D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Spell Focus gives only +1 to DCs

[Gez]

It's a great change IMO. I never wanted to take Spell Focus for my spellcasters, because there were always more interesting -- or at least more appealing -- feats out there, and I prefer feats that give new options to feats that just make you a bit better at something.

Now, I have a very good reason not to take it, as it is a worthless feat.

With SF nerfed, I just have another reason to say NO! to spells that allow saves. From magic missile to power word, kill, you shall only take spells for which no saves are allowed.


I wonder what new change will we learn about next. I guess they've removed the bonus spells for high ability score. After all, they only causes problems with spells such as fox's cunning, owl's wisdom or eagle's splendor.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I wonder what new change will we learn about next. I guess they've removed the bonus spells for high ability score. After all, they only causes problems with spells such as fox's cunning, owl's wisdom or eagle's splendor.

Hmm? What problems?

-Hyp.

 

[Gez]

Hmm? What problems?

It's obvious. Munchkins tried to prepare more spells by having these active at preparation time. (Of course, now that they will last 1 minute/level rather than 1 hour/level, you won't have your double-extended spell lasting more than 24 hours.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

It's obvious. Munchkins tried to prepare more spells by having these active at preparation time.

Munchkins need to read the spell descriptions again, then.

"Sorcerers and bards who receive Eagle's Splendor do not gain extra spells, but the Save DCs for their spells increase."

"Wizards who receive Fox's Cunning do not gain extra spells, but the Save DCs for their spells increase."

"Clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers who receive Owl's Wisdom do not gain extra spells, but the Save DCs for their spells increase."

-Hyp.

 

[Li Shenron]

It's a great change IMO. I never wanted to take Spell Focus for my spellcasters, because there were always more interesting -- or at least more appealing -- feats out there, and I prefer feats that give new options to feats that just make you a bit better at something.

Now, I have a very good reason not to take it, as it is a worthless feat.

With SF nerfed, I just have another reason to say NO! to spells that allow saves. From magic missile to power word, kill, you shall only take spells for which no saves are allowed.

I am not sure if you are joking or not... I really can't see your point this time, Gez. You NEVER wanted to take a feat because in your opinion it's not interesting, and now you are happy that it is even less interesting??? What sense does it make?

So you like spells that always work, with no saves. That's understandable, you probably think that things like armor casting failure, SR or concentration give already enough randomness to spellcasting, and I don't criticize this opinion of yours. But eventually ST are quite important for those spells that have an effect which makes a big difference in a battle; if there was no ST, to win initiative could be sometimes the only thing to make you win or lose the combat.

I also usually cast only ST-less spells, because i have quite low Wisdom and i am afraid of wasting my few precious prepared spells. But SF makes sense as it is still, it's a worth feat as all feats should be, it's neither a must nor a waste.

 

[Dthamilaye]

.

What I'm sad about the SF and GSF (and possibly SP, GSP) feat change is that now the (non-munchkined) persons who take an ECL race and are a caster, have less options to somehow reduce the penalties.

I have a gaming group with five ECL+3 races and everyone has some casting levels. One is full Sorc, one is full Druid and one has taken the path of Arcane trickster.

The AT suffers most of this, because he will be 7!! levels behind the normal CR curve. +4 to DC and SP helped him quite much. He also wasn't going to go the AcM or RWiz route, but if this hits him, I think it would be mandatory for him to take at least 2 levels of AcM, just for spell power .

Of course, I believe they nerf Acm and Rw too. That probably was their reason to put them into the DMG in the first place... Yeah, I'm paranoid .

 

[Pax]

Evokers always cry when they finally realize that their massive, AOE spells designed for slaughtering larger amounts of weaker enemies don't do that much against single strong creatures... Of course, there's always the 17.5 points of damage a round from Magic Missile...

Massive AoE? Heck, not all elemental damage spells are "massive AoE" -- well, once you look outside the core rules. A Sonic Orb (4th level, T&B) would be nice, as would Ball Lightning, or one of my favorites, Firebrand (which is basically a Fireball that is easier to work around your own allies, so as not ot hit them, while still getting as many enemies as possible 5th level, from MoF, btw).

And we can hardly base this argument on a situation in which the wizard memorized spells that aren't any damn good for fighting outsiders - if you design DCs so that sub-optimal spells still have a good chance of working, the optimal ones will be impossible to resist.

And who says the Wizard knows there is an Osyluth ahead? Who says the Wizard isn't, in fact, just obsessed with [cold]-damage spells?

Should the player be penalised for picking a theme and sticking to it? IOW, for decent role-playing?

Why don't we see what happens to that Osyluth after the wizard takes Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration and hits the devil with a couple of Enervations? Or, under current rules, traps it in a no-save, no-SR hemisphere made with a Wall of Force?

For the first: the wizard likely misses on his attack roll (wasting the spell right there), and if he hits, possibly still fails to penetrate SR. On top of which, 2-3 negative levels (on average) won't even slow the sucker down much, overall.

As for the Wall of Force ... the Osyluth turns invisible, teleports directly behind the wizard, and (the next round) proceeds to reduce our spell-throwing, hapless non-hero to magical hamburger.

Now, consider: as a 9th level wizard, the 5th level spell he throws is the absolute most powerful thing he will do that day!. And unless he's a specialist, or has a remarkably high Intelligence (20+, not a guarantee for a 9th level wizard at all) ... he can do it ONCE, each day.

...

And god forbid our Evoker chose Necromancy as a barred school (Necromancy, Enchantment, and Illusion, perhaps -- sort of a "Screw subtlety" approach).

 

[Darklone]

Fascinating. The fourth thread in the last ten days where someone was still doing it wrong.

 

[Pax]

Good Riddance I say!

Int 26 Wizard at 20th level (starting Int of 15!), using a will save spell agaisnt a fighter with a cloak of resistance +5, Iron WIll and 12 WIS.

Wizards DC 27. Fighter save +11. Needs a 16 to make it.

Same schmoe of a wizard with Spell Focus and Greater Spell focus, 3.0 style: Fighter stands no chance, can only save on a 20, even though he invested heavily in save boosting. With the new Spell Focus being +1 and +2, his chances go up by 300%.

So, you think a talored spell targetting the Fighter's WEAK save, should give the Fighter more than a slim chance of resisting? Even when the Wizard is (by current core rules)absolutely and utterly specialised in the type of magic in question?

God forbid the Fighter has a Ring of Spell Turning active, by the way -- and no reason not to, sicne it's not limited by charges-per-day. Every hour on the hour, pause for 6 seconds to activate the ring. All of a sudden, it's the WIZARD facing that save, not the fighter ... who, instead, is drawing his Big Sharpened Metal Instrument of Pain and Death, while grinning wickedly at the foolish wizard.

Also, don't compare PC saves to PC DC's; compare MONSTER saves, instead. A CR 20 monster -- what that wizard will be facing, as part of an adventuring party -- is likely to have another 5 to 10 points on it's saves, in general. Plus SR. Plus other special abilities which may circumvent, negate, or even rebound spells the Wizard casts.

 

[Al]

Which is where a wizard comes in handy. With 5 bonus feats which can buy item creation feats, the wizard gives the rest of the party a chance to customize the party

Unusual in my games, and (dare I say it) probably in the average Sunday-afternoon-gamers' game. Sitting around for weeks on end whilst the party wizard crafts items is not a regular PC activity. More likely, they go off adventuring whilst the poor wizard get stuck cranking out potions- not to mention burning his xp to boot.

One thing that doesn't seem to come up is how much more vulnerable fighters are compared to wizards

Er, no. Okay, they're on the front line, but given a dungeon encounter, the front line is only around 20' in front of the back line. Most higher CRs monsters *are* intelligent, contrary to your assertions, and will target the wizard (since they are weaker). Defensive buffs take time, and/or have been nerfed. Heaven forbid that the party run into magic-using, area-effecting or ranged-weapon-wielding monsters. The poor wizard is really going to suffer.

At level 5 a wizard starts to truly shine over the half-orc barbs and human fighters with a nice solid 5d6 fireball or lightning bolt

...which he can cast once per day, and might get saved against for a whopping eight points of damage. Fireball is nice and can probably swing a battle at 5th level, but only one battle per day. To say that the wizard 'shines' because he can crank out one measly fireball is hardly much. Even with good Int (16) he can only do two, and that's assuming he ignores defensive and utility spells.

I suspect that Ridley's Cohort is the direction that wizards will tend to devolve towards- enabling the fighters to dish out the damage and/or give them protective buffs. Just as the 2e cleric was a walking medicine cabinet, the 3.5e wizard is a walking tool kit-cum-drug store.