The Big List Of Spells

[lankycheese]

That looks awesome. Seems like everything is much less hard coded. And I'm 100% aggree that 5 missles would be sweet. IGMS is a rape worthy AoE spell and that would mean it stays as that.

[Grayle]

My particular annoyance at Disintegrate is that it is a (base)6th level spell that can be maximized to crit for 480 damage from 300 feet away. It can be cast up to 6(4 for a Wizard) times before needing to rest to get 6 more uses. It's attack roll negates all armor and shields, so it's targets are all AC 10, + whatever thier Dex or deflection items can provide. Spell resistance or a total character emphasized Fortitude save is it's only defense.

That is outrageous power. Mages and Sorcerers were already powerful enough.

[lankycheese]

For the benifet of the doubt though, it is a touch attack. While it ignores armour, classes that have a high dex bonus AC will dodge it decently, and those without that usually have a decent fort save. Your Con based fighter will have no problem against it.

I don't mind high damaging spells at all, if there is a way around it so that it doesn't work 100% of the time. Disintegrate will be devistating yes, but it can quite easily be countered.

[Grayle]

Your Con based fighter will have no problem against it.

But this isn't just about me.

Disintegrate will be devistating yes, but it can quite easily be countered.

How? Really, do the math. Barring other magical items, A 20th level Sorcerer would only need to roll a 10 to hit a Rogue with a 30 dexterity. That 20th level Rogue's base Fortitude save is 6. What will the DC be against that save?

[lankycheese]

I'm not saying it's useless and isn't powerful, I'm just saying it isn't the to be all and end all spell. It can be countered and isn't as "I Win" as previous mage spells. The mage still has to roll a 10, that's almost a 50% chance of it not happening. Don't forget buffs and tumble bonuses and all that too.

I just think it's too early to say it's completely overpowered is all, and I like the fact that there is a way around it. It will be effective against rogues yes, but rogues have still got all that stealth time to sneak up on them and not get hit by it. ^^

I can't wait to start PvPing again!

[Grayle]

Two words, Lanky:

True Strike.


Speaking of IWIN, tho...I suppose you are correct. I should be bitching about Wail of the Banshee instead. and griping about IGMS is like complaining about how the Nazis were bad people.

Well, I've shared my opinion. We'll see what the game holds. I know the staff will see to any blatant imbalances.

[JaeEleutheria]

I think you're still forgetting that yes, there is a possibility of a 480 points of damage hit with Disintegrate, there is still a saving throw. If you pass the fortitude save, you take 5d6 (approx, 30) as opposed to 40d6. That is a significant difference of power. Sure, one can use true strike, but that is not always the case. If the con fighter still makes the save, that means he doesn't take all of the possible damage.

Personally, I think it's pointless to complain of the possiblility of being broken until the game comes out (we only have a few more days). We should wait until we see how this is actually implemented in game before we make the call.

[Grayle]

Personally, I think it's pointless to complain of the possiblility of being broken until the game comes out (we only have a few more days). We should wait until we see how this is actually implemented in game before we make the call.

Yes Jae, I agree with you.

[Stormknife]

Code: Select all

...nMIRV = VFX_IMP_MIRV, 

With IGMS like that...that's pretty cool. Oh, and for reference: MIRV

Barring other magical items, A 20th level Sorcerer would only need to roll a 10 to hit a Rogue with a 30 dexterity. That 20th level Rogue's base Fortitude save is 6. What will the DC be against that save?

What will the rogue's HP, save bonuses, and other magic items look like is the better question. Until we know what the loot of the average non-casting Dasarian is, it's hard to guess how a spell that actually involves an attack roll AND a save is going to turn out.

[Peregrinus]

Grayle, as much as I respect you, I'm going to have to call you out on this one.

You're being disingenuous about Disintergrate, True Strike, and the entire Fighter vs Caster debate.

First, you consider true strike an answer to the touch attack problem. In a mass battle, that would be the case, however, in small-scale PvP, unless the caster is launching an ambush from invisibility, by the time they finish the True Strike and begin the Disintergrate most melee classes will have closed the ground to the caster, giving them an oppurtunity to do something against the caster long before the Disintergrate finishes casting. At that point, things fall to the dice. A quickened True Strike? Well, only wizards are able to do that, and then you're burning a 5th level spell slot and at least a 6th level... I should hope that burning two spells of that level would get some results, as the caster doing so is basically completely focusing on using ray attacks.

Then you have to consider the fortitude save. The absolute maximum DC for a Disintergrate (unless they've added Heighten spell) will be DC 30. This is assuming a +12 Casting modifier and Greater Spell Focus (Formula: 10 + 6 (spell level) + 12 (casting stat) + 2 (Greater Spell Focus)). Is that high? Yes, almost ridiculously so, and the average fighter with a 14 Con only gets a +14 Fort Save modifier, meaning they have a 25% chance to save. But that's taking an average unmodified fighter against a fully buffed mage built to use evocation spells. I suspect your average fighter will likely have a fort save like this: +12 (class), +6 (con modifier), +2 (magic items), giving a total +20 Fort save, in other words a 50/50 chance at making it. Further, I have my doubts about many mages taking both Spell Focus and Greater Spell focus, making the save on Disintergrate only a 28.

Finally, on the rogue AC, a 30 dex gives a +10 modifier, so a total AC of 20. As lanky says, you're ignoring the dodge bonuses from tumble (I think that will give another +4 assuming max ranks), deflection modifiers from a simple ring of protection, let's assume a cheap +2 ring. Hmm... suddenly the rogue has a touch AC of 26, and the mage (who assuming has a 16 Dex somehow) only gets a +13 to hit... well, that's less than a 50% chance to hit.

Disintergrate is not a "IWIN" spell, does it have the highest damage potential in the game? Yes, but its also one of the only spell in all of DnD that is Subject to SR, has a touch attack, AND has a saving throw. In other words, it has every negative a spell can have in DnD without the introduction of expensive material components. In return it gets to have the highest damage potential in the entire DnD game.

So in the end, I think that Disintergrate won't be the problem, death spells will be, and I'm not entirely convinced that IGMS won't still be a problem-child.

[Grayle]

I am often wrong, but never disingenuous. Let's show more care in our word selection.

My math was assuming simple base scores, whereas yours is assuming a wider set of imagined numbers. I suspect most of our difference of opinion is based in perspective of class preference.

There are too many unknown variables to pre-determine what is a problem and what is not. You asked why people didn't like Disintegrate...I bothered to answer your question. A Mage would choose a spell that assaults a Fighter's Will save, anyway.

Numbers getting as high as some spells' potentials make me nervous that combats won't take more than a few seconds to resolve.

[Grayle]

...and it's spelled 'Disintegrate'.

[Yuna]

As a sorc i'm not wastin my spell slot for a trues strike there alot more spells to choose from then taking trues strike. Maybe a wizard will take since than can choose spells. With sorc less choose of spell. They probalbly won't take it. I'm not 100% if i choose it , probaly will but not sure yet.

[lankycheese]

One of the better things though is this apparent can't stack ability points, which means DC's won't be as monsterous for casters. It's going to be rather difficult to get that +12 modifier now, on any stat. The DC's will be lower, and the saves themselves won't be as massive either, giving that more 'average' con of 14 still a decent fort save now. I thought it was a bit lame at first, but the more I think about it, not stacking ability points is a fantastic addition that works very well all across the board.

[Wyvern]

The damage was dropped, the number of missiles per target was capped, and the missiles now randomly assort between targets in the defined area, rather than dropping a bomb on one dude and plinking everyone else with one missile. It will also now target any creature, not just hostiles, so on hardcore mode your companions may wind up drawing fire.

So now instead of being a spell that puts massive damage on a single target, it's a huge AoE that becomes more potent the fewer targets are within it.

Should be very interesting...