Resistance is like the "Magic AC". It helps as a balancing act for damage-dealing (casters auto-deal damage, fighters have to pray to the dice gods). Another thing is also that no Wizard is made unrelevant simply because an opponent might have Spell Resistance, there's always lots of other things a Wizard can do.
-
2019-10-31, 02:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Location
- Canada
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Even Adult Dragons can easily get 25-30 touch AC with a pair of low level spells and a few magic items (that would be assumed to be part of their hoard). If your at the point where the characters are level 15-17+ (which is probably where your at to have Arch-mage on top of Incantrix), 220 damage isn't that much per turn, especially as it sounds the wizard is burning easily +10 slots before subsidizers. That orb trick is probably his one best move that he can only do 1-3 times a day. Remember Rods are expensive and your looking at something like 20-70k PER turn you have to spend on rods if he wants to do that trick.
Or Arcane Thesis. It's probably both. He's essentially put all of his Prc specific resources and probably 20-50% of his WBL to pull off this trick 2-4 times a day. I mean you could nerf orbs but odds are you will just make his entire build invalid. Honestly this will either be unfairly targeting him or he will just rebuild and (accidentally) make something ACTUALLY scary.
-
2019-10-31, 02:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Friends don't let friends play Incantatrix. The only stronger prcs are Beholder Mage and Planar Shepard, and he is playing a wizard to your Monk.
The orbs are abusable, but no more so then Acid Rain (7d6 damage with no save, attack rolls, resistance, etc.) Or Hail of Stones, or Stun Ray. There are lots of "you just lose" spells, the ability to stack metamagic is the problem here.Last edited by Tvtyrant; 2019-10-31 at 02:46 PM.
-
2019-10-31, 02:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2007
- Location
- Terra Australis
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
You can put some defenses on enemies you don't want obliterated by Orbs:
- Otiluke's Suppressing Field keyed to Conjuration makes the caster roll a level check.
- Globe of Invulnerability flat out blocks them.Last edited by Thurbane; 2019-10-31 at 02:51 PM.
My winning competition entries: Kinvig Arrumskor | The Great Pumpkinhead | Wynfrith d'Acker
Torn-City - Massively multiplayer online browser based crime RPG
-
2019-10-31, 03:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2013
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Ray Deflection and Friendly Fire are two more spells that hard counter.
-
2019-10-31, 03:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2019-10-31, 03:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
-
2019-10-31, 05:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
First thing's first. Is eveything he's doing legal and how often can he do it?
You highlighted twinned, maximized orb of X and a quickened version of the same to do 220+ damage in one round.
You can't be under level 14 if he has an archmage level unless he actually wasted the cheese to get in one level early.
So 14d6, maximized, makes 84 damage, twinned to make 168. Then double that for a quickened casting of the same for 336 if all 4 orbs hit. So the damage more than checks out. He'd actually need CL penalties to get it -down- to 220.
Then there's the metas: twin and quicken are both +4s and max is a +3. Neither incantatrix nor archmage gets you around paying that reliably so you're looking at paying for at least one of those. I'm gonna guess twin rod, instant meta quicken, and actually prep'ed with maximize. If I'm right, that's not something he's doing more than once in a day since it costs one of his highest level slots and a 1/day class feature. If I've underestimated your level, do tell.
So now the question is if it's actually a problem. 1/day, he can nuke a single combat encounter, as long as -none- of the defenses against this attack are in place and the target has a weak touch AC. The wizard is rolling, I'm gonna guess, +10ish on that? It's -really- not hard to get a touch AC to 20+. Then, of course, that's assuming he hasn't already used his rod 3 times or instant metamagic feature at all on the same day.
There are plenty of spells that can trivialize an encounter with a single roll of the dice or even none at all with no metamagic applied, as long as none of the available defenses for such are in play. I'm not actually seeing a problem here. I mean, does your GM have an answer to the wizard just locking an enemy in a force cage?Last edited by Kelb_Panthera; 2019-10-31 at 05:34 PM.
I am not seaweed. That's a B.
Praise I've received A quick outline on building a homebrew campaign
Avatar by Tiffanie Lirle
-
2019-10-31, 05:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
perhaps i wasn't clear, or perhaps this forum has a tendency to be paranoid towards casters, so i reiterate: no player nor character is being a problem here. and we do not have big issues with power disparity. the wizard is still the most powerful character, but not in a toxic way. he can't deal with every problem himself, and we martials are all useful enough. Yes, even my monk.
we try balance to the table, and it works fine enough. which is why I'm asking here: to keep balancing to the table. to tune the orbs down until they are balanced to the table.
As for incantatrix and archmage being so broken, well, not really. they give nifty boosts, but they are not a problem by themselves. that's the problem when trying to balance a wizard to the table. most of the nifty wizard toys are not broken by themselves. they only become broken as they keep being added. which makes it really difficult to figure out what to allow and what to deny. So far the wizard was applying his metamagic to disintegrate and fireball, so he was dealing some good damage but not outshining the rest of us. He can go nova once per day, he's doing mostly support otherwise, which is where most people want a wizard to be. most "you just lose" spells are not available. So incantatrix and archamge weren't problems.
the problem is that the wizard wanted something to work against opponents with high magic defences, because all his combos so far don't work against someone who can tank a DC 29 disintegrate. and orb spells work, but they work too well. heck, even an alternative to orb spells that does something similar but less powerful is fine.
As for the level of the party, we are now at 16. I'd call the optimization level decently high, in that we all can do our stuff pretty well. nobody has access to the rocket tag stuff, though. the warrior deals easily 70-80 damage on a charge (shock trooper) and more on a full attack, but he won't get pounce. the wizard has a lot of stuff, but he needs to actually beat one's saving throws. the cleric is mostly core and full caster: heal and support with the occasional fire storm and save-or-die thrown in it. the monk is extremely hard to hurt with any kind of attack and has some decent battlefield control from tripping, but does not generally have reach, nor pounce.
basically, we have some pieces of the high-op builds, but we take some limitations on them.
no arcane thesis, and orbs are far from his only trick. how could he have centered the build on it, when he only discovered them a few days ago?
as for dragons having defences, that's too much of a burden for the dm. not only he's less mechanically skilled than me or the wizard, but it's much harder to play at high op for a dm; as a player you know very well all your stuff, as a dm you're either extremely good, or you'll forget half of what your npc can do every time. we don't want to force the dm to give counter strategies to all npcs. we also don't want to go for the magical escalation of attack and defence.
plus, we don't want to make the orbs less effective against the dragon, only against anyone else
anyway 220 damage per turn with almost no chance of failure, at our power level, is huge.
EDIT:
I don't know the wizard mechanics 100%. he probably can't do two twinned in the same round. not sure exactly how much damage it is, but at least 160 if he can reliably hit touch AC. which is more hp than most humanoids of our level have. if you can one-shot an enemy of your level without giving him any kind of defence, then I see a problem. of coure there are some defences, but those bring out the magic escalation. more specific: if it's not a number about yourself that you can passively increase, but it's a spell you need to have on to do some effect, then it's escalating too much - and it's practically guaranteed that we'll forget about it.
As for it not being hard to get touch AC above 20, you have a different concept of what is hard than we do. most of us, especially most npcs, are limited to dex + ring of protection. very few things in the campaign go above 15. powerful rogues have 20. I have 30+, but I devoted my build specifically to be hard to affect with magic.
I think you are assuming a level of optimization higher than we want to havehave.
On forcecage: I don't think the wizard has forcecage, but most humanoid opponents have some trinket for short distance teleportation, or they have casters with disintegrate. so yes, an encounter of our level would have the means to deal with forcecage, even if some individuals probably would not.Last edited by King of Nowhere; 2019-10-31 at 06:01 PM.
In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.
Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you
my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert
-
2019-10-31, 06:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Yeah, but like we are all telling you, fixing the orbs only works until the next spell comes up. The orbs are not particularly powerful, fixing them won't fix the issue. I just mentioned several spells that do an equivalent job of the same thing. The issue is in fact power disparity, the orbs themselves are just the first problem to have come up from it.
The best solution in game is to say "you can't add more then the spell's base level in metamagic to it" and nerf the whole prestige class. Incantatrix is still strong under those rules but you can't just heap metamagic on a spell anymore, so nova casting goes away.
The best solution out of game is to ask them to tone it down to the rest of the parties level.
Edit: Put another way, you are insisting that there aren't power disparity problems while asking for a solution to power disparity problems. Those are caused by the use of Incantatrix on a moderately effective blasting spell, and is a symptom of larger problems. If your player is unwilling to control their optimization this is only going to get worse, the genteel agreement to not instantly win encounters is the only real solution to D&D 3.5s problems.
-
2019-10-31, 06:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Defensive spells are the answer, Ray deflection, spell immunity, mirror image, elemental immunity, blink, spell turning.
-
2019-10-31, 06:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- Oregon
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Make them evocation, allow spell resistance, remove the bonus save or lose a turn effects. While you're at it ban Incantatrix, metamagic rods, and Assay Spell Resistance, and fix metamagic stacking/reduction (pretty sure the FAQ was quite clear that the intent is total then reduce, not reduce for every individual feat, not that some people care), possibly just ban all reduction. Consider giving metamagic feats a prerequisite that prevents you from taking them before you can actually use them, and consider capping the amount you can boost a spell or not allowing people to enhance a spell beyond the levels they can cast. Naturally this will require the wizard to re-do their entire build to tone it down to the rest of the party, which sucks, but drastic problems require drastic measures. You have discovered that one PC being able to reliably one-round appropriate foes is a problem, and that means characters built to do that need to be re-built.
- would make them weak enough that they can't destroy a humanoid with impunity
Alternatively, it is also possible to suggest alternative ways for the wizard to contribute in the fight against creatures that can pass easily all his saving throws and will manage spell resistance most of the times. One idea we have was to use shapechange to turn into a dragon and use the breath weapon, that should provide a decent-but-not-overpowered source of damage.
So far the wizard was applying his metamagic to disintegrate and fireball, so he was dealing some good damage but not outshining the rest of us.
As for other effects, you might add Greater Ice Storm and Greater Disintegrate for higher level no-save and fort-save critical damage. I've pegged them at 7th level with 6d6 bludgeoning+ 4d6 cold, and 8th level 10d6 on successful save, respectively. So a souped up Greater Disintegrate which is saved against still has twice the base damage, and you can soup up an area with 10d6 flat damage.
Finally, well they could stop using crazy souped up metamagic. 9th level single target spells should generally have death or 2d6/level on failed save, 1d6 per level on successful save (previous spells like Finger of Death or Destruction had less than 1d6/level), and there are a couple 9th level spells that are close. Burst of Glacial Wrath, Frostfell (actually still OP under this increased expectation), Detonate, and yes even Meteor Swarm when you count the on-target damage.
plus, we don't want to make the orbs less effective against the dragon, only against anyone else. . .
of coure there are some defences, but those bring out the magic escalation. more specific: if it's not a number about yourself that you can passively increase, but it's a spell you need to have on to do some effect, then it's escalating too much
my only passable idea so far is to give them a damage penalty on smaller targets (perhaps "justified" in saying that a person will be pushed back more than hurt, while a dragon will take the full brunt of the impact), so that they deal full damage to a colossal creature but won't one-shot a humanoid.
Don't sell yourself short, you've already decided what the specific issue is and come up with the most specific solution.
Come back if they start using Assay Resistance and whatnot to blow through SR and open up all the other 1d6/level no-save spells, but now that you know the issue, you should probably institute a policy of no no-save 1d6/level spells below 6th level to limit how many exist. Which is actually how 3.0 progression worked (Freezing sphere was the first available d6/level no save, at 6th, all the lower level damage was d6/2 or had saves), but someone wrote Scorching Ray (presumably because they removed the direct damage from Flame Arrow* and wanted a replacement) and everything went nuts. Scorching Ray at least caps so it's "only" 12d6 for a 2nd level slot, but Hailstones had its reflex save removed in SpC thanks to Scorching Ray so it goes to 15 or 20d6, and there's other stuff like Melf's Unicorn Arrow, just a lot of 1d6/level no-saves starting at 2nd level. Scorching Ray ought to be nerfed to 3d6 or 3rd level or something, but it's used in so many monsters and prerequisites that's hard to do (I've given it a -2 attack for each ray after the first).
*Freezing Sphere's original ray effect was replaced with a small AoE, and the ray apparently separated into the 8th level laughingstock Polar Ray, at the same time as they wrote Scorching Ray at 2nd. It's baffling.Last edited by Fizban; 2019-10-31 at 07:38 PM.
Fizban's Tweaks and Brew: Google Drive (PDF), Thread
A collection of over 200 pages of individually small bans, tweaks, brews, and rule changes, usable piecemeal or nearly altogether, and even some convenient lists. Everything I've done that I'd call done enough to use in one place (plus a number of things I'm working on that aren't quite done, of course).
-
2019-10-31, 07:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2013
- Location
- Collegeville, PA
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Ray Deflection, Spell Compendium, page 166.
"For the duration of the spell, you are protected against ranged touch attacks, including ray spells and ray attacks made by creatures."Resident Mad Scientist...
"It's so cool!"
Spoiler: ContestsVC I: Lord Commander Conrad Vayne, 1st place
VC II: Lorna, the Mother's Wrath, 5th place
VC XV: Tosk, Kursak the Marauder, Vierna Zalyl; 1st place, 6th/7th place
Kitchen Crashers Protocol for Peace
-
2019-10-31, 07:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
The most basic defence against the orbs is a decent touch AC; something any character that's of even moderately high level should be concerned about anyway. 160 hp will drop most humanoids of your level, true, but actually landing 2 orbs should be far from guaranteed on AC alone. What are these guys even doing that their touch AC isn't at least 16 by your level? Ring of protection and even a little bit of dex; done. Adjusting for the highe level than I estimated it's more likely a +11 on those orbs vs AC 16 is 80% to-hit. Good but not guaranteed. Dex types should be more like 20+; less than even odds. For two orbs to hit on a single twinned casting is only 2 times in 3 for the former and 1 in 4 for the latter.
As for it not being hard to get touch AC above 20, you have a different concept of what is hard than we do. most of us, especially most npcs, are limited to dex + ring of protection. very few things in the campaign go above 15. powerful rogues have 20. I have 30+, but I devoted my build specifically to be hard to affect with magic.
I think you are assuming a level of optimization higher than we want to havehave.
On forcecage: I don't think the wizard has forcecage, but most humanoid opponents have some trinket for short distance teleportation, or they have casters with disintegrate. so yes, an encounter of our level would have the means to deal with forcecage, even if some individuals probably would not.
You overcome a high-level caster using high level spells to crush encounters by forced attrition. He can pull this stunt -once- in a given day. Point out to the DM that he can have -two- big bad monsters in a given encounter. One gets nuked and then you fight the other without the nuke. Bait the nuke with illusions or at least dummy targets. Have a hard encounter come to the party at the end of the day when the nuke's already been dropped. Actually use the defenses available against this particular trick.
I mean, you can nerf the orbs but another spell will simply take their place. You can nerf incantatrix but it's barely even a factor for this problem.
If this is -really- the problem you think it is then kill the sacred cow: advize your GM to target the rods. If any of your enemies are remotely intelligent (and I heard dragon) then targetting a known source of strength for their enemy is an obvious strategy.
I get your concern about the escalation problem but there's only two -good- solid answer to that and they're both gonna make somebody unhappy: the GM asks the wizard to change his character and stop doing the problem thing or he leans into the curve and becomes a high-op monster that -can- deal with anything that any player throws at him. The former is a whole hell of a lot easier.I am not seaweed. That's a B.
Praise I've received A quick outline on building a homebrew campaign
Avatar by Tiffanie Lirle
-
2019-10-31, 07:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- California
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Orbs do not turn corners. If there are objects in the way they can impact early correct(like fireball).. Yyou need line of sight?
A fog cloud, darkness if he can not see in the dark, invisibility pick a square (do not hit anything in between).
The dragon can shrink in size up the dex with cats grace.
-
2019-11-01, 12:23 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
...I don't see how it's "paranoid" to point out that the root cause of your problems is combining a Tier 1 metamagic-stacking Mailman build with a monk focusing on defense rather than blaming a single category of damage spell, but you do you.
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2019-11-01, 01:12 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
As others have pointed out, a starting point is to at least retcon the Orb spells (and pretty much all one-shot direct damage) as Evocation and SR:Yes. That won’t take them off the table as “I cast, enemy dies” spells but (1) philosophically it makes little sense for spells to magically create bursts of nonmagical damage that can blast even magic “immune” foes inside antimagic areas and (2j if SR-beating tricks are a little too easy, nerf them too.
Personally, I’d like to think that SR as a mechanic is supposed to represent some level of actual defense (not insuperable, yet significant) — rather than a mere inconvenience or even annoyance. In any case, if you’re looking for a nerf that will make orbs usable but not end-all, making SR a viable possible defense is arguably a broader remedy than requiring all potential foes to have spellcasting access to orb-defying defenses or die.
-
2019-11-01, 05:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
I am confused why changing the orbs to be Evocation and SR Yes is a good fix. Doesn't that just make them significantly worse than regular old fireball or lightning bolt?
I am seeing a DM running a level 16 group that appears to not be able to run higher levels encounters and just wants to slap down a few monsters straight from the monster manual and call it a day, or is not willing to put in the time to create challenging encounters. You are well past that point and the DM needs to step up. That dragon will have feats, it will have buffs, it will almost certainly know the party is coming, it will have traps and minions helping defend it and it will be wearing magical gear.
The weakest Great Wyrm dragon in the MM is a white, which unbuffed already has 522 HP. A cheap CON +6 item adds another 108 to that. So 630 HP is already defense #1 against 220 damage worth of orbs, so they are not 1-shotting the dragon at all. It does have a crappy touch AC of 6, but slap on a Ring of Protection +5 and a DEX +6 item and a WIS +6 and a Monk's Belt and now it's up to 22, not amazing but at least the orbs are not an auto-hit. So without busting out a single spell (the dragon better have a few on them) or obscure magic item, the wizard's once-a-day nuke is already easily disarmed.
Regardless as others have said, there is power disparity, whether you want to admit it or not. A wizard throwing out DC29 disintegrates and a defensive monk trying to trip? I'm sorry, that's like comparing apples and bulldozers. As a group of friends you might be having fun and that is awesome because fun is the name of the game, but mechanically in the world of D&D the characters aren't close to equal at all, and it is just going to get worse from here on out.
I am interested, what trinket lets you cheaply teleport through a Forcecage? An Anklet of Translocation won't do it due to no line of effect.Last edited by Trebloc; 2019-11-01 at 07:13 AM.
-
2019-11-01, 08:10 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Location
- Ursoule
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
Hmmm...
How much knowledge are the dragons going to have about the party? Are these going to be one at a time or in multiples? (Yikes!) If the dragons have some idea of what is coming, they can better prepare. And very likely after the first or second one is one-shotted they will know what's coming and plan a defense.
Spells/Items: Globe of Invulnerability spell, Rod of Absorption, or perhaps the spell Absorption (Spell Compendium), Fortunate Fate (Spell Compendium, insta-Heal), Staff of the Magi (requires the user to have the spell available to them, but not required to be able to cast it), a Ring of Spell Turning (or the spell of same name) would be a nasty surprise, and from Pathfinder there is the Ring of Energy Shroud. And maybe Antimagic Field, although size would be an issue for a dragon. Perhaps the dragon could be in an extra-dimensional space with only a 10 ft. opening, big enough for its breath weapon.
Or you could give the dragon some artifact or relic that provides some kind of protection, might have to be home brewed.
These are all in-game responses that don't require any tweaking of the rules. If I can think of any more I will add them.
Hope this helps."Save your tears, my fetid friends, the dead have Wept enough!"
The Tears of Blood Campaign Setting Updated 15 Dec 2019
From the Tears of Blood GiTP Forums 2004-09: "20 million dead. Whatcha gonna do with 20 million dead? You can’t bury ‘em, no time or energy to dig the graves. You could chuck ‘em somewhere out of the way. Or you could burn ‘em. But, but what if those things angered someone, or put a bad curse on 'em? Maybe gettin’ rid of ‘em is better. Just a thought. Hey, you could help us!"
-
2019-11-01, 08:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2014
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
For defenses wings of cover spell and wall of blades maneuver both negate or make it super hard to land a metamagiced orb.
Wall of blades sets a.c. vs. all attacks, touch etc equal to attack roll, which a dragon will make very high even on a low roll.
Wings of cover just nopes any one attack/spell/effect with pretty much little recourse to get around.
-
2019-11-01, 09:17 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
yes, that's what "balance to the table" entails.
you decide on a power level, then whenever someone wants to take up a new spell or feat or stuff, you decide whether it's consistent with that power level, and if not, you ban or nerf it.
we can still hit them most of the times. and most foes fail saving throws regularly; it's just the final bosses that are significantly above our levels
If you're really fine with everything else, than your particular problem is just the 1d6/level +no-save nature. The orbs really should allow SR, but if you specifically want no-SR damage spells, then the solution is simple: use the other no-SR damage spells. Acid Breath, Cone of Flame, Arc of Lightning, and Vitriolic Sphere are all in Spell Compendium, all SR-no but with standard reflex saves for half. The cost of having no-SR is that the spell simply must allow a save, and vice versa. If you want single-target spells, then add saves to the orbs (I'd recommend something other than reflex, so fort, especially if you're keeping the other effects in).
As for other effects, you might add Greater Ice Storm and Greater Disintegrate for higher level no-save and fort-save critical damage. I've pegged them at 7th level with 6d6 bludgeoning+ 4d6 cold, and 8th level 10d6 on successful save, respectively. So a souped up Greater Disintegrate which is saved against still has twice the base damage, and you can soup up an area with 10d6 flat damage.
Finally, well they could stop using crazy souped up metamagic.
Don't sell yourself short, you've already decided what the specific issue is and come up with the most specific solution.
yes, we (as in, my group) have already decided what the issue is, because we've been playing together with those characters for over two years, and we've had lots of fun. And we knew of the potential issues when we started, but we decided that we would deal with them and keep them in check, and we've always done so.
when I was DMing a high level campaign, I did put some hard caps on metamagic reduction. but here we didn't, and retconning stuff that we've been doing for the last year breaks immersion a lot. And retiring a character that's been used for over two years sucks even more. Much, much better to nerf or ban spells as they come by.
And disregarding all we've done in those two years and telling us to change everything is quite rude. It's like someone has been in a happy relationship for a couple years, and now they have some mild disagreement, and you suggest them that they should break up, and that in fact all they did previously has been wrong all the time.
I hope all those people who are saying "retcon/rebuild/change the character" can see that.
Now, we probably will change some things when we eventually wrap this up and start something new. but for the rest of this campaing, the characters and their builds are not going to be changed in any meaningful way.
It's paranoid to assume that we have a problem with the party or that we have to change our whole styles. We are perfectly aware of the tier implications. We know that we have to adjust stuff to keep everyone relevant. we accepted that when we started our campaign with our characters. I accepted that, the wizard accepted that, the dm accepted that, everyone else accepted that. and we've dealt with it all the time, we all got told at some point by the dm "no, that stuff is too strong, you can't take it because it would break the balance of the table". Including my monk, when I was asking if I could stack karmik strike and defensive throw with robilar's gambit.
So, we've been keeping balance to the table by evaluating whether to accept any new power anyone wanted to take, and we wish to keep doing so, and it would be very easy to keep doing this kind of balance by telling the wizard "no, you can't take oerb spells", and i was asking a specific help on a specific topic that came up. I don't want to be told that there are problems running two tier 1 with three tier 4-5, because we know that already. though "paranoid" is the wrong word here. Can't think of a proper one. but certainly a lot of people are accusing our party of badwrongfun because we want to play with tier differences and face them by tweaking stuff along the way. A lot of people are mistrusting me, thinking that I tell lies when when I say what is a problem and what is not.
And do note that the problem is not that a spell combo does 200+ damage in a round with no defence. We know well enough how allow the fighter to deal the same amount of damage. Or how to make a battlefield control build that does not rely on a medium-sized monk with no reach. we merely decided that we do not want to play with those premises.
Please don't insult our DM. he's never played above level 3 before our campaign, so he's inexperienced in dealing with high levels. And he's got a job and a busy life, like the rest of us, and can't be expected to spend days preparing this game.
That said, he DOES put in the time to create encounters. unique monsters, unique situations, unique npcs. he still lacks the skill to use them to their full potential. it's easier when you are a player, you have to know well your character. when you have to know a dozen npcs that you will use once or twice, it's different. I've been there. I've DMed a party of 20th level casters as main opponents, and never managed it well.
Speaking of stepping up, I did specifically say that I wasn't looking for defences for the dragons, and wasn't looking for spells to neutralize orbs. So if you want to throw dismissive comments on my friends, you should at least make sure to have read and understood the issue.In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.
Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you
my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert
-
2019-11-01, 10:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: A suitable nerf for orb spells?
There is no insult intended. If he is unable to handle the situation well due to whatever reasons (and several reasons are listed by you), then isn't it fair to him to play a game in territory he is more familiar with and has the time to handle? Because 220 damage at level 16 shouldn't be giving the DM issues, nor should the rest of the party be overshadowed by it.
I've DMed well past epic and it can be challenging to run appropriate encounters, but everyone at my table understands I am able to do it well. We have another DM who was having trouble once we entered the mid-teens, so we retired and rerolled, no biggie.
All you want is to nerf a single spell as being the only issue? Will you be back next week too when the next spell is found? Then the next, and the next, and the next...etc. I see alot of good suggestions, which does include playing legendary monsters as being the super-intelligent magic wielding power houses that have lived for centuries without being slain. I also see a number of other spells that are mentioned here that are just as troublesome, if not significantly more game breaking than super metamagiked orbs. There is one common cause for these problems -- the Incantatrix. In your games, how many times has it come up that a tripping monk was too powerful for the boss encounter (like say, a Great Wyrm Dragon...)