Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Morgengrauen 03-31-08, 07:25 AM	Which spells, feats and PrCs do you exclude from your game? Which are broken or overpowered? Myself I exlude the orb spells.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 08:41 AM	I think the orb spells are a pretty minor boost in power for most arcane casters, especially when viewed along side the polymorph line and the like. Damage spells are usually not the most effective thing an arcane caster can do... a well-placed grease or web spell will usually have more impact on a battle than a single damage spell. In my campaigns I disallow the polymorph line of arcane spells. I also houserule that Arcane Thesis will not lower the cost of a metamagic feat below 1 spell level, ever. I have a few other minor houserules, but generally I find the RAW to be adequate. Apart from that, I tend to review character options on a case-by-case basis and talk to the player to see where they're planning on going with their concept. If I see a specific combination of abilities as being overpowered when taken as a holistic set, I gently reign in the player. I base this judgement on what the other players have made, so noone feels eclipsed by another player. I can always make the opposition more challenging (asymetrical threats are wonderful things), but balancing the party after creation often causes resentment and loss of fun, so I try to nip it in the bud. If I have concerns about the balance in the game based on a given ability, I'll warn the player that I may make an in-game ruling limiting their ability to preserve balance. So far, telling them this has prevented me from ever having to do it.
Rurik_Siann 03-31-08, 09:46 AM	The most broken spell that I have ever come across isn't a damage spell, nor is it even in the polymorph family. No this spell has the potential to break an anti-magic field, completley strip a warrior of any and all magical goods, and even destroy powerful artifacts which in turn has a 95% chance of incurring the attention/wrath of a powerful entity associated with said artifact. This spell is called Mordenkiadens Disjunction. This spell is banned in all games that I play in because of it's unerring ability to completely screw ever one in a party.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 09:50 AM	Seconded on that... as a DM I just don't use disjunction. I've never seen a player try to use it because they're destroying their own loot. I don't consider it banned, just not on my list of tactics as a GM.
RobbyPants 03-31-08, 11:02 AM	In terms of banned classes, I don't allow the Frenzied Berzerker. Part of it is due to raw power. The other part is due to it violating my "you must make characters that get along" rule. I tend not to restrict things like alignment, so long as they can all get along. I hate wasting three hours of game time trying to start the mission. ;) Other than that, most of my (old) group isn't particularly good at optimizing, and I would often have to make suggestions to make their characters more viable. They seldom did anything that would break the game. As mentioned, some tactics just aren't used by us. Disjunction would be one of them. We seldom do anything like sundering.
Sunic_Flames 03-31-08, 11:06 AM	Mordenkainen's Game Disjunction. Thirded. Utterly pointless spell unless you have masochistic tendencies. Or are pro Sunder, which is the same thing. It is also worth noting Arcane Thesis = +0 is the only thing that can potentially make DD mages worthwhile. It's like banning trippers, chargers, and ToB for the martial guys. With that said, I don't need to ban anything. No, not even Pun-Pun. DM's First Rule - Anything you can use, I can use. This, alone, is enough to prevent anyone using a uber tactic as it will inevitably bite them in the ass. Strong characters are of course perfectly acceptable, encouraged, and treated with suitably capable opposition.
DraconsNighthawk 03-31-08, 11:44 AM	With that said, I don't need to ban anything. No, not even Pun-Pun. DM's First Rule - Anything you can use, I can use. . In a fight against two creatures that have perfect power, who wins? Both go first. Both infinite HP, infinite AC, etc etc. Then again, for Pun-Pun, I'd just travel the multiverses to the big bosses, (Like most of FR baddies, the lords of Hell), just to say. Sup. How ya doing. Oh wow. That was a cool fireball man. Try your best. Whoa, was that a 9th level Death spell? I gotta admit, the effects weren't that cool looking. Got anything more prestidigitation like?
Araxiss 03-31-08, 11:47 AM	In a fight against two creatures that have perfect power, who wins? Both go first. Both infinite HP, infinite AC, etc etc. In a tie situation like that the DM would decide who goes first, I'd imagine. Player's Pun-Pun takes infinite damage and dies, maybe.
Sunic_Flames 03-31-08, 11:50 AM	I prefer the two collide and explode cataclysmically, completely annihilating each other. Oddly, this has no effect on the surrounding area.
DraconsNighthawk 03-31-08, 12:15 PM	spell.. I also houserule that Arcane Thesis will not lower the cost of a metamagic feat below 1 spell level, ever. Not questioning your DM powers, but what possibly metamagic feat could make this bad? So that ONE spell they can make may be widen, or extended, or silent? It's still limited to 6th level minimal casters, and even then towards one spell, as many times as they can prepare it. Its not that bad I wouldn't think?
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 01:35 PM	On Arcane Thesis: Sunic Flames- I know where you're coming from, but IMO it falls short of removing tripping, charging, ToB, etc. The reason for this is arcane casters have so much versatility that I'm not removing much of their repitoire. I'd also say that if a player came to me saying "I really want to play a blaster, and I feel like arcane thesis is the only way I can do it", I'd listen and decide. I might feel compelled to warn them they're making themself a bit of a one-trick pony, but if their heart was really in doing it, I'd probably permit it at (level+0). I'd apply the same rule to the NPCs and opposition as well, however. DraconsNighthawk- The reason Arcane Thesis gets so ugly is because of builds that focus on a single spell and metamagic it to the point where it's effectively like casting 8 spells at the same time. Check out this example: Arcane Thesis (Orb of Fire: (No save, no SR) Easy Metamagic twice: (Quicken/Twin) Orb of Fire (4th level) Maximized (+ 1 level) Energy Sub (-1 level) Searing (no level change) Energy Admixture(+2 levels) Twin (+ 1 level) Empower (no level change) Repeat (+ 1 level) Quicken (+ 1 level) Becomes a 9th level spell, RAW. The math on damage is this: 15d6 (base) +15d6 (EA) +15d6 (Emp) =45d6. x2 twin= 90d6+90(max) x2 repeat = 180d6+180. I know this is a 9th leel spell slot, but that's one heck of a lot of damage for no save, no SR. That's why I put it at +1, but I'd entertain +0 if the player(s) were willing to escalate both sides of the equation. (i.e. the enemy can do it too.)
DraconsNighthawk 03-31-08, 01:42 PM	:eek: I can see what you mean, and I'm sorry I didn't read further into it myself. Jebus man, what the hell kind of monsters you have playing under you!?
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 01:47 PM	None of my players have this level of mechanical aptitude... yet. But they are learning. I try to avoid builds like this both as a player and a DM, unless it's purely theoretical (Which to me is a secondary hobby in addition to playing and DMing.)
Escef 03-31-08, 01:51 PM	What book is Arcane Thesis in?
DemonEye 03-31-08, 02:15 PM	That would be Player's Handbook II.
Escef 03-31-08, 02:43 PM	Check out this example: Arcane Thesis (Orb of Fire: (No save, no SR) Easy Metamagic twice: (Quicken/Twin) Orb of Fire (4th level) Maximized (+ 1 level) Energy Sub (-1 level) Searing (no level change) Energy Admixture(+2 levels) Twin (+ 1 level) Empower (no level change) Repeat (+ 1 level) Quicken (+ 1 level) Becomes a 9th level spell, RAW. The math on damage is this: 15d6 (base) +15d6 (EA) +15d6 (Emp) =45d6. x2 twin= 90d6+90(max) x2 repeat = 180d6+180. I know this is a 9th leel spell slot, but that's one heck of a lot of damage for no save, no SR. That's why I put it at +1, but I'd entertain +0 if the player(s) were willing to escalate both sides of the equation. (i.e. the enemy can do it too.) My issue is that -1 from Energy Substitution. Firstly the errata clearly states that the feat cannot bring the spell's casting cost lower than it originally was. I find it strange that this makes Energy Substitution better when used in conjunction with other metamagic feats. So while by RAW this works, many DMs who notice what's going on probably won't let this fly as is. OTOH, it is single target damage (up to 4 target technically, with the Twin and Repeat), over the course of two rounds. And it still requires an attack roll, and is therefor still prone to Natural 1's, low attack rolls against targets with good touch ACs (at 17th level, a wizard only has a +8 BAB, maybe 4 or 5 points from Dex... A dragon with Improved Combat Expertise can jack his seemingly poor touch AC through the roof), Miss Chance, Incorporeal Miss Chance, Illusions, and because it is damage dealing is also subject to Energy Resistances and Immunities. Is it strong? Hells, yes. Is it insurmountable? Definitely not. Add to that the fact that some DMs won't allow Energy Substitution to drop the spell DOWN to a level 9 spell slot, and I'd say it's fair enough.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 02:59 PM	My issue is that -1 from Energy Substitution. Firstly the errata clearly states that the feat cannot bring the spell's casting cost lower than it originally was. I find it strange that this makes Energy Substitution better when used in conjunction with other metamagic feats. I agree with this, it's why I make the maximum benefeit (+1 spell level). I can also see the reasoning for making the max a (+0) instead. I don't outlaw the feat, I just don't agree it should work the way it's currently worded. So while by RAW this works, many DMs who notice what's going on probably won't let this fly as is. OTOH, it is single target damage (up to 4 target technically, with the Twin and Repeat), over the course of two rounds. And it still requires an attack roll, and is therefor still prone to Natural 1's, low attack rolls against targets with good touch ACs (at 17th level, a wizard only has a +8 BAB, maybe 4 or 5 points from Dex... A dragon with Improved Combat Expertise can jack his seemingly poor touch AC through the roof), Miss Chance, Incorporeal Miss Chance, Illusions, and because it is damage dealing is also subject to Energy Resistances and Immunities. IMO, direct damage is usually suboptimal for arcane casteres anyhow. See my first post in this thread on that topic. The best spells are the ones that require few (or no) rolls, provide good results regardless of saves, and (if possible) are irrespective of SR. I only posted the Arcane Thesis bit to illustrate how it can be broken(ish) if allowed RAW. Is it strong? Hells, yes. Is it insurmountable? Definitely not. Add to that the fact that some DMs won't allow Energy Substitution to drop the spell DOWN to a level 9 spell slot, and I'd say it's fair enough. No damage spell is "insurmountable". I used the orb spell because it's easy to understand.
nightwyrm 03-31-08, 03:10 PM	On Arcane Thesis: Sunic Flames- I know where you're coming from, but IMO it falls short of removing tripping, charging, ToB, etc. The reason for this is arcane casters have so much versatility that I'm not removing much of their repitoire. I'd also say that if a player came to me saying "I really want to play a blaster, and I feel like arcane thesis is the only way I can do it", I'd listen and decide. I might feel compelled to warn them they're making themself a bit of a one-trick pony, but if their heart was really in doing it, I'd probably permit it at (level+0). I'd apply the same rule to the NPCs and opposition as well, however. DraconsNighthawk- The reason Arcane Thesis gets so ugly is because of builds that focus on a single spell and metamagic it to the point where it's effectively like casting 8 spells at the same time. Check out this example: Arcane Thesis (Orb of Fire: (No save, no SR) Easy Metamagic twice: (Quicken/Twin) Orb of Fire (4th level) Maximized (+ 1 level) Energy Sub (-1 level) Searing (no level change) Energy Admixture(+2 levels) Twin (+ 1 level) Empower (no level change) Repeat (+ 1 level) Quicken (+ 1 level) Becomes a 9th level spell, RAW. The math on damage is this: 15d6 (base) +15d6 (EA) +15d6 (Emp) =45d6. x2 twin= 90d6+90(max) x2 repeat = 180d6+180. I know this is a 9th leel spell slot, but that's one heck of a lot of damage for no save, no SR. That's why I put it at +1, but I'd entertain +0 if the player(s) were willing to escalate both sides of the equation. (i.e. the enemy can do it too.) Hmm...it looks impressive, but 11 feats to make a 9th level single target death spell that does only half damage against a fire immune creature. Not to mention that it looks wrong since arcane thesis only lowers metamagics by 1 level, not 2. Thus empower should be +1, max should be +2 etc. No...what you should really be using arcane thesis on is enervation. Then you can add split ray to the mix as well. a split, empower, twinned enervation with arcane thesis does 4x1.5x1d4 (avg 15) neg level as a 9th level spell.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 03:37 PM	I used the orb spell because it's easy to understand. I know enervation is another great one. Magic missile preforms quite well in many cases. As to the adjustment on the spell levels, I forgot I was doing math based on the Incantrix PrC. Have a look at I love arcane Thesis! (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=638724) on the CharOp boards.
nightwyrm 03-31-08, 03:40 PM	I know enervation is another great one. Magic missile preforms quite well in many cases. As to the adjustment on the spell levels, I forgot I was doing math based on the Incantrix PrC. Have a look at I love arcane Thesis! (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=638724) on the CharOp boards. Ahh...the insane incantantrix. Personally, I think the PrC is a more broken problem than arcane thesis by itself.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 03:45 PM	I'd say both the feat and the PrC bear scrutiny, exponentially more so if used in conjunction... that being said I'd probably allow it if the player had a good reason (or I wanted them to see just how one-dimendsional their power set would be.)
RobbyPants 03-31-08, 03:53 PM	Another awesome spell that should probably be in here is Shivering Touch from Frostburn. I don't own that book, so I don't use the spell, but still, a 3rd level touch spell (no save) that deals 3d6 Dex damage :eek: probably deserves mention. The reason Arcane Thesis gets so ugly is because of builds that focus on a single spell and metamagic it to the point where it's effectively like casting 8 spells at the same time. Check out this example: Arcane Thesis (Orb of Fire: (No save, no SR) Easy Metamagic twice: (Quicken/Twin) Orb of Fire (4th level) Maximized (+ 1 level) Energy Sub (-1 level) Searing (no level change) Energy Admixture(+2 levels) Twin (+ 1 level) Empower (no level change) Repeat (+ 1 level) Quicken (+ 1 level) Becomes a 9th level spell, RAW. The math on damage is this: 15d6 (base) +15d6 (EA) +15d6 (Emp) =45d6. x2 twin= 90d6+90(max) x2 repeat = 180d6+180. You were a bit too liberal on some of the numbers here. As already mentioned, Arcane Thesis only drops each metamagic feat by one level. Thus, some of the numbers should be higher: Empower should still raise it one level. Twin should still raise it three. Energy Admixture should raise it three. Quicken should raise it three. Maximize should rasie it two. And I probably missed a few others. Secondly, each metamatic feat only affects the original spell, not the newly modified version. For example, if you make a fireball (10th level caster) Maximized and Empowered, what you end up with is 60 + ((1/2) * 10d6) and not a flat 90 points. This is because each feat is applied to the original spell separately. So, in your above example, when you twin or repeat the spell, you only get a copy of the original spell (10d6, not 45d6). What you should end up with is much weaker. Something that would work could be Empowered - Split Ray - Maximize for 60 + 25d6, using an 8th level slot. Still, it's not to say Arcane Thesis isn't powerful. It works great with the Lesser Orbs, as well as the 4th level Orbs and other rays like Enervation. Using Enervation, you could whip out a Split Ray - Empowered - Maximized Envervation as a 8th level slot, and a Split Ray - Empowered - Quickened Envervation as a 9th level slot in the same round, for an average of about 13.5 negative levels. The first one should deal 4 + 1.5d4 and the second should deal 2.5d4, for a rough total of 4 + 4d4 negative levels.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 03:59 PM	:surrender Next time I'm just going to link the thread and not put any math on the net for scrutiny, lol. My statement about the feat andf the PrC stand, however, for the reasons stated.
RobbyPants 03-31-08, 04:10 PM	:surrender Next time I'm just going to link the thread and not put any math on the net for scrutiny, lol. My statement about the feat andf the PrC stand, however, for the reasons stated. Well, I do agree that Arcane Thesis is powerful. Do you have a link showing some of the absurdities?
Sunic_Flames 03-31-08, 04:24 PM	1: Metamagics do apply to the entire spell. This means that a Twinned, Split Rayed Enervation shoots four rays. Maximize + Empower is an expressly stated exception to this rule. 2: Arcane Thesis is the only thing making blasting worth a damn. Furthermore, a blasting specialist is neglecting all the many, many broken things they can do as a full caster to take a Fighter like approach, become a one trick pony, and hope said one trick actually works. I can see blocking it under the justification you don't want them hopelessly nerfing themselves but doing it as a means to prevent the power level from exceeding nine thousand? :rolleyes: 3: The parallel is very valid. Arcane Thesis is the only thing that makes a blaster caster worth a damn, compared to his unoptimized companions of the same class using the real spells. Tripping is the only thing making a battlefield controlling martial type worth a damn, as they don't have any other means of keeping the enemy in place. Charging is how you try to duplicate save or dies so you aren't trivial after the first few levels. Damage easily stacking up tends to accomplish this. ToB is the 'everything else' martial book, allowing for more options to those who don't want to whip out a spiked chain, or do pouncing charges for massive damage. All of which are narrowly focused, and therefore nothing compared to a real caster going all out. Banning any or all of them does not reduce the power level of your game. It does however eliminate the lower and middle end options.
Escef 03-31-08, 04:49 PM	The Sudden Maximize and Sudden Empower feats make a low level blaster mage disproportionately powerful. My Assassin of Cheese, a 6th level wizard with Int 14 (someone who needs to prove himself), Greater Spell Focus (Evocation), and these two feats. His tactics, in order: Locate target, a.k.a. the PCs (usually done with aerial familiar) Invisibility, approach unobserved to optimal range (maybe around 150 feet) Fox's Cunning Drop Sudden Maximized and Sudden Empowered Fireball. 36+0.5(6d6) fire damage to party (39-54 damage, average of 46), Reflex DC 19 for half Cleric and Wizard have been dropped or outright killed. Finish off the fighter. If the rogue made his save, he will likely flee. Otherwise, he can be finished as well. Note that this does not include magic items. Mind you, if the PCs have any fire resistance items, things change. As has been noted above, blaster mages aren't all that great at higher levels, but at higher level these feats can still be nasty. Shivering Touch for 18+0.5*(3d6) Dex damage (19-27, average of 23)? That is a one shot kill for most enemies (except mid level+ rogues).
Sunic_Flames 03-31-08, 05:24 PM	Locate target, a.k.a. the PCs (usually done with aerial familiar) Invisibility, approach unobserved to optimal range (maybe around 150 feet) Fox's Cunning Hope entire party fails DC 15 Listen check to hear spell casting at said distance. Alternately, be smart enough to cast this before moving in for the kill, reversing steps 2 and 3. Otherwise, the jig is up. Drop Sudden Maximized and Sudden Empowered Fireball. 36+0.5(6d6) fire damage to party (39-54 damage, average of 46), Reflex DC 19 for half Cleric and Wizard have been dropped or outright killed. Finish off the fighter. If the rogue made his save, he will likely flee. Otherwise, he can be finished as well. You omitted a step. I fixed it for you. Sudden feats are good for novaing. As such they're good for NPCs who really can't do anything else, especially with crap treasure and loot dependency as is illustrated above.
Escef 03-31-08, 05:38 PM	You omitted a step. I fixed it for you. Sudden feats are good for novaing. As such they're good for NPCs who really can't do anything else, especially with crap treasure and loot dependency as is illustrated above. Don't forget crappy stats (c'mon, a 14 Int wizard). That's ok, I also omitted a feat. Sudden Silent, anyone? A DC 15 listen will be hard for the fighter and wizard even without. That's ok, if the confrontation is in a public area, one can also add the +5 to DC for being distracted. But we can trade conditions back and forth for days. The point is nasty feats and choosing the battleground turn a CR 6 into a TPK for a 6th level party. I have a gish that uses the feats in question. He specializes in AoE blasting and combat augmentation. A Greater Invis'd, WraithStrike'd, Power Attacking, Great Sword wielding Warforged can do some nice damage. He has a good balance of abilities. He's powerful, but because he's a gish, far from overpowering. Though I took the DM a little off guard the first time a busted out the Sudden feats. The fact that the DM likes to only use 1-3 encounters per day doesn't help him much.
Reality_Czech 03-31-08, 05:41 PM	Well, I do agree that Arcane Thesis is powerful. Do you have a link showing some of the absurdities? Linked in post #19 of this thread.