| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| paigeoliver02-10-06, 07:19 AM | Recently in driving home from a convention I spent almost the entire 3 hour drive in a friendly arguement with another player about the usefullness of the wisdom statistic to non-spellcasters, and more specifically to fighter type characters. He insists that it is vital. I insist that it is a bigger dump than charisma (fighters actually have a few charisma skills as class skills). His arguement is that it boosts your spot, listen and will save. My arguement is that every wisdom skill is cross class for a fighter, and that your will save is going to be bad as a fighter ANYWAY. Specifically about the will saves. I will often go module after module without ever even making a savings throw at all, much less a will save. As for the skills, I just don't see the point in raising an ability score that only effects skills that are cross class for a class that gets 2 skill points per level. The roleplaying part of it doesn't even come into play since wisdom is easily the most invisible part of the character. What does everyone else think? |
| kjenks02-10-06, 07:36 AM | Having a crappy Will save is okay at low levels, but at higher levels, you'll run into many more "Everybody make a Will save" situations. |
| Iswald02-10-06, 09:12 AM | Usually, I'd consider wisdom to be more important. It also depends upon your build. I assume that you're talking about melee type characters and not straight fighters. You can often take some levels in classes that'll give you some spells if you have a modest wisdom, but that's less likely for charisma. There's the whole will save debate, but casting protection from evil helps quite a bit there (of course, it helps if your wisdom is high enough to cast it yourself). I dislike playing stupid and foolish characters. If I have a character that is stupid, I go for at least average wisdom so that he doesn't go off and do things that are totally ridiculous. |
| afbeer02-10-06, 10:29 AM | His arguement is that it boosts your spot, listen and will save. My arguement is that every wisdom skill is cross class for a fighter, and that your will save is going to be bad as a fighter ANYWAY. Don't think Fighter. Ranger has Spot, Listen & Survival and some Skillpoints. Same for Barbarian with Listen & Survival. |
| DuctShuiTengu02-10-06, 12:21 PM | Hmm... hard to say, and it depends on what you're wanting to do with the character. Running down the list of classes, here's my thoughts Barbarian: Wisdom helps with Survival, Listen, and Will Saves. Charisma... uhm... Intimidate? Personally, I'd go Wisdom. Fighter: Wisdom helps with Will Saves, but as already mentioned, all the skills that use it are cross-class. Then again, the only class skills that use Charisma are Handle Animal (if you're going to be using it, you probably have enough ranks in it without Charisma) and Intimidate again. I'd still go with Wisdom, personally. I've seen a few too many situations where a failed Will save by the fighter lead to a TPK. Hexblade: Wisdom... well, it still helps with Will Saves, but with those being good here, that's less of an issue. It also boosts Profession checks. Charisma... Hexblade's Curse, Spellcasting, Arcane Resistance, Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate.... Yeah, definitely Charisma. Paladin: Wisdom helps with Will Saves again, Heal, Profession, Sense Motive, and Spell Casting. Charisma helps all saves, improves your ability to Turn Undead, Smite Evil, and Lay on Hands. I vote both, but Charisma first. Ranger: Wisdom is still good for Will Saves, Spellcasting, Heal, Listen, Profession, Spot, and Survival. Charisma helps Handle Animal, and Wild Empathy. Personally, I'd go Wisdom here. Swashbuckler: Wisdom (yet again) is good for Will Saves, Profession, and Sense Motive. Charisma helps Bluff and Diplomacy. I know that the section on Swashbucklers says they should have a good Charisma, but I'm just not seeing it. Sack it and throw the points into Int or Dex. So yeah, in general, I find Wisdom is more important for those with low will saves (conversely, it's the first stat I dump when I make a Sorcerer, Warmage, or Wizard). |
| Lomiat02-10-06, 01:14 PM | Of course, all of this assumes that with your 28-point buy you didn't just grab an 18 STR, 12 DEX, 14 CON, and 10 INT. Or the tripper's standard: 16 STR, 14 DEX, 14 CON, and 14 INT. Depending on the fighter type, I can easily see taking WIS over INT, but never for a melee brute would I take WIS over STR, DEX, or CON. Thus, WIS vs. CHA is moot for most of my brute builds. Otherwise, I'd probably break it down like the previous class-by-class attribute assessment. |
| mowaca02-10-06, 02:16 PM | I like the term 'brute' below...I'm thinking of a power attack/cleaving kind of guy who has 18 str, lots of armor and a greatsword, and 1 skill point a level after first level. If you look at 'role in the party', do they ever talk to anyone? No. Most intelligence skills are trained only, so they can't do those anyways. Sure, they don't have ranks in listen or spot, but both are skills everyone uses almost every encounter and +1 can make a big difference. Ditto with Will saves. So if they have 2 or 4 points left over, wisdom is a good spot. Unless you cast spells with your Charisma score as a modifier, CHR only helps a little on skills and all Charisma skills are really easy to boost with spells and equipment. I can't see a guy with full spiked plate with a CHR higher than 8, sorry. - Kirk Recently in driving home from a convention I spent almost the entire 3 hour drive in a friendly arguement with another player about the usefullness of the wisdom statistic to non-spellcasters, and more specifically to fighter type characters. He insists that it is vital. I insist that it is a bigger dump than charisma (fighters actually have a few charisma skills as class skills). His arguement is that it boosts your spot, listen and will save. My arguement is that every wisdom skill is cross class for a fighter, and that your will save is going to be bad as a fighter ANYWAY. Specifically about the will saves. I will often go module after module without ever even making a savings throw at all, much less a will save. As for the skills, I just don't see the point in raising an ability score that only effects skills that are cross class for a class that gets 2 skill points per level. The roleplaying part of it doesn't even come into play since wisdom is easily the most invisible part of the character. What does everyone else think? |
| Paul H02-10-06, 02:38 PM | Hi As I normally play spellcasters, I'm probably a bit biased, but Wis 11 can be important - it allows you to take 1 level of Cleric, & cast 1st lvl spells. Strength Domain - Enlarge person, Destruction - Smite 1/Day, Protection from Evil, Bless, Cure Light Wounds etc are all more than slightly useful. My 'Fighter' type I'm starting is Human Cleric of Velnius - going Stormlord. The ability to make a weapon grant elemental damage just by picking it up is nothing to sniff at. :P With Wis 11 suggest 1 level Clr with 2 Domains of: Strength (Enlarge Person), Travel (Freedom Movement 1 rnd) Ocean (Water Breathing, plus Endure Elements - perfect for Bright Sands). List goes on........ Cheers Paul H |
| JohnduBois02-10-06, 02:47 PM | All of my PC's have Wisdom as a dump stat. With the exception of my bard, they also have Charisma as a dump stat. I'm also looking at new PC's I'm looking at. My cleric is WIS 18, CHA 16, but the dwarf tank I'm building is WIS 8, CHA 6. It just depends on what you want to build. I would wonder why a front-line fighter is putting points into anything but STR, DEX, and CON without a roleplaying or PrC reason. Likewise, a pure caster who's paying a lot of attention to STR also needs a roleplaying reason to do so. |
| solbergb02-10-06, 04:43 PM | I had a long pattern of int 12 or 14 and wisdom 8 characters. I finally broke it with a cleric and druid (the druid is still smart, the cleric is only average int) Personally I've seen no difference between having a bad will save and an abysmal one :) I've noticed the lack of spot/listen a lot more, but some charas make it up with skill points, others with feats (combat reflexes, hold the line and reach weapons means you get actions even when surprised sometimes) etc. I don't find will save effects all that common, and half of them go away around level 11 when you spend most of your adventuring time under a hero feast and can ignore fear. Of the others, well, one of those massive will save clerics or druids can cast something to protect me or bust me out, on the rare occasion where it happens. (yes, I was pleased when my monk shook off a half dozen will save effects from bhargests, but he's another wisdom 8 character..he's just my only low wis char with a decent will save anyway) |
| Mommy was an Orc02-10-06, 04:51 PM | It just depends on what you want to build. I would wonder why a front-line fighter is putting points into anything but STR, DEX, and CON without a roleplaying or PrC reason. Likewise, a pure caster who's paying a lot of attention to STR also needs a roleplaying reason to do so. I wouldn't go that far - the problem with putting nothing into Intelligence is that it greatly restricts multiple PrC access. Strength is useful for getting Power Attack, which a lot of pure casters(Clerics/Druids/Favored Souls) are interested in getting... |
| kenobi6502-10-06, 04:53 PM | Personally I've seen no difference between having a bad will save and an abysmal one :) Agreed; the extra +1 or +2 to a Will save from giving a fighter a halfway decent Wis score, vs. a minimal Wis score, just isn't that big a deal, IMO. Better to spend those build points on an ability score that'll come into play more often. I've noticed the lack of spot/listen a lot more Yeah, that's where a poor Wis can hurt more often. I hate having PCs with dogmeat Spot scores. (Making it even more problematic is that Spot is cross-class for most classes.) |
| JamesMaissen02-10-06, 05:10 PM | Recently in driving home from a convention I spent almost the entire 3 hour drive in a friendly arguement with another player about the usefullness of the wisdom statistic to non-spellcasters, and more specifically to fighter type characters. He insists that it is vital. What does everyone else think? I try to be fair when I judge and part of doing so is representing the opponents as NPCs. I will always want to know what the characters look like so that I can try to assess what my NPCs see them as. From what I imagine the NPC pegs each PC as, I will draw my conclusions as to his decisions. He will go on stereotypes and drop fort saves on wizards and rogues, ref saves on clerics and other heavy armor types, and will saves on fighters of all occasions. The NPC will, until given evidence to the contrary, base tactics on his assumptions. Much the way that PCs would. In my mind this is a very fair way of handling things. And it should, honestly, be the way you should expect things to go. You wouldn't target the raging orc with a great axe with a fort save, rather you instead would be searching for anything you had with a will save. The upshot of this is that when you take on an archetypical role expect that the first pitch that you'll get will be against your legendary weak spot. This is a place to expect to be hit. For fighters it's the will save and a good wisdom is a nice leg up in defense. Of course multiclassing into classes that favor will is the way to really make a good will save for you, but the wisdom is a nice addition when the alternative is spending more than 1-1 for another stat. -James PS: Towards expect your weaknesses to be hit: As a joke my dwarven cleric has complained "It's always 'make a reflex save' Rothgar.. where are the magical poison fort saves I ask you? I swear they exist!" |
| Sieylianna02-10-06, 06:02 PM | I try to be fair when I judge and part of doing so is representing the opponents as NPCs. I will always want to know what the characters look like so that I can try to assess what my NPCs see them as. That's why my wizard wears a mithral chain shirt and carries a longsword and dagger. I generally try to avoid stats of less than 10. Most of my 8 PCs have some sort of spellcasting capability. I have one PC with an 8 Charisma and none with a Wisdom less than 10. I have more PCs with Strength as a dump stat than any other characteristic. Personally, I'd slight Charisma before Wisdom, because there is usually at least one PC with diplomacy as a class skill, if nothing else. If your BDF is controlled because of your poor Will saving throw, I'm not going to be happy, but I'm going to be more unhappy if you have a Wisdom penalty. Ed |
| Paul H02-10-06, 07:31 PM | Hi The only character I'm creating with low Wisdom is a Human (or 1/2 Elf) Ranger: Str 10 Dex 14 Con 10 Int 16 Wis 10 Cha 14 Favoured Enemy Humans But we all have our own ideas how we see characters developing. (Don't play 'clones'). Cheers Paul H PS: Low stats Str, Con, Wis, because going Warmage. High Int is extra damage. (Plus Favoured Enemy for Lssr Orbs, etc). Only problem low BAB, but can wear armour. Takes Shielded Spellcaster at 3rd, (no AoO spellcasting), Extra Edge 6th, Improved Favoured Enemy 9th. +11 Damage for attacking spells vs Humans at 9th lvl. Lssr Orb 5D8+11 vs Humans? Can't be bad. |
| redgamer02-11-06, 10:48 AM | All of my characters have an 8 wisdom. The one with the worst will save is the one that everyone thinks is a cleric so this hasn't been a problem. I can't remember failing a will save. Fort and Reflex, well I've failed a fort save when my bonus was 16 at APL 8 and reflex saves are just so common until you have over +10 you are likely to fail one a mod. |
| King Kashue02-12-06, 02:27 AM | That's why my wizard wears a mithral chain shirt and carries a longsword and dagger. Weapons are no issue, but I (and many folks I know) would have an issue adventuring with a straight caster with a arcane failure penalty (assuming your guy is a straight caster)... Not every character has to be "optimized" by any measure (my light fighter speaks 14 languages and has every knowledge skill), but a player has a responsibility to the other folks at the table to be able to be depended on...A straight caster who cannot count on getting his spells off puts his party at risk... |
| Mommy was an Orc02-12-06, 10:10 AM | Weapons are no issue, but I (and many folks I know) would have an issue adventuring with a straight caster with a arcane failure penalty (assuming your guy is a straight caster)... Not every character has to be "optimized" by any measure (my light fighter speaks 14 languages and has every knowledge skill), but a player has a responsibility to the other folks at the table to be able to be depended on...A straight caster who cannot count on getting his spells off puts his party at risk... I think it depends on your point of view - 10% isn't all that big of a failure chance and in exchange for that he's getting likely a pretty good AC and throwing off people who might otherwise make him the first target in an ambush. I'd rather see the Wizard generating a 10% failure chance than getting dropped before he can even get a spell off... If the PCs go after the casters first, the smart bad guys will as well - and if they can't figure out who is the wizard on the 1st round, all the better... |
| Sieylianna02-12-06, 10:49 AM | I think it depends on your point of view - 10% isn't all that big of a failure chance and in exchange for that he's getting likely a pretty good AC and throwing off people who might otherwise make him the first target in an ambush. I'd rather see the Wizard generating a 10% failure chance than getting dropped before he can even get a spell off... My wizard's armor is +1 with the Twilight enhancement, so no ASF. My barbarian/wizard is wearing leather and putting up with the ASF, but it's not a big deal at 3rd level. Eventually want to get a mithral chain shirt for him too. He may go spellsword, rage mage or twilight enhancement to get rid of ASF, but I have to see how he develops. Ed |
| redgamer02-12-06, 11:07 AM | I think 20% is not a good trade off for +4 armor. (chain shirt) By the time you can make it mithril for 10% you are likely facing enemies where AC16 instead of 12 is not a meaningful difference and you can put up mage armor most of the day without too much trouble |
| King Kashue02-12-06, 12:08 PM | I think it depends on your point of view - 10% isn't all that big of a failure chance and in exchange for that he's getting likely a pretty good AC and throwing off people who might otherwise make him the first target in an ambush. I'd rather see the Wizard generating a 10% failure chance than getting dropped before he can even get a spell off... If the PCs go after the casters first, the smart bad guys will as well - and if they can't figure out who is the wizard on the 1st round, all the better... As Redgamer mentioned, at any APL higher than 6, that +4 won't matter much. And considering that 10% chance could kill a fireball or disintigrate or evard's, it's certainly not worth risking merely to raise your AC from 14 to 18 (especially since you can get Bracers of Armor for the armor stat). A Wizard will like cast 20 spells during a module, that means on average, 2 of those will fail...there's no way to guarantee that those will be inconsequential magic missiles and not crucial spells that need to go off to save a party member... If a Wizard wants AC, cast Alter Self and turn into a Troglodyte. You'll still be able to cast spells and your AC gets a lot better... |
| King Kashue02-12-06, 12:11 PM | My wizard's armor is +1 with the Twilight enhancement, so no ASF. Cool...carry on then :D My barbarian/wizard is wearing leather and putting up with the ASF, but it's not a big deal at 3rd level. Eventually want to get a mithral chain shirt for him too. He may go spellsword, rage mage or twilight enhancement to get rid of ASF, but I have to see how he develops. Ed Yeah, mixed casters sometimes will often take ASF chance, that's understood. However, a Barbarian Spellsword can bring something to the table even if his spells don't work. A primary caster who doesn't get a spell off is contributing nothing (his 1d4+0 dagger damage just doesn't cut it)... |
| Mommy was an Orc02-12-06, 01:54 PM | As Redgamer mentioned, at any APL higher than 6, that +4 won't matter much. And considering that 10% chance could kill a fireball or disintigrate or evard's, it's certainly not worth risking merely to raise your AC from 14 to 18 (especially since you can get Bracers of Armor for the armor stat). A Wizard will like cast 20 spells during a module, that means on average, 2 of those will fail...there's no way to guarantee that those will be inconsequential magic missiles and not crucial spells that need to go off to save a party member... First off, people add 10% failure to their chances all the time - every time a BDF takes +2 on Power Attack, he's trading an additional 10% chance of failure for more damage. Which is great over time usually, but can throw a monkey wrench into an individual combat. One miss by someone who did a Shock Trooper build against a target with Power Attack can mean the death of a character - was the potential extra damage worth it when it fails? If that then means you lose your frontline combatant and then results in a TPK, was the Shock Trooper wrong to do that? It isn't about just raising your AC, although it does it a lot more cheaply than Bracers. It increases the survivability of the wizard, which is a benefit to the party. Now, you're deciding it isn't worth it, I'm ambivalent about its value, but I wouldn't have 'issues' with a pure wizard build to the point of raising it to them. Sure, it will occasionally hurt, but I'd much rather play with a tactically adept wizard with a possibly suboptimal choice than a incompetent blaster any day of the week... Finally, you can tailor your spell choices - useful link here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=472555). |
| redgamer02-12-06, 02:47 PM | If power attacking for 2 drops your chance to hit by 10% it isn't nesseccarilly worth power attacking for +4 to damge. Because 20s always hit and 1s always miss the numbers for power attacking are not clean. If a successful spell would incapacitate/kill an enemy and save someone life having it fail due to armor is a problem. If you need to hit an enemy for 50 damage to kill it and you do 20 damage per hit without power attack then you have to power attack to have a chance to kill it and your lower chance to hit is irrelevant. If you need to do 15 damage to kill the enemy then you don't power attack at all. If you can't kill an enemy then you power attack for whatever gives you the best average damage. Of course you shouldn't know the exact number so you take your best guess (or your characters best guess if you have information you shouldn't have) Wearing armor makes you spell always have a chance to fail and only help your offense if you would be dead/dying without armor. If casting spells is your only contribution to combat then your armor would have to cut down the gross number or rounds you are dead or dying (or withdrawing) by 10% (assuming mithril chainshirt). If you spend less than 10% of your rounds dying/running then armor is mathematically inferior. If I remember correctly my level 6 wizard has only spent 2 rounds dying and only one of those rounds would have been prevented by armor. Therefor any ASF above 1/the total number of rounds fought would have been an inferior choice. Using a conservative estimate of 9 rounds of combat per mod that would be 270 rounds |
| King Kashue02-12-06, 02:58 PM | First off, people add 10% failure to their chances all the time - every time a BDF takes +2 on Power Attack, he's trading an additional 10% chance of failure for more damage. Which is great over time usually, but can throw a monkey wrench into an individual combat. One miss by someone who did a Shock Trooper build against a target with Power Attack can mean the death of a character - was the potential extra damage worth it when it fails? If that then means you lose your frontline combatant and then results in a TPK, was the Shock Trooper wrong to do that? Missing a swing is not equivalent to fizzling a 4th level spell. A fighter will get 2-4 attacks in a round, a wizard gets 1 spell... The effective difference a 17 AC makes vs. a 13 or even a 20 vs. a 16 is not worth making your spells inconsistant (At APL 8, you're regularly fighting stuff with +15 to hit, at higher APLs, AC often becomes irrelevant unless you're pushing 35-40+)...And if a wizard is consistantly taking attacks, then the party is doing something seriously wrong, and avoiding 1 attack at the beginning of a battle is really not worth a 10% bollocks chance on every single spell... As for power attack, when you look at the statistics, power attack almost never makes sense beyond +2 or 3...It's only with extremely low or extremely high AC enemies that hauling off with a full power attack is statistically advantageous, especially when you get iterative attacks... |
| Mommy was an Orc02-12-06, 04:24 PM | If power attacking for 2 drops your chance to hit by 10% it isn't nesseccarilly worth power attacking for +4 to damge. Because 20s always hit and 1s always miss the numbers for power attacking are not clean. Actually, it drops it by 20% on average, particularly in a game like LG where you fight higher CR monsters. They're clean enough - the use of Power Attack causes higher uncertainty in damage, which is often good, but will cause misses. It is often a better thing to hit more often than it is to do spectacular or even higher average damage. Wearing armor makes you spell always have a chance to fail and only help your offense if you would be dead/dying without armor. If casting spells is your only contribution to combat then your armor would have to cut down the gross number or rounds you are dead or dying (or withdrawing) by 10% (assuming mithril chainshirt). If you spend less than 10% of your rounds dying/running then armor is mathematically inferior. That's a lot of assumptions in there - here's a simple counterexample - if an archer readies an attack against your wizard, if you're wearing armor, you're about 10% less likely to take damage with Mithril Chain +1 vs Mage Armor. And you won't be wasting a cure light wounds when you fail your spell... The advantage of armor is that it is a cheap form of protection. The question isn't whether or not defense is better than offense, it is whether or not you have the right balance or not. |
| redgamer02-12-06, 05:15 PM | AC= 10 + 2 dex +5 armor = 17 or AC=10 + 2 dex +4 mage armor = 16 At low levels the archer shouldn't be readying to disrupt. At mid levels the archer has a good to hit bonus. BAB 6 + 2 dex +1 mwk at the low end missing 7/20 versus missing 8/20 BAB 9 + 5 dex +2 GMW at high end missing 1/20 versus missing 1/20 If you are being attacked by a bad archer at APL 6 then that extra point of AC is significant. Even the bad archer approaches the second example as APL rises. In my experience archers are the rarest of NPCs. You said with a 1 higher AC you have a 10% chance of saving the party from casting one cure light wounds. You aren't really balancing offense and defense if this is true. Since you cast more spells they you are attacked and you usually cast higher than 1st level spells. (If the enemy can hit you enough to deserve a cure serious he likely hits you 95% of the time no matter what armor your wizard is wearing) you are risking more than you are preventing. A ring of protection +1 is a lot cheaper than a +1 mithril chain shirt and rods of extend are only 3k. |
| Objulen02-12-06, 08:45 PM | I'd say that wisdom is more important than charisma, because while CHA does boost some skills, you aren't going to have many without also dropping points into INT, while WIS helps to reinforce your weak will save, and let's face it -- any moderately intelligent NPC caster knows you hit the casters with fort save spells and warriors with will save spells, especially fighters, since barbarians eventually gain bonuses to will while raging, rangers and paladins often have higher will saves due to their need for wisdom to cast, and paladins have Dive Grace if they go the CHA route anyway. However, given the fighter's dearth of feats, if you have a wisdom score of 14 and Iron Will, you get +4 to will saves, which means that you are going to be significantly above the curve compared to other warrior characters, especially other warrior classes who can't afford to drop a feat for Iron Will early on. |
| Paul H02-12-06, 08:59 PM | Hi You guys talk of ASF, but the best Blaster Caster is Warmage - no ASF for Light Armour, Small Shield, with better armour choices as you level up. (No ASF for Heavy Armour later levels, though still can only use Light Shield). You can even take Battle Mage (whatever it's called), to use heavier armours without ASF. My Clr/Warmage has Mithril +1 Shirt (Lt Fort), plus Light Shield +1. Only suffers ASF when using arcane scrolls not on Warmage list. (Magic Domain power). If you never want to have problems casting spells then the Combat Casting/Shielded Caster (RoS) combo stops AoO casting spells in threatened areas. :D In non-LG games I just Love the 'Luminous Armour' spell, especially what it does to undead, etc. Only thing is that there should be an Errata for the obvious material component - the Dayglo concentric target rings that should be painted both front & rear! :D Cheers Paul H |
| JamesMaissen02-13-06, 12:45 AM | To those that are debating the wizard with the mithril chain shirt. You are missing the point. The point is not what AC the wizard reaches, but rather that he is not known to BE the wizard! I have a human cleric (whom I've retired) that wore full plate. His AC at 10th level was a pathetic 21 (from an 8 dex, +1 full plate and +1 shield). But a few DMs would hear full plate and shield and have thier monster power attack for less than if they heard 'no armor' or 'chain shirt'. It was a question of appearance and helped my poor priest run away on his turn. My wizard loves the seeming spell for just such reasons. In LG a good number of parties are going to be ambushed by thier composition and/or choices. Having the bad guys confusing who's who in that surprise round is wonderful. It may not be worth the price of a 5th level spell, but I love it. It's also a nice check on who's a sucker for some will saves and who's not when you're deciding what to throw that first round. -James |
| King Kashue02-13-06, 01:24 AM | You are missing the point. The point is not what AC the wizard reaches, but rather that he is not known to BE the wizard! I have a human cleric (whom I've retired) that wore full plate. His AC at 10th level was a pathetic 21 (from an 8 dex, +1 full plate and +1 shield). But a few DMs would hear full plate and shield and have thier monster power attack for less than if they heard 'no armor' or 'chain shirt'. It was a question of appearance and helped my poor priest run away on his turn. Except that Plate didn't affect your cleric's abilities in any substantial way. ASF does affect an arcanist's abilities... If the Wizard wants to look like something else, get a hat of disguise. My Sorcerer carries a mithril buckler and a rapier. He still has one hand free for casting, has a weapon so he threatens (for AoOs), has increased AC from the shield and any enchants on that (energy resistance is nice), doesn't "look like an arcanist", and has 0% ASF... |
| Sieylianna02-13-06, 07:52 AM | My Sorcerer carries a mithril buckler and a rapier. He still has one hand free for casting, has a weapon so he threatens (for AoOs), has increased AC from the shield and any enchants on that (energy resistance is nice), doesn't "look like an arcanist", and has 0% ASF... And in the VTF modules, you'll be targeted by the assassins because you aren't wearing armor and don't look like a monk. My wizard has survived a half-dozen death attacks during her career. That is the single biggest threat to her survival, no uncanny dodge means flat-footed AC is horrible and Fortitude is not a good saving throw for a wizard. Ed |
| Sieylianna02-13-06, 07:55 AM | The advantage of armor is that it is a cheap form of protection. The question isn't whether or not defense is better than offense, it is whether or not you have the right balance or not. The other issue is that I've never seen access to place armor enhancements on bracers (which is defined in Arms & Equipment). If a wizard/sorcerer wants fortification, then he needs to put it on armor (or a shield where it's allowed). Ed |
| kjenks02-13-06, 11:10 AM | If the Wizard wants to look like something else, get a hat of disguise. My sorceress has a Hat of Disguise. She often looks like she's wearing full plate (very quiet full plate, I guess) and wielding a spiked chain. More than once, this has saved her from being targetted as a spellcaster, and once the illusion of a spiked chain caused an attacker to choose another victim so he'd avoid an attack of opportunity. |
| JamesMaissen02-13-06, 12:17 PM | And in the VTF modules, you'll be targeted by the assassins because you aren't wearing armor and don't look like a monk. My wizard has survived a half-dozen death attacks during her career. That is the single biggest threat to her survival, no uncanny dodge means flat-footed AC is horrible and Fortitude is not a good saving throw for a wizard. Ed Which is why there are more than just 2 levels to Divine Oracle. It's a pity that Loremaster is so easy to enter into after 2 levels of this PrC or some people might see it's usefulness by going into Divine Oracle 4. As to other posts: Getting armor enhancements on Bracers is very rare (unfortunately). I think because it's from a side area rather than a normal entry it's missed by authors that want to include nonstandard fare in thier modules. I've seen such access once and heard of it once on the boards, both modules having retired. And the hat of disguise is great for a sorcerer without need for a headband. More of a sacrifice for a wizard, like wearing the armor in the first place. Both are better than nothing, however. -James |
| solbergb02-13-06, 03:18 PM | Leaving aside the value of deception for a moment, I'll get to that. I'm with all the folks that say never, EVER take arcane spell failure, not even 5%, on a primary caster. A mutt or gish can get away with it, but a lot of what makes magic strong is some of it has NO chance of failure. Like a wall of force. Unless you fizzle it. Oops. ASF isn't as big a deal on things with saves, or with attack rolls, since those have a failure chance anyway (unless ASF becomes a big part of the overall chance of failure). It IS a big deal on "sure thing" spells, such as buffs, battlefield control and mobility spells. They're the diff between doing your job and effectively not being there. Bad enough that enemies might try to disrupt your spells, no sense doing the job for them. The counter argument is that more armor might mean your spell isn't interrupted. For that to be valid, you have to look at how rare the armor actually helps: 1. Someone actually has to ready an action to shoot you, and it has to be a better choice than simply opening up on you and killing you. 2. The armor actually has to provide more AC than you can provide for yourself (eg, mage armor, or better moving to cover/prone/out of range of multiattack, etc) in a meaningful way (the armor is in the mid range, where they don't need 20s to hit you and they don't automatically hit even with the armor) 3. Their attack actually has to hit by just enough to hit without the armor but not enough to hit with the armor. 4. The attack must actually disrupt a spell. I don't know about you guys, but my sorceress with 12 AC has had I think exactly one spell disrupted due to physical attack, and that was back at level 1 (and they had to knock her out to beat the concentration check, although I admit I rolled well on the first hit). This number might have increased to about 4 in 8 levels if I didn't buy gloves of arrow snaring at level 4. She's been down and bleeding a few times, but if memory serves, only twice was low AC a contributory factor to that outcome and I'm not sure a +4 would have made any difference. So...I think the odds you'll fizzle an important spell are a ton higher than the odds lack of armor will prevent you from being unable to cast your spells in a given combat round. Regarding deception: This I approve of. However I'll direct your attention to Disguise Self, Seeming and Veil, plus Hat of Disguise, all of which can change appearance, and all but Disguise Self can do it for the whole day if you need it (and disguise self is low level, so easy to pearl of power back, extend or whatever). Should you lack illusion spells or just be too poor/low level can a simple disguise kit+sorcererer charisma+take 10 vs a casual observer, to make your clothing look like it has a mithril chain shirt under it (heavier armor isn't recommended, since it changes how you walk/move...but no-acp armor is indistinguishable from clothing except visually) Even an 8 cha wizard can still force a spot check to notice you aren't wearing armor, if he at least tries to disguise himself (-1+2 for disguise kit+10 for take 10+2 for minor change = spot DC13+range mods to notice you aren't in armor) |
| Mommy was an Orc02-13-06, 06:30 PM | I'm with all the folks that say never, EVER take arcane spell failure, not even 5%, on a primary caster. A mutt or gish can get away with it, but a lot of what makes magic strong is some of it has NO chance of failure. Like a wall of force. Unless you fizzle it. Oops. ASF isn't as big a deal on things with saves, or with attack rolls, since those have a failure chance anyway (unless ASF becomes a big part of the overall chance of failure). It IS a big deal on "sure thing" spells, such as buffs, battlefield control and mobility spells. They're the diff between doing your job and effectively not being there. Bad enough that enemies might try to disrupt your spells, no sense doing the job for them. Your Sorceress has an AC of 12 - you're either getting extremely lucky or a good number of your spells are devoted to making sure you don't get hit or killed. By definition, someone doing this move is devoting some resources in addition to the Mithril Chain so as to make his AC higher and to allow him to cast spells that bypass ASF(taking Sudden Still Spell or Still Spell for must cast spells, choosing spells without somatic components when possible(True Strike, Blindness, Suggestion, Dimension Door, etc...), possibly taking Light/Medium Armor proficiency to be able to wear Mithril Plate instead, casting Alter Self for very high AC, etc...with Still Spell, Mithril Plate +1, Mithril Heavy Shield +1, 16 Dex, it isn't impossible for this character to have an AC of 31 with Alter Self at say 8th level and with False Life, enough hit points to be hard to hurt. Now while the end point seems pretty decent to me, it is very possible the build is at the midpoint, where it can't consistently afford to Still everything and it has invested in a couple of armor proficiencies. A Wizard can also remove his mithril chain, cast a long lasting buff spell, and put his armor back on in the space of less than 2 minutes. It is only if he is planning on casting no failure spells in combat that he is significantly affected. Something he doesn't have to do. Is it possibly suboptimal? In many cases, yes, but not always. Is it something worth raising as an issue to another player, pointing out that they're somehow not pulling their weight? No. I'm sure if they're a bad player, they'll be giving KK plenty of other reasons to complain to them. |
| kjenks02-13-06, 07:08 PM | Your Sorceress has an AC of 12 - you're either getting extremely lucky or a good number of your spells are devoted to making sure you don't get hit or killed. It doesn't take many spells. My 13th sorceress has AC 11 (just a +1 from Dex). She rarely gets attacked in melee, and only once or twice -- ever -- by ranged weapons. Her bane is large area effect spells (and surprise rounds). She hangs out behind the party. WAY behind the part, like 35 or 40 ft. away and off to one side. When they enter a room, she's in the hall outside, around a corner. When they're outdoors, she's lagging behind. When combat breaks out, she'll cast Swift Fly and move in, above the melee. Her first spell in close combat is often Mass Fly, designating her famliar as her "fly buddy" for the purposes of staying within 30 ft. of another recipient of the spell. Or she'll share a Greater Invisibility with her familiar before flying in. (Or she'll get both spells off in the first round. She often casts Greater Invis, designating her familiar as the toucher. Her raven hangs out in a Familiar Pocket spell until combat begins, then he pops out, tags his master and pops back in, all in the first round.) I use the Feign Surprise card to get this stuff done in a surprise round, if necessary. Especially in Living Greyhawk, most creatures can't fly. Many creatures have no effective ranged attack. Most creatures can't see invisible opponents. Those who do have one of these abilities can often be isolated from the combat, at least for a round or two, by a Wall of Force spell. Just for good measure, she always uses Sleight of Hand to disguise her spellcasting (per the Races of Stone rule for the alternate skill usage). As I said earlier, she uses a Hat of Disguise to appear to be wearing heavy armor and wielding a spiked chain, which further discourages creatures from targeting or even approaching her. By effective tactics, you can greatly reduce the circumstances under which your opponents can or will target you with attacks and spell. If your sorcerer is getting hit a lot, or even frequently getting in a situation where someone can target you with weapons or spells, you need to learn some new combat tactics. Oh, and by the way, she has Wisdom 8. This not only lowers her Will save, it makes it a bit difficult to get Imbue with Spell Ability for the delicious cheese that is Divine Insight, since Imbue requires Wis 9. |
| solbergb02-13-06, 07:26 PM | What Ken said. I don't even have Feign Surprise spells. What I do have is False Life, and Swift Fly and I think about placement every single round. For defensive items, I do have gloves of arrow snaring. They don't come up often, but when they do, they're surprisingly effective. Nobody expects a sorcerer to have the snatch arrows feat. I also invested in a vest of resistance+2. (I *just* at level 8 finally got around to getting my amulet of health). Olivia has a decent balance between defense and other expenditures, fairly normal. I carry a couple cheap scrolls for when I'm sure I'll need armor class (mage armor+prot evil). I also use arcane sight pro-actively to scout for traps, hidden magic-using enemies etc. It doesn't help with the obligatory thug encounters, but it is pretty good when we're hitting a hardpoint that might have traps or ambushers. Her armor class is not slated to rise as she levels, but she's going to have other defenses. Aside from the upgrades to resistance and con items, there is the ability to interpose resilient spheres or walls of force, improved flying options, the ability to levitate the entire party out of harms way, the ability to fly a rowboat (slowly) and use it for cover, contingency and of course much more effective offense to hinder and kill enemies before they kill her or her allies. Olivia's bane is surprise rounds, much like Ken's character. Area effects are only a problem in the surprise round, because normally they won't waste them where she is (away from party members, due to swift fly). I'm working on stuff to mitigate surprise round risks...that flying rowboat is one of those strange ideas. She also has a bad habit of walking up to bodies of water and sticking her hand in so she can cast a dancing lights under the surface to light up whatever is down there. I really need to remember to buy some "light" scrolls to avoid that particular risk :) |
| solbergb02-13-06, 07:33 PM | Now while the end point seems pretty decent to me, it is very possible the build is at the midpoint, where it can't consistently afford to Still everything and it has invested in a couple of armor proficiencies. Is it possibly suboptimal? In many cases, yes, but not always. Is it something worth raising as an issue to another player, pointing out that they're somehow not pulling their weight? No. I'm sure if they're a bad player, they'll be giving KK plenty of other reasons to complain to them. Ok...If the build is designed to avoid APC, I got no issues. Which is why I say nothing when I see arcanists in armor, I assume they've got spellsword levels, or use verbal spells, or whatever. If however someone tries to cast a key spell in combat and it fizzles, he can probably expect to get teased a bit. There is a category of casters out there who are so paranoid about defense they don't do anything useful. One of these categories is the armored-fizzle-guy, but another is the guy with feats in 3 save boosters, toughness and improved toughness, and who spends 50% of his spell slots on defense, and casts half of them in the middle of combat. Armored-fizzle-guy is normally a mild form of this disease, and a conversation about his plans for the character can sometimes yeild a productive outcome (he remixes more verbal-only spells in tomorrow, saving VS for long running buffs, etc...or casts mage armor from scroll for the climactic fight and takes off the armor to avoid risk of failing a key spell, but wears armor the rest of the time) |
| redgamer02-13-06, 08:51 PM | Twice my wizard adventured with another wizard who wore armor. My AC was 12 theirs was 18. They also had to spend stats in strength to carry the armor. Both my wizard and the other wizard spent our time in the back not getting attacked. Their armor was completely wasted so were 3 of their spells due to ASF. My wizard never cast defensive spells other than mage armor and even that is only when another character wants it and I can recast it with a pearl. If I am expecting people to tank for me then it is only fair that I provide arcane support not arcane support 80 or even 90 percent of the time. Distance and other party member saves a wizard for more hits than armor. Casting long term buffs and putting on full plate does work. In fact it works nicely but its not an optimal tactic for straight wizards as they can't contribute much to the offense without spells and AC tanking doesn't work as well when 5% of the enemies attacks kill you. My Gish character loves wearing full plate. It makes his AC great his HP become great with rage and false life and he has the strength to be useful without spells. He doesn't like full plate enough to spend 1.5k on it however so its only a once in a while tactic. I don't remember a hat of disguise changing what weapon you weild. Are you holding an actual spiked chain? or am I misremembering what the hat does? |
| Arvagor02-14-06, 11:27 AM | I don't remember a hat of disguise changing what weapon you weild. Are you holding an actual spiked chain? or am I misremembering what the hat does? Hat of Disguise: This apparently normal hat allows its wearer to alter her appearance as with a disguise self spell. Disguise Self ... You make yourself—including clothing, armor, weapons, and equipment—look different. You can seem 1 foot shorter or taller, thin, fat, or in between. You cannot change your body type. Otherwise, the extent of the apparent change is up to you. You could add or obscure a minor feature or look like an entirely different person. So yes, that little dagger most mages carry could, in fact, looked like a spiked chain... |
| King Kashue02-14-06, 01:49 PM | Hat of Disguise: This apparently normal hat allows its wearer to alter her appearance as with a disguise self spell. Disguise Self ... You make yourself—including clothing, armor, weapons, and equipment—look different. You can seem 1 foot shorter or taller, thin, fat, or in between. You cannot change your body type. Otherwise, the extent of the apparent change is up to you. You could add or obscure a minor feature or look like an entirely different person. So yes, that little dagger most mages carry could, in fact, looked like a spiked chain... If you did need to stab someone with it, you would still look like you were stabbing someone with a spiked chain rather than swinging it... However, if you wizard is in melee, you've got bigger issues than fooling the badguys that you're not a wizard :D |
| solbergb02-14-06, 04:19 PM | I've got the hat of disguise, but I don't use it to simulate fullplate because it seems to me that the lack of noise, the different way I move (no armor check penalty) etc is a dead giveaway. Note also that a decent spot check will easily penetrate hat of disguise (it is only +10 to disguise, and few arcanists have ranks in disguise) and many of your assassins and archers out there have good spot checks. So I keep it simple. Change facial features, hair, clothing, extend the dagger into a rapier, maybe turn my scroll satchel into a musical instrument, add a hint of mithril chain peeking out and a mithril buckler (none of which change how you move, except the rapier). Instant bard! Rogue is also easy. Simulating a "mobile cleric" wouldn't be hard either, but my character is down on groveling to an outsider, any outsider. Now given access to a "veil" spell...the sky is the limit. But disguise self (and its big brother "seeming") are visual only illusions, and if you don't behave properly you give saving throws (dc11 for hat of disguise) and in any event, a spot check can see something is wrong, modified by how different your disguise is from your normal form. |
| kjenks02-14-06, 04:33 PM | I've got the hat of disguise, but I don't use it to simulate fullplate because it seems to me that the lack of noise, the different way I move (no armor check penalty) etc is a dead giveaway. Note also that a decent spot check will easily penetrate hat of disguise (it is only +10 to disguise, and few arcanists have ranks in disguise) and many of your assassins and archers out there have good spot checks. Yes, but. The Disguise rules also say that most creatures won't even get a Spot check unless you "come to the attention of people who are suspicious" (whatever that means is up to the DM). SRD === DISGUISE (CHA) Check: Your Disguise check result determines how good the disguise is, and it is opposed by others’ Spot check results. If you don’t draw any attention to yourself, others do not get to make Spot checks. If you come to the attention of people who are suspicious (such as a guard who is watching commoners walking through a city gate), it can be assumed that such observers are taking 10 on their Spot checks. === And the rules for illusions say they don't get a saving throw until "they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion" (whatever that means is up to the DM). SRD === Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion. A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline. A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus. === So, depending on the DM's whim, your opponents could get no saving throw and no Spot check. Or they could get one or both, and they're pretty easy to make. The lack of noise has never been a problem. We have enough people in the party clanking around in armor and there are enough ways of having quiet armor that the NPCs are unlikely to notice. |
| solbergb02-14-06, 07:57 PM | I'm aware I'm "conservative" for a hat of disguise weilder, but to me it seems like someone with "target the spellcaster first" is going to fall under the "study you carefully" or "suspicious" category, especially since this is a pretty common tactic. It is nearly impossible to make the spot check if you go with subtle disguises, quite easy if you try to imitate a dwarf tower-shield tank when you're a grey elf with 10lb of equipment. We all have areas where we push the boundaries and areas where we limit ourselves to avoid table variation or discussion. For me, the hat of disguise is a place where I choose to limit myself, as is quickening 1 round spells (I won't), rod of metamagic use (most conservative interpretation), personal burden (I track it religiously and try to have a way to describe where all the crap I carry is held) and I'll only mention the most egregious abuses of unusually tactical/intelligent constructs and animals. It's all about choosing battles... I tend to push the limits pretty hard on things like unseen servants, familiar use, use of alchemicals and insisting my characters with high spot/listen scores or other unusual senses actually get some benefit from their skills, and I'm assertive about ensuring the actual balance, grapple, charge and trip rules are used, for or against PC's. |
| JamesMaissen02-14-06, 10:28 PM | I'm aware I'm "conservative" for a hat of disguise weilder, but to me it seems like someone with "target the spellcaster first" is going to fall under the "study you carefully" or "suspicious" category, especially since this is a pretty common tactic. I guess I would wonder if they spent anytime at all to 'study carefully'. To whit: Have they taken an active spot check, or something like this? Or are they acting immediately so as not to give the party more time to notice where they are hiding? The former I can obviously see (likewise of course for an assassin 'studying' a target) while the later I would think might be a bit too much. I can see the later taking in what everyone is wearing, wielding and the like just as much as a player would ask the DM to describe attackers. I wouldn't think that would be at the level to merit saves against illusions. Now I do grant you it would matter how common such tactics are around you in your region. I would hazzard that it would be most uncommon amongst wizards (given the slot involved) and very region dependant amongst sorcerers. If it were something to be expected then I could certainly see someone having tactics based on it. I know on the other hand that when I use seeming as my wizard most people don't even know what the spell is.. mind you they could just be acting and really just be very wary in character when a wierdly dressed greenskinned Gnome starts talking about how he thinks they would look better in different forms... -James |
| Mommy was an Orc02-14-06, 11:23 PM | I guess I would wonder if they spent anytime at all to 'study carefully'. To whit: Have they taken an active spot check, or something like this? Or are they acting immediately so as not to give the party more time to notice where they are hiding? I don't agree that is the standard - we've got a presumably bored city guard qualifying as suspicious - without him likely knowing he's looking for a disguise and he still gets a shot of spotting it. I'd also penalize heavily someone who was clearly not possessing the items they were claiming to have - a wizard making a spiked chain is talking about an item which needs to move like a spiked chain, yet he doesn't really know how they work(as he doesn't have proficiency). Same thing goes for Full Plate - sure, there may be some kind of magic item that makes it possible for Plate to move like that, but 9 times out of 10, it is going to be some little wizard trying to pull something. At a certain point, people are going to be aware of that... |
| Sieylianna02-15-06, 07:27 AM | I guess I would wonder if they spent anytime at all to 'study carefully'. To whit: Have they taken an active spot check, or something like this? Or are they acting immediately so as not to give the party more time to notice where they are hiding? They're assassins. They have maxed out hide skills, frequently have magical invisibility and need to spend three rounds studying you for their "death attack". Ed |
| RanielK02-15-06, 09:38 PM | They're assassins. They have maxed out hide skills, frequently have magical invisibility and need to spend three rounds studying you for their "death attack". Ed Which is why my Wizard has a +1 Light Fortification Mithril Chain Shirt. I am looking for a way to upgrade it to Medium Fort and +2 as the 75% chance of failure of sneak attacks, criticals and by extension no death attack (i.e. no successful sneak attack equals no successful death attack) is not to be missed and the +2 gives me armor equal to mage armor. As far as ASF is concerned, I guess I've been lucky. I've only ever failed three spells between buying it back around 8th level and now (almost 12th) that realy mattered. Those proved not to be bad for the party, just a reason to harras me for being a putz. Now with that being said, I've seen another wizard fail so often, the other PC's held him down and stripped him of his armor. Miles |
| redgamer02-16-06, 12:15 AM | If you've lost three important spell how many important sneak attacks have you avoided with that 25% chance or how many important hits have the 1 AC over mage armor provided? Now that thistledown padded armor is a part of the campaign you can more easily get fortification without ASF |
| JamesMaissen02-16-06, 06:56 AM | They're assassins. They have maxed out hide skills, frequently have magical invisibility and need to spend three rounds studying you for their "death attack". Ed And I'm sure that's more than good enough for 'studied carefully' but it wasn't what I was refering to. I was thinking the party enters into an area and is ambushed in the first round. Rather than take the time to assess the enemy but risk detection the ambushers spring the trap immediately. Within the surprise round merely looking around to see who's not wearing armor (ie wizard candidates) would not imho constitute 'studied carefully' while that would be all that time would really allow. Meanwhile should they decide to take such time (and somehow be coordinated amongst themselves to time the attack after a predetermined delay period) then I would imagine that the party would get more chances to notice the ambushers in hiding. It seems a reasonable tradeoff in my mind and a choice that ambushers would need to predetermine after some fashion. Anyway that's where I was going with this, James |
| Objulen02-16-06, 09:29 AM | If you've lost three important spell how many important sneak attacks have you avoided with that 25% chance or how many important hits have the 1 AC over mage armor provided? Now that thistledown padded armor is a part of the campaign you can more easily get fortification without ASF You really can't look at a single player's experiance when dealing with statistics and dice rolls like this. They can wildly vary, depending on the individual's luck with the dice. The character has an average reduction of sneak attacks by 25%, and an average spell loss of however many % light chain has. Personally, though, if you want an armored arcane caster, it would make more sense, IMO, to go with bard -> Sublime Cord (9th level spells, but 2 levels later than other casters; Lyric Spell really helps, obviously) or Warmage. |
| Mommy was an Orc02-16-06, 10:17 AM | I was thinking the party enters into an area and is ambushed in the first round. Rather than take the time to assess the enemy but risk detection the ambushers spring the trap immediately. Within the surprise round merely looking around to see who's not wearing armor (ie wizard candidates) would not imho constitute 'studied carefully' while that would be all that time would really allow. Studied carefully is not part of the disguise skill, the only question is if someone suspicious of you or not. Not suspicious that you might be disguised, but suspicious of you. Why would the average person in crowd care if you were disguised as a merchant as long as you're not trying to fool them in any other way. From the Disguise skill: "Usually, an individual makes a Spot check to see through your disguise immediately upon meeting you." The only question is someone who is about to attack you suspicious of you. Are you not suspicious of NPCs that you attack? I don't see why NPCs should be any different when they attack PCs. Of course, the big advantage of waiting a round is they can possibly communicate to each other that a particular person is the 'wizard' |
| RanielK02-16-06, 11:09 PM | Studied carefully is not part of the disguise skill, the only question is if someone suspicious of you or not. Not suspicious that you might be disguised, but suspicious of you. Why would the average person in crowd care if you were disguised as a merchant as long as you're not trying to fool them in any other way. From the Disguise skill: "Usually, an individual makes a Spot check to see through your disguise immediately upon meeting you." The only question is someone who is about to attack you suspicious of you. Are you not suspicious of NPCs that you attack? I don't see why NPCs should be any different when they attack PCs. Of course, the big advantage of waiting a round is they can possibly communicate to each other that a particular person is the 'wizard' Not to mention the fact that if one sets up an ambush properly, the ambushers will have watched those to be ambushed for some time before the poor SOB's had ever entered the kill zone. There were simple sniper ambushes in Vietnam and the like which relied on shooting anything that walked past you and then running, but most properly set up ambushes allow plenty of warning to the ambushers, some way of slowing down or stopping the targets inside the kill zone, and wonderful fields of fire. Of course that is in a perfect world, but considering ambushers usually choose the terain, it isn't hard to at least somewhat meet these requirements. Miles |
| takata02-20-06, 01:47 AM | i see that this went form wisdom question to wizards wearing armor. i find that with out spending alot of feats and gold to raise ac the cheaper way is to increase hp and fort saves i have a gray elf wiz 13/archmage 1 with ac 11 and int 23 con 12, wis 12, dex 12, cha 8, and str 6. i have +5 vest, +4 con, +6 int, luck stone, rat familiar, ring evasion. i cast mage armor,false life, phantom steed, contentgence grapple i blink, first spell i cast is haste. my moto is i should live thru first round hp's (82)(with FL hp 93 to 102) is 1st priority over ac (15)at my level then fort (16) my save are like wis 16 ref 12 fort 16. i then tend to look for spell caster if none i slow the bad guys 3rd level trans 23 will (have trans spell focus) then next look for big bad guy and ray enfeeblment empower (rod lesser) min str gose down -9 max -16 and if not strong for armor fall prone good on cleric to. if see arcane caster i feeblemind dc26 (spell focus ench) and arcane caster -4 on will save to come to dc30 will. my character would have a 50/50 change to make and if not balefale poly or stone to flesh both trans spells on fort. my character tends not to kill unless needs to. has craft wand for the magic missle dread wriaths and orbs for sr and orb force for energy resistance and common used 1thru 4th spells. other feats spell pen, g spell pen, craft wonderous, and skill focus (spellcraft). so my advice would be for you to find ways to increase hp because big baddies will tend to hit ac 25 and my level pretty easy. but if you want ac bracers +8, +5 dagger defending, +5 buckler miltheral heavy fort( masters touch spell), gloves dex +6, ring +5, combat expertise (+5 to ac), dodge, moblity, poly green hag (+11 natural) and still able to wear all items, 5ranks in jump and tumble, go full defencive have at lest 14 dex to start with ac 55 before dodge buddie and going full defence which would up it over 60 ac. not to mention race beenie to ac could be knock on a 70 ac lots of gold to get there. |
| solbergb02-22-06, 02:54 PM | You really can't look at a single player's experiance when dealing with statistics and dice rolls like this. They can wildly vary, depending on the individual's luck with the dice. The character has an average reduction of sneak attacks by 25%, and an average spell loss of however many % light chain has. . Right. But you can say "Ok, but then how often do I cast spells" (answer...a lot). How often do I actually get sneak attacked (answer..hopefully not as much as you cast spells)? Then you ask "what is the consequence of failure". If you instantly die if sneak attacked (6 con grey elf wizard perhaps) then you will put a higher priority on reducing the sneak vs someone who is playing an 18 con gnome sorcerer with amulet health +6 and empowered false life running 24x7. Likewise if you rely heavily on precise application of spells (battlefield controllers and any spell category that doesn't really have a failure chance built in) the consequence of a failed spell is huge...your whole plan for the current encounter could unravel as you fail to fly/teleport/raise the wall of force/polymorph/etc. If instead you primarily work with spells that have built-in failure chances (spells with attack rolls like rays, save or XXX spells, etc) then your strategy probably assumes that sometimes your spells work poorly or don't work at all, and you can perhaps tolerate an additional risk of fizzle. Even then it can bite you in the rear. I ran a battle interactive last weekend with a wizard who had only long-running buffs and a single spell other than magic missile (dimension door, unaffected by armor) which didn't either have an attack roll or a save. In the second half (after nearly being decapitated by a power-attack-full flying opponent) he opted to wear armor, and the outcome was: 1 encounter where he fizzled over and over, essentially taking himself out of the fight. 3 encounters where ASF never came up (and his miss-chance luck was phenominal too..so in those encounters he did very well) OTOH...he was only in melee danger by critters which had incorporeal touch attacks, so out of the whole interactive he was under AC threat only once, and his existing mage defenses got the job done without armor. (still..that one hit with average damage WOULD have reduced him to one hitpoint, so you can say the consequences of not enough AC would have been pretty high, especially if I rollled well on damage dice) Why was he in melee danger so seldom? He had winged boots which he used pro-actively, and he sometimes mixed in improved invisibility (although I suspect, given his addiction to rays, improved invis is also there to give hit bonuses and make enemies flatfooted, greatly reducing his chance of failure to hit with a ray) |