That depends on the point of view. For a dedicated caster, the longest CC control, the better. To a warrior, the highest dmg, the better. These implements are going to hurt wizards even more, considering how often they are able to cast a CC spell, not to mention any scroll would probably be closer to a spell he's able to cast in matter of duration, but correct me on that last part if I am wrong.
No, it's not point of view dependant. One spell that removes control from the player for that long is not balanced.
The scroll will have garbage DC and spell penetration.
A fighter's damage is not in any way the same as an extended 60 round Fear or Hold Person or Dominate Person or Web or So On And So Forth.
It doesn't make sense at all a scroll or a potion to almost have an equal duration of a spell casted by a wizard or a sorcerer, even with garbage DC and spell penetration. We're talking about buffs such as any ability buff, mind protection bubbly potion. How come they will get to the same level as a caster in matter of duration, for God sake? These new implements will only hurt the caster side and to squish them to a level of a scroll/potion.
And yes, a fighter's damage will cripple any dedicated caster as any dedicated caster would cripple a warrior (not a paladin) with CC spells. The only difference would be a caster wouldn't take 60 rounds because he would be dead at the very first 2. And that will continue to happen (I am not talking about cross classed builds here). Again, as I suggested, if you're going to nerfe the spells, I would suggest looking at classes with lower than 20 spell classes on it. That would be fair and balanced.
Fighters have damage, but wizards have ac. Any wizard can get a 60 ac...
But any spell with a DC 35+ will save vs. full disable for 10 times the amount of time needed to then stab them to death is too much. CC spells still work, they just have shorter durations. A focused caster can still disable them for 5 or so rounds. Plus there are some secondary effects that take place. So even though the duration a got shorter, for the incapacitation they are still good.
Fighters have damage, but wizards have ac. Any wizard can get a 60 ac...
But any spell with a DC 35+ will save vs. full disable for 10 times the amount of time needed to then stab them to death is too much. CC spells still work, they just have shorter durations. A focused caster can still disable them for 5 or so rounds. Plus there are some secondary effects that take place. So even though the duration a got shorter, for the incapacitation they are still good.
Hmm... you're wrong about any wizard being able to reach 60 AC. Again, we're talking about dedicated (aka pure) casters not Palemaster cross classed casters. I agree cross classed casters could get that sort of nerfe but I don't see why you're going to touch already squishy casters such as those dedicated ones. It's like Amia is pushing only cross classed builds to have a chance to survive out there.
But if you point out with numbers why a pure wizard won't get terribly nerfed with that implement, casted away to the level of a scroll/potion duration, then if you prove that I'll clap my hands and "say well done, Amia."
I'm not so sure what sort of spells you're talking about. Unless you're suggesting a wizard commited to the Epic Mage armor spell. So again, with that nerfe Amia will be pushing only to builds with Epic Mage Armor on it, right? If you're focused on CC control and being that squishy you will continue to be squishy and potion/scroll caster mage. Oh joy...
I'm not so sure what sort of spells you're talking about. Unless you're suggesting a wizard commited to the Epic Mage armor spell. So again, with that nerfe Amia will be pushing only to builds with Epic Mage Armor on it, right? If you're focused on CC control and being that squishy you will continue to be squishy and potion/scroll caster mage. Oh joy...
epic mage armor is one epic feat and you get like, tons of epic feats on a wizard. it's not a 'commitment' to take a singular feat which has like no pre-reqs.
Quote:
Type of feat: epic spell (general feat) (epic) Prerequisite: 21st level, the ability to cast 9th level spells, spellcraft 26
Specifics: The caster gets a +20 armor class bonus.
Agree but if you do not want to take it and instead you want to max the duration/DC/effects of your spells? Well the nerfe will touch that, so I'll basically need to come up with a RP to take down a lvl to pick that spell instead of trying to recast over and over my domination spell on a RP event because it will end out after 5 rounds.
Also, I noticed Amia does not love wizards at all. It's like a complementar class IMHO. If you try to look at the word Wizard on this link Classes and Feats - Contents you will see two mentions of it on Palemaster class.
A wizard wit ha large shield. Okay you see the point? your build follows another sort of specialization and the nerfe here touches only pure wizards (maybe sorcerers) that don't have large shields +5, probably swords too. Probably 1 paladin to avoid arcane failure on cast?
Again, the nerfe will push pure wizards to cross class because there is no reason to dedicate specializations to max it to a few more rounds. And instead, it will force to take another feat since you can drink/cast those from potions/scrolls with just a few less rounds.
Please, DM team, take a look on that again. Allow some flavour on dedicated builds and not cross classed cheese builds on which I understand the effect of the nerfe. Please, do not throw pure wizards to the same lvl as potions/scrolls/wands.
you're being retarded they get the highest AC on the server, the largest variety of spells, and the most feats they do not need bullshit aoe CC that stops players from doing anything long enough for them to be killed five times over this isnt sinfar (which i assume you are currently banned from hence why youre here) where single classes get bonuses just cross class, no one cares
you're being retarded they get the highest AC on the server, the largest variety of spells, and the most feats they do not need bullshit aoe CC that stops players from doing anything long enough for them to be killed five times over this isnt sinfar (which i assume you are currently banned from hence why youre here) where single classes get bonuses just cross class, no one cares
I can still log in there. Also, Amia is a RP server something sinfar totally lacks off and I'll totally ignore the rest of your immature post for the sake of the topic.
Joined: 12 Nov 2015 Location: The belly of the beast
Gentleman, I would ask politely that you cease the cross server rivalry/ grudge and or discussion thereof. It has historically not ended well for those with previous, similar circumstances. Name calling isn't necessary either. You can disagree with what he feels to be a valid arguement wothout resorting to immediate, derogatory statements simply based on the premise you don't like what he said. That simply isn't how adults do things.
_________________ Jace Fenneril: Cleric of Sharess.
Shadow Mage Armor: Replace old effect entirely with - Applies 5/- cold and negative energy resistance for duration. Epic Focus each add 5/- resist to each of cold and negative.
Any chance we could add the original effect back in, mainly for the one ac after gear. The point of Shadow Conjuration is suppose to be for Sorcerers to gain access to multiple spells through one... and shadow weave shenanigans. The DR by itself is quite lackluster. Mage Armor + DR maybe?
"Operating in the border between light and darkness, shadowdancers are nimble artists of deception. They are mysterious and unknown, never completely trusted but always inducing wonder when met"
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
TormakSaber wrote:
We just had a discussion on how mages get AC too easily. No, you do not get the free stacking shadow mage armor back.
The shadow conjuration spells are not inherently Shadow Weave.
Like I said before, the stacking issue between Mage Armor and Shadow Mage Armor was removed long ago. Even before all the changes, if you cast one before, it wouldn't stack with the other.
It still would be nice if Shadow Mage Armor gave it's AC bonuses, or at least the Dodge bonus it had before, even if that means replacing/overwriting original Mage Armor when it is cast. It's not as easy as what's been done(simply making it do something different), no, but it is again more thorough, keeps people with at least what they already had, and really matches the theme we've otherwise set up. Shadow Variants are flavored versions of the original spell: Web still does entangle plus Cold/Neg damage, Minor Globe still blocks lv 3 and lower spells plus +5 saves vs Cold and Neg. No one wants stacking Mage Armor/Shadow Mage Armor back, Tormie, only what was already there before the change. If you still do not understand that, I can try yet again to explain it.
PC with SMA Before Change: *60 AC* PC with SMA After Change: *59 AC* "Huh. Can I have my 1 AC back?" "NO STACKING, GRRR!" "I... I don't want anything to stack. I just want the AC I already had back please?" "NO STACKING MAGES GET AC TOO EASILY!" "Dude, you're missing the point. I can still get my AC back, it's just a pain for Sorcs and folk who can't/don't want to somehow fit regular MA back into their build. You haven't fixed anything dealing with stacking, you've just taken away something useful and replaced it with something explicitly less useful." "http://imgur.com/spwjMml"
As far as the Shadow Variants being there specifically for Sorcerers to get access to more spells, I'd say yes and no. Yes, in that originally they were there simply for convenience and for Wizards to fantasize about what it must be like to be a Sorc. But it was a silly set up. There really is no reason to cast a normal, unmetamagic'd lv 1 spell(Magic Missile) as a lv 4 spell. Ditto for Shadow Melf's, Fireball, Wall of Fire, etc, etc. No amount of convenience makes it worth it in our setting where scrolls are abundant, nor does the added DC really mean that much in the face of lackluster damage. Additionally, they used the original Spell Foci for the base spells(the original Shadow Variant scripts just called up the other regular scripts) and thus there was no real point in them being Illusion.
What they are now is essentially a way for Illusionists to have some direct damage spells and substitute for actually having to add in new spells for them with the HAK. It wasn't my original idea, but I feel what we've done so far(bugs and SMA aside) has really worked out nicely. There's always the issue of not being able to metamagic them, I suppose, but I look at it this way. With Shadow Magic Missile, you're not so much getting a Lv 4 Spell as you are a supped up level 1 spell, hence already metamagic'd. It does double damage compared to normal Magic Missile. Same with Shadow Web, it's not really a true lv 5 spell, it's using a lv 5 slot to cast a flavored version of a lv 2 spell. If you think of them as already meta-magiced, it's worth it. And now that they use Illusion Foci, it's not really a matter of giving sorcs specifically a variety of spells, rather anyone who focuses Illusion.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
DI has the jist of it I'd say. The changes done were to give the spell its proper illusion focus and to differentiate it from the other spells. While it was a work around for sorcerers to gain access to more spells than they normally get that, and they still do if they take it, we wanted it to create a larger variety of tactics. That has been done. What this means to sorcerers now is, you have to drop a current known level one spell to retake Mage Armor.
If someone needs a de-level to work that out I'm personally cool with that, but I think adding the AC back in to Shadow Conjuration Mage Armor with the DR will make it cross that OP line.
Also Do are there more bugs? I thought all had been corrected?
Meh, I got so excited about the Illusion spell changes until I realised that you can't empower or maximize the Shadow spells. The spell school was relatively viable to begin with, so I won't shed too many tears for that and Colour Spray spam is demonstrably better with the extra round to its stun. Is there any intention for the Devs to fiddle with Shades? So far I've only taken Shadow Conjuration out of the shadow spells on my sorceror, because the slot was vacant and it gives access to Darkness.
_________________ Every time you clock in the morning, I feel you just want to kill All my innocence while ignoring my purpose to persevere as a better person I know you heard this and probably in fear -Kendrick Lamar, good kid
Is up to 20/- DR vs cold and negative really that strong?
Alse, would a sorceror get a free rebuild if his spells are changed? and how many does he get before the team says "no, we changed five spells, for each you wanted a rebuild, be happpy with the spells you have!"?
Also Do are there more bugs? I thought all had been corrected?
I found a few I posted elsewhere in bugs forum! Will copy em over here.
Rigela wrote:
Both these spells supposedly receive buffs for focusing in divination, namely...
Legend Lore: Greater Spell Focus allows the ability to add to Craft Armor and Weapons skills. Epic Skill Focus allows the spell to add to Spellcraft skill. Remove Blindness/Deafness: ESF adds rounds/level Immunity to Blinded and Deafened.
Neither seemed to provide any of it, with epic focus in divination though.
TormakSaber wrote:
Fireball's still broken, too.
Rigela wrote:
Not sure if also a bug or I misread/heard.
Shades/Shadow evocation/conjuration don't seem to apply illusion spell focus to DCs
Also, from my experience, always been fine for a sorcerer/bard to be dropped a level to fiddle with spells
_________________ Signature by Maryn! <3 I am also seen as DM Snuffles.
Robbi: Rehashing the spells is only a matter of some levels, though. You just need to get delevelled to your last caster level and you can overhaul your spellbook completely.
20/- DR cold and neg isn't redundant either. You can use it in the Frozen Wastes to save up an item slot and Ice Storm is a pretty popular spell in the neighbourhood. I'd add it to my buff repertoire.
EDIT: Rigela, the Shadow spells have never applied Illusion focus to the DC, rather it adds the original spell's school. Don't know if this was supposed to get changed with the updates.
_________________ Every time you clock in the morning, I feel you just want to kill All my innocence while ignoring my purpose to persevere as a better person I know you heard this and probably in fear -Kendrick Lamar, good kid
Last edited by Opustus on Sun, Jan 22 2017, 14:04 PM, edited 1 time in total.
If shadow illusion stuff wasnt intended to take focus into account, then all seems to be working fine from what I tested. I musta just misread about it being taken into account now.
_________________ Signature by Maryn! <3 I am also seen as DM Snuffles.
Sorry about my insistence on the matter, but I would like the DM to look at this and, if possible, to point out my final question: Is Amia pushing builds with 30 lvls on wizard towards cross class builds to avoid being trashed out to the level of potions/scrolls +1 or 2 rounds? Even knowing you take epic feats to upgrade to 1 or 2 rounds and that secondary effects from CC spells can be easily removed by potions? Bear in mind 30 lvls wizards cannot bump up to 60 AC unless you have that 1 lvl on somewhere else. So, again, they have that obviously weak spot.
The 1.69 version of Evards is pretty trash. Especially on this server with its permanant freedom. It only does 1d6+4 bludge damage as a +0 weapon. Any soak and 5/- bludge effectively negates all the damage followed by Freedom ignoring the paralysis. 1.67-1.68 made it apply all of its damage in one big hit, massively reducing the effectiveness of DR against it.
The 1.69 version of Evards is pretty trash. Especially on this server with its permanant freedom. It only does 1d6+4 bludge damage as a +0 weapon. Any soak and 5/- bludge effectively negates all the damage followed by Freedom ignoring the paralysis. 1.67-1.68 made it apply all of its damage in one big hit, massively reducing the effectiveness of DR against it.
if you empower it you get like absolute fuckloads of damage.
time stop, evards twice, use a hand spell as soon as ts ends.
watch them take obscene amounts of dmg for the 2 rounds it takes them to die.
A field of thick, 10 foot long rubbery tentacles rises from the ground. Each is capable of grappling a target doing 1d6+4 points bludgeoning damage.
This spell can be devastating when used in conjunction with the empower spell feat. This is because the 50% bonus applies to both the number of tentacles from the die roll and the number of tentacles deriving from caster level, as well as applying to the damage each dealt by each tentacle.
If this spell is cast at maximum effectiveness (level 20 caster) at a single opponent, the total average damage is 181.5 (average of 16.5 tentacles * average of 11 damage each), assuming all tentacles hit.
Maximized - Does nothing due to DR + Soak. Literally Ghostly Visage + 5/- bludge Empower - Occassionaly does 1-5 damage or 0 if you have 10soak. Ethereal Visage.
I might have the potential to quite a bit of damage, but due to its damage type its incredibly restricted or otherwise made redundant. You can have as many tentacles as you want, but if there not doing any damage at all, then your not doing anything.
Maximized - Does nothing due to DR + Soak. Literally Ghostly Visage + 5/- bludge Empower - Occassionaly does 1-5 damage or 0 if you have 10soak. Ethereal Visage.
I might have the potential to quite a bit of damage, but due to its damage type its incredibly restricted or otherwise made redundant. You can have as many tentacles as you want, but if there not doing any damage at all, then your not doing anything.
Well if you are casting emp black tentacles and they drink a visage potion breach it off. Emp black tentacles wrecks anyone without inherent bludgeoning resist directly on gear or from a class.
There is another point I would like to stress out, even knowing my previous one was not touched yet by the DMs. My toon is based on Domination spells so basically the nerfe disturbed my build in matters of dominating monsters for farming/defending/interacting. Would that be possible to at least Domination monster do not suffer from such terrible nerfes? Otherwise I think I'll have to figure it out a rebuild.
Joined: 02 Jun 2015 Location: Georgia, United States.
Commie wrote:
lilmarcat wrote:
Maximized - Does nothing due to DR + Soak. Literally Ghostly Visage + 5/- bludge Empower - Occassionaly does 1-5 damage or 0 if you have 10soak. Ethereal Visage.
I might have the potential to quite a bit of damage, but due to its damage type its incredibly restricted or otherwise made redundant. You can have as many tentacles as you want, but if there not doing any damage at all, then your not doing anything.
Well if you are casting emp black tentacles and they drink a visage potion breach it off. Emp black tentacles wrecks anyone without inherent bludgeoning resist directly on gear or from a class.
Maximized - Does nothing due to DR + Soak. Literally Ghostly Visage + 5/- bludge Empower - Occassionaly does 1-5 damage or 0 if you have 10soak. Ethereal Visage.
I might have the potential to quite a bit of damage, but due to its damage type its incredibly restricted or otherwise made redundant. You can have as many tentacles as you want, but if there not doing any damage at all, then your not doing anything.
Well if you are casting emp black tentacles and they drink a visage potion breach it off. Emp black tentacles wrecks anyone without inherent bludgeoning resist directly on gear or from a class.
There is another point I would like to stress out, even knowing my previous one was not touched yet by the DMs. My toon is based on Domination spells so basically the nerfe disturbed my build in matters of dominating monsters for farming/defending/interacting. Would that be possible to at least Domination monster do not suffer from such terrible nerfes? Otherwise I think I'll have to figure it out a rebuild.
Domination cast on monsters should not have a reduced duration. This was an explicit request on my part.
The Shades line and Shadow Conj. line of spells should be using Illusion focus for its spell DCs, yes.
Shades is being altered.
Evards is an obliterator of a spell.
"only" getting 57 Ac instead of 60 AC is not a weak spot.
_________________ Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
"only" getting 57 Ac instead of 60 AC is not a weak spot.
Maybe not, but when I made my build it was solely because I could count on the long spell duration. I hope you're right about Domination spell duration and Control undead for example. Diminished duration will totally kill those builds that are focused on that, unless you allow a free rebuild to be fair.
And again, since my build is based on long spell durations, this nerfe goes on contrary on what I've trying to build up. For that, I'll have to change my play style and also go for a rebuild I didn't want to because now I'll have to multiclass in order to survive or to grab that Epic Mage Armor.
Multiclassing 28 wizard 1 ranger 1 rogue is not murdering your spell durations like you're implying it is.
I watched casters, as a DM, fight in epic areas by doing nothing but summoning, buffing the summon, and casting standard Invis on themselves. The game's AI magnets to summons intensely hard. You hardly even need EMA. And lowering the duration on CC spells to be remotely fair doesn't suddenly make EMA necessary - even though basically every mage took it anyways, because why wouldn't you?
Your arguments aren't coming from a place of mechanics or game balance, and aren't affecting high end casters like you say they do. 57 AC vs 60 Ac is not an argument that has anything to do with "long spell durations".
_________________ Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
Quote:
If someone needs a de-level to work that out I'm personally cool with that, but I think adding the AC back in to Shadow Conjuration Mage Armor with the DR will make it cross that OP line.
It really wouldn't be. The original is a level 1 spell and the flavored version is a lv 4 that cannot be extended. I understand the concern, but I it's been seriously overestimated how often you come into contact with Cold/Negative damage. Ask yourself this, which would be more popular, an Ioun that gave +1 AC(Dusty Rose) or an Ioun that gave 5/- Cold/Neg. The first is universally usable, the second you probably couldn't even give away. And god forbid we ever changed Dusty Rose Iouns to give 5/- Cold/Neg; you would never be able to convince players that what it had become was equivalent or better than what they had. That is the situation. But even if it were only giving it back Mage Armor's Dodge Bonus(making it +1 AC, 5/- Cold/Neg) and non-stacking, you would have made everyone happy. No one is getting more AC, the spells are still relatively different, but filling the same niche. Everyone wins. Again, I know it's hard to do the overwritting thing, at least that is to do it non-buggily, but it's worth it. It doesn't have to be a priority in the face of the other changes we're making, but it's a good change to make before it's all said and done.
Re: Evards
Our Evard's is different from both the original version and even the 1.69 version. We've done some voodoo on it that was never exactly explained to us(I even recall asking folks to look at the script so it could be addressed in Spell Changes to no avail). The 1.69 version actually isn't as bad as the original. It rolls each tentacle attack seperately, instead of lumping the damage altogether. This results in a lot less damage on average as well as the damage being easier mitigated by physical damage reduction. Our Evard's in general could use a rework or streamlining. The grappling mechanic, while unique, is usually all or nothing by endgame and unintuitive. Given how it preys on things with low BAB there's a high chance of you screwing yourself as a caster if you get near it. And the not affecting small creatures bit, while again unique, is needlessly complicating. Though I imagine it could be fun as a Gnome Conjurer to cast a field of Evard's and stand in the middle of them, unharmed and unapproachable to many.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
Multiclassing 28 wizard 1 ranger 1 rogue is not murdering your spell durations like you're implying it is.
It's a point of view, actually. I think 2 more rounds, if you have a spell round/level as we had before, is totally worth if your character needs it to survive. If you believe 2 more rounds are not relevant in comparison between 30 lvls wizard vs 28 lvls wizard, then why the nerfe changes that in a way that 2 specializations would grant you 1-2 rounds extra? Every round is relevant the reason I prefer a 30 wizard instead of a non dedicated build (aka cross classed).
TormakSaber wrote:
And lowering the duration on CC spells to be remotely fair doesn't suddenly make EMA necessary - even though basically every mage took it anyways, because why wouldn't you?
Again, you have to play a 30 lvls wizard to see how important the nerfe will cause to them. If you cannot relly on just two spells to hold the target, you will have to use more spell slots to be able to bypass their saves and to endure more than 5 rounds so basically that will eat more spell slots wizards cannot compromise that much. So, because of that, you cannot relly on long spell durations and instead (in my case) I'll have to see the EMA as a needed spell.
TormakSaber wrote:
Your arguments aren't coming from a place of mechanics or game balance, and aren't affecting high end casters like you say they do. 57 AC vs 60 Ac is not an argument that has anything to do with "long spell durations".
Again, I see the issue here are the cross classed builds. With that I totally understand the spells would require something to balance because a say spell sword could reach high AB and CC control you till the server resets. They will be able to still beat anyone with 5 rounds after buffing up their AB bonus. But a full dedicated wizard (aka not cross classed build) won't be able to manage that much.
Second, I actually didn't care about AC so far and It wasn't me who picked up that subject in the first place if you scroll up. I know where is the weak spot of my build and the strong was the long spell duration. I trust even metamagic won't extend that? So basically it would be an extra spell slot?
Joined: 02 Jun 2015 Location: Georgia, United States.
Have you ever considered taking Evocation spells to actually dish damage? I see it as kinda pointless to just "Dominate" someone. At a time like this, with how the adjustments are going, It might be better to work towards doing actual damage + summons. If you Dominate someone, your summons + actual spells is a good option.
Some basic maths for your pleasure: if you have 5 rounds on a wiz sorcerer that is 10 spells, with Isaac's you can belt out 120 per cast against 1 person. So 240 per round. That's is 1200 dmg in 5 rounds. Nothing survives this
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
