Assay Resistance, overpowered? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Assay Resistance, overpowered? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Evilclone
01-13-08, 07:42 AM I would glad to know your opinion on this spell found on the Complete Arcane.
The reason why high levels creatures have spell resistance, is because high level spells can close a combat in one round.
With Assay Resistance you get a huge +10 bonus to caster level checks for the entire combat, this means a caster can bypass the SR always, especially if he also has the feats for SR penetration (and they are a must have). One can argue that the spell is effective only against one enemy at times, but who cares?

Our group was wondering how to adjust it, an idea was to decrease the bonus to +4 (the same as the two feats).
What do you think about it?
Avatar of Kokusho
01-13-08, 07:53 AM Assay Spell Resistance was redone in the Spell Compendium, and it only works against a single enemy in any case. the main reason it's abuse-prone is the fact that it's a personal spell and therefore not subject to SR or a saving throw on its own, unlike Spell Vulnerability (also found in the SC).

I believe you can also only have a single one in effect at any given time.
Vegepygmy
01-13-08, 06:44 PM Yes, it's overpowered. But the spell is an understandable response to the uber-lame SR mechanic, which is basically a "save or suck" situation for the caster.
Wellspring
01-13-08, 07:30 PM The spell is a great hedge against high-SR monsters, which leave you burning spell slots and wasting time trying to affect them. It's not overpowered. Such monsters typically have very strong save bonuses also, so this merely defends against the double-whammy of beating high SR, then high saves. Not to mention the immunities derived from creature type or magic.

Monsters often have high AC, but that's less of a problem. First, melee/ranged attackers get more chances per round to beat it. Second, they're typically not burning through any consumables to do it (except PERHAPS ammo, but by even mid levels ammunition is no longer a consideration). When a wizard casts his last Fireball, that's really it. By the time this spell becomes affordable, you're casting very high level spells against high-SR monsters who have layered magical defenses. A way to easily bypass the first layer of the onion doesn't hurt.

Finally, ASR is a useful spell, but it's single target and burns your quickened spell for the round. Against multiple monsters with high SR ratings, that limits what you can do against them.

The spell doesn't explicitly say that you can only have the bonus for one target at a time, but in practice unless you're setting an ambush up you'll be out of action for quite a while spamming ASR until you're ready to do an area effect.

And there's nothing to say that NPC wizards won't cast that on you!
Bopple
01-13-08, 09:58 PM While autopenetration against high-SR BBEG it quite annoying and unbalancing, nerfing it down to +4 sounds a bit too much. +6~+8 sounds about right, imo.
tyrecian
01-13-08, 10:47 PM Taken in a pure core concept, yes this could be abusive. But only in core, and there are still terrible difficult SRs even in core to be dealt with.

However, you are not talking about core with the CA and the SC. We are talking about a realm of spells that bypass SR completely, from 1st level on. Who wouldnt take a selection of orb spells into the dungeon if they knew they were fighting drow, beholders, and illythids? Sorry, but magic is a primal force of nature and the universe, there should be ways in which a wizard can burn a high level slot to make his magic more able to penetrate a barrier.

The feats allow the penetration with every single attempt, while assay resistance only allows against one monster at a duration. There is really no way in which this spell can be seen as overpowerred given that at 14th level and up almost everything my parties face has massive SR. It gets old when the casters have to select from a very tiny list of spells because they are afraid that they won't be able to beat the SR of creatures. One prime example is a paizo adventure where a mind flayer has SR of 32, against a party of lvl 9 adventurers. Without the ability to affect this guy at all with magic, our core only party was annihilated. Wizard, cleric, then druid, dead dead dead. Sorry, SR can be abusive, and there needs to be a counter. Even with assay it was completely posible to miss the 22 SR with level 9 PC casters.

not to mention that Some mosters are rediculously overpowerred with their SR, and given their abilities might be darn near impossible to get at in melee. Given a few powerful minions and SR all around, it can set the stage for a TPK.

In many cases spell resistance is a really tough thing for casters to deal with, especially since if they make it through, there are still saves to be dealt with. Let the casters have at least one boon, eh?
kuonji
01-14-08, 01:06 AM Overpowered? Maybe. Unnecessary? Definitely. A tool for lazy and/or unimaginative people? Yes. Even using just core spells, I've never had a problem coming up with spell strategies that can affect creatures with high SR or help the group defeat said creatures. There's more to attacking an enemy then just blasting them with damage and save or suck spells that have to bypass the SR on the enemy.

One prime example is a paizo adventure where a mind flayer has SR of 32, against a party of lvl 9 adventurers. Without the ability to affect this guy at all with magic, our core only party was annihilated. Wizard, cleric, then druid, dead dead dead. Sorry, SR can be abusive, and there needs to be a counter. Even with assay it was completely posible to miss the 22 SR with level 9 PC casters.

I would say that this sort of thing is an argument for tuning an adventure, not for adding in unnecessary spells to overcome the ridiculously bad choice of creature for an encounter. There are plenty of pre-made adventures out there with poor decisions made (I remember one level 1 adventure where the party has to face off against a vampire) but I think that's where the DM has to use a little common sense.

Challenge yourselves a little. Rather than seeing SR as a giant roadblock and looking for expansion book spells without SR or that lower SR, do a little thinking or some brainstorming with your group and try to find some alternate strategies that can still affect your opponents or buff your allies in fights against high SR enemies.
Count Arioch the 28th
01-14-08, 01:12 AM I consider Assay Spell Resistance to be a bit weak.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it only applies to the very next spell cast? That's not really worth using an action to do.
Bopple
01-14-08, 01:33 AM Nope. There is no such restriction.
Vegepygmy
01-14-08, 01:42 AM Also, it's a "1 swift action" spell, so it's probably well worth using that action to do.
Wellspring
01-14-08, 10:29 AM Overpowered? Maybe. Unnecessary? Definitely. A tool for lazy and/or unimaginative people? Yes. Even using just core spells, I've never had a problem coming up with spell strategies that can affect creatures with high SR or help the group defeat said creatures. There's more to attacking an enemy then just blasting them with damage and save or suck spells that have to bypass the SR on the enemy.

Sure you can get around SR every fight. But those tactics, while novel to a new player, get cliché after your fiftieth encounter with a high-SR monster. At high levels virtually every encounter features large dollops of spell resistance. Combined with very high save bonuses and immunities, you have monsters who are basically immune to most magic without tools like ASR (or "mandatory" feats like Spell Penetration and GSP).

In midlevel play, you're sacrificing one 4th level spell per monster per round to penetrate spell resistance. That's great; at midlevels, SR is a useful and situational obstacle that should require some real expenditure of resources to defeat. In high-level play, you're only sacrificing your Swift action for the round, but you'll also need it nearly every CR-appropriate fight and its utility is very limited vs multiple monsters. Either way, ASR requires an investment commensurate with your level and the challenge.

The strength of ASR is precisely that it permits imaginative play. It lets you open up your spellbook and pull out all the spells you long since forgot you could cast. Buff-botting, shaking-and-baking casters are fine, but after you trot through the same three or four "imaginative" sequences, they stop being imaginative.

I would say that this sort of thing is an argument for tuning an adventure, not for adding in unnecessary spells to overcome the ridiculously bad choice of creature for an encounter.

It makes no sense to nerf your players by removing this spell, just so you can nerf the monsters, too. Of COURSE the monster is too tough-- you removed a major tool the players have for defeating it.
Derren S.
01-14-08, 11:42 AM Yes, Assay Resistance is overpowered. It removes one of the only thing used to keep the already strong spellcasters a bit in check, namely Spell Resistance.

That it only works on one creature isn't really a problem. When do you fight several high SR creatures at the same time?
By the encounter rules a full spellcaster would have no problem when fighting a balanced encounter with two or more creatures as teh CR of those monsters would be lower than the level of the caster (CR is made for single combat) which means the SR of this creature was assigned to block spells of lower level casters about 50% of all times.

The only real downside of Assay is its level, so sorcerers have to wait a bit longer till they can throw it around in masses. (But how often do you fight problematic SR creatures at low level?)
Vegepygmy
01-14-08, 12:07 PM In midlevel play, you're sacrificing one 4th level spell per monster per round to penetrate spell resistance. That's great; at midlevels, SR is a useful and situational obstacle that should require some real expenditure of resources to defeat.I fixed your post for you.
Wellspring
01-14-08, 01:09 PM I fixed your post for you.

I should have been more clear-- when you fight four monsters, you'll have to cast the spell four times (either two rounds of inaction or four rounds of no quickened spells.
Gnarl
01-14-08, 02:18 PM Yes it's full of crap and overpowered. It's one of those spells I got rid of after playtesting it.

Spell resistance is 'supposed' (or not, it's your game after all) to be a pain in the ass for spellcasters. With assay spell resistance, a mid to high level wizard can bypass nearly any spell resistance.

In my experience, what makes it overpowered is that without it, a spellcaster needs to find tactics against critters with high spell resistance. With it, a spellcaster can rely on the same tactics against high SR critters at the cost of a single 4th level spell (and perhaps a scroll in case there are more than one). Combined with a penetrating third eye and arcane mastery, SR is never an issue.

The spell is a great hedge against high-SR monsters, which leave you burning spell slots and wasting time trying to affect them. It's not overpowered. Such monsters typically have very strong save bonuses also

Yeah right, the rakshasa, mind-flayer and roper are all notorious for their very high save...

And those very high saves are so increadibly usefull against spells like maze, powers words, ray of enfeeblement, ray of diziness...
Bopple
01-14-08, 10:08 PM You don't have to cast ASR against every enemy with SR you face.
Ordinary minions aren't much of a problem, even if they had SR.
Because they are on low CR, they have low SR. It's not hard to beat their SR.
Furthermore, they are weaklings, melee combatants wouldn't have a hard time to beat them.
All you need is a joker to beat BBEG's SR.

And of course there are orb spells. But then again, it's universally accepted that DD damage is weaker thing to do with magic. Moreover, the orb spells are subject to energy resistance(fire/acid/cold/elec) or they do sorry damage(sonic/force).
nightwyrm
01-15-08, 12:14 AM As someone has mentioned before, the orb spells bypass SR. Also, many great battlefield control spells, such as the various fogs, many of the wall spells and evards tentacles, also ignores SR. Probably the only main thing you need to get pass someone's SR are direct debuffs or save-or-die/suck.
Bopple
01-15-08, 01:21 AM The thing is, BBEG's with SR usually have high strength and most have special abilities including fly or teleport.
Spells like fogs, walls, evard's, and ect aren't as effective as it would against minions.
And of course those spells can also hinder the actions of PC allies.
kuonji
01-15-08, 07:02 AM It makes no sense to nerf your players by removing this spell, just so you can nerf the monsters, too. Of COURSE the monster is too tough-- you removed a major tool the players have for defeating it.

Considering the spell comes from sources outside core, how exactly am I nerfing players by taking away a spell they didn't have in the first place?

To address the rest of your comments, yes, I realize that many higher level opponents come with SR. I kind of figured that was the point. To me SR is the designers way of trying to protect monsters from the giant arsenal of high damage or save-or-suck spells that exist. I'm not saying that it's a good way of dealing with those types of spells, but that's what we got. Taking that protection away through the use of a lower level spell, a spell that can be cast in addition to your DD or save-or-suck spell, trivializes encounters to the point of ending them on the wizards turn. Well, maybe it'll take more then 1 round if there are multiple SR creatures.
Wellspring
01-15-08, 02:09 PM Considering the spell comes from sources outside core, how exactly am I nerfing players by taking away a spell they didn't have in the first place?

To address the rest of your comments, yes, I realize that many higher level opponents come with SR. I kind of figured that was the point. To me SR is the designers way of trying to protect monsters from the giant arsenal of high damage or save-or-suck spells that exist. I'm not saying that it's a good way of dealing with those types of spells, but that's what we got. Taking that protection away through the use of a lower level spell, a spell that can be cast in addition to your DD or save-or-suck spell, trivializes encounters to the point of ending them on the wizards turn. Well, maybe it'll take more then 1 round if there are multiple SR creatures.

You make a good point here. There are far too many save-or-die or save-or-all-but-die powers out there. When fights last 5-8 rounds, CC'ing a monster for even a round or two is deadly. Adding more monsters to a fight helps vs this, but obviously that has its own issues. The new CR system will GREATLY help with this; adding monsters to each encounter reduces the relative power of crowd control.

I've always felt that ASR was invented to address a problem that emerges at high levels: a sheer number of monsters running around with very high SR ratings. Not to mention high saves and immunities. Someone mentioned the Mind Flayer, Rakasha and Roper as examples of high-level monsters who don't have high saves. The problem is that they're CR 8, 10 and 12-- definitively midlevel. And remember there are multiple barriers before a spell goes off-- even a decent chance to succeed at each level can turn into a low overall chance. In any case, Ropers aren't exactly the enemies of choice in most campaigns. In my many years of D&D, I can't say I've ever fought a roper, but I've fought quite a lot of Beholders, Liches, Demons/Devils, and of course NPCs. All with high SR, high saves, and many immunities.

There are many interesting ways to play casters, but with so many monsters virtually immune to magic I've seen casters reduced to a very limited number of spells and roles in the party. Ranged DD spells like Meteor Swarm are basically hopeless from the time you get them, except for the RP fun of nuking peons. It also forces you to take anti-SR feats like the spell penetration chain, locking up feats that should be useful for genuine customization.

If SR was less common, you'd see more kinds of caster builds out there, and I'd be far more tolerant of having the occasional monster be very hard to kill with magic.

Rather than retcon all the monsters to a lower level of SR, it's better to simply raise the easy access to an SR-beating mechanic to a point where it's pricey but doable for midlevel characters, and cheap-but-wastes-a-swift-action for high level characters.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Evilclone 01-13-08, 07:42 AM	I would glad to know your opinion on this spell found on the Complete Arcane. The reason why high levels creatures have spell resistance, is because high level spells can close a combat in one round. With Assay Resistance you get a huge +10 bonus to caster level checks for the entire combat, this means a caster can bypass the SR always, especially if he also has the feats for SR penetration (and they are a must have). One can argue that the spell is effective only against one enemy at times, but who cares? Our group was wondering how to adjust it, an idea was to decrease the bonus to +4 (the same as the two feats). What do you think about it?
Avatar of Kokusho 01-13-08, 07:53 AM	Assay Spell Resistance was redone in the Spell Compendium, and it only works against a single enemy in any case. the main reason it's abuse-prone is the fact that it's a personal spell and therefore not subject to SR or a saving throw on its own, unlike Spell Vulnerability (also found in the SC). I believe you can also only have a single one in effect at any given time.
Vegepygmy 01-13-08, 06:44 PM	Yes, it's overpowered. But the spell is an understandable response to the uber-lame SR mechanic, which is basically a "save or suck" situation for the caster.
Wellspring 01-13-08, 07:30 PM	The spell is a great hedge against high-SR monsters, which leave you burning spell slots and wasting time trying to affect them. It's not overpowered. Such monsters typically have very strong save bonuses also, so this merely defends against the double-whammy of beating high SR, then high saves. Not to mention the immunities derived from creature type or magic. Monsters often have high AC, but that's less of a problem. First, melee/ranged attackers get more chances per round to beat it. Second, they're typically not burning through any consumables to do it (except PERHAPS ammo, but by even mid levels ammunition is no longer a consideration). When a wizard casts his last Fireball, that's really it. By the time this spell becomes affordable, you're casting very high level spells against high-SR monsters who have layered magical defenses. A way to easily bypass the first layer of the onion doesn't hurt. Finally, ASR is a useful spell, but it's single target and burns your quickened spell for the round. Against multiple monsters with high SR ratings, that limits what you can do against them. The spell doesn't explicitly say that you can only have the bonus for one target at a time, but in practice unless you're setting an ambush up you'll be out of action for quite a while spamming ASR until you're ready to do an area effect. And there's nothing to say that NPC wizards won't cast that on you!
Bopple 01-13-08, 09:58 PM	While autopenetration against high-SR BBEG it quite annoying and unbalancing, nerfing it down to +4 sounds a bit too much. +6~+8 sounds about right, imo.
tyrecian 01-13-08, 10:47 PM	Taken in a pure core concept, yes this could be abusive. But only in core, and there are still terrible difficult SRs even in core to be dealt with. However, you are not talking about core with the CA and the SC. We are talking about a realm of spells that bypass SR completely, from 1st level on. Who wouldnt take a selection of orb spells into the dungeon if they knew they were fighting drow, beholders, and illythids? Sorry, but magic is a primal force of nature and the universe, there should be ways in which a wizard can burn a high level slot to make his magic more able to penetrate a barrier. The feats allow the penetration with every single attempt, while assay resistance only allows against one monster at a duration. There is really no way in which this spell can be seen as overpowerred given that at 14th level and up almost everything my parties face has massive SR. It gets old when the casters have to select from a very tiny list of spells because they are afraid that they won't be able to beat the SR of creatures. One prime example is a paizo adventure where a mind flayer has SR of 32, against a party of lvl 9 adventurers. Without the ability to affect this guy at all with magic, our core only party was annihilated. Wizard, cleric, then druid, dead dead dead. Sorry, SR can be abusive, and there needs to be a counter. Even with assay it was completely posible to miss the 22 SR with level 9 PC casters. not to mention that Some mosters are rediculously overpowerred with their SR, and given their abilities might be darn near impossible to get at in melee. Given a few powerful minions and SR all around, it can set the stage for a TPK. In many cases spell resistance is a really tough thing for casters to deal with, especially since if they make it through, there are still saves to be dealt with. Let the casters have at least one boon, eh?
kuonji 01-14-08, 01:06 AM	Overpowered? Maybe. Unnecessary? Definitely. A tool for lazy and/or unimaginative people? Yes. Even using just core spells, I've never had a problem coming up with spell strategies that can affect creatures with high SR or help the group defeat said creatures. There's more to attacking an enemy then just blasting them with damage and save or suck spells that have to bypass the SR on the enemy. One prime example is a paizo adventure where a mind flayer has SR of 32, against a party of lvl 9 adventurers. Without the ability to affect this guy at all with magic, our core only party was annihilated. Wizard, cleric, then druid, dead dead dead. Sorry, SR can be abusive, and there needs to be a counter. Even with assay it was completely posible to miss the 22 SR with level 9 PC casters. I would say that this sort of thing is an argument for tuning an adventure, not for adding in unnecessary spells to overcome the ridiculously bad choice of creature for an encounter. There are plenty of pre-made adventures out there with poor decisions made (I remember one level 1 adventure where the party has to face off against a vampire) but I think that's where the DM has to use a little common sense. Challenge yourselves a little. Rather than seeing SR as a giant roadblock and looking for expansion book spells without SR or that lower SR, do a little thinking or some brainstorming with your group and try to find some alternate strategies that can still affect your opponents or buff your allies in fights against high SR enemies.
Count Arioch the 28th 01-14-08, 01:12 AM	I consider Assay Spell Resistance to be a bit weak. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it only applies to the very next spell cast? That's not really worth using an action to do.
Bopple 01-14-08, 01:33 AM	Nope. There is no such restriction.
Vegepygmy 01-14-08, 01:42 AM	Also, it's a "1 swift action" spell, so it's probably well worth using that action to do.
Wellspring 01-14-08, 10:29 AM	Overpowered? Maybe. Unnecessary? Definitely. A tool for lazy and/or unimaginative people? Yes. Even using just core spells, I've never had a problem coming up with spell strategies that can affect creatures with high SR or help the group defeat said creatures. There's more to attacking an enemy then just blasting them with damage and save or suck spells that have to bypass the SR on the enemy. Sure you can get around SR every fight. But those tactics, while novel to a new player, get cliché after your fiftieth encounter with a high-SR monster. At high levels virtually every encounter features large dollops of spell resistance. Combined with very high save bonuses and immunities, you have monsters who are basically immune to most magic without tools like ASR (or "mandatory" feats like Spell Penetration and GSP). In midlevel play, you're sacrificing one 4th level spell per monster per round to penetrate spell resistance. That's great; at midlevels, SR is a useful and situational obstacle that should require some real expenditure of resources to defeat. In high-level play, you're only sacrificing your Swift action for the round, but you'll also need it nearly every CR-appropriate fight and its utility is very limited vs multiple monsters. Either way, ASR requires an investment commensurate with your level and the challenge. The strength of ASR is precisely that it permits imaginative play. It lets you open up your spellbook and pull out all the spells you long since forgot you could cast. Buff-botting, shaking-and-baking casters are fine, but after you trot through the same three or four "imaginative" sequences, they stop being imaginative. I would say that this sort of thing is an argument for tuning an adventure, not for adding in unnecessary spells to overcome the ridiculously bad choice of creature for an encounter. It makes no sense to nerf your players by removing this spell, just so you can nerf the monsters, too. Of COURSE the monster is too tough-- you removed a major tool the players have for defeating it.
Derren S. 01-14-08, 11:42 AM	Yes, Assay Resistance is overpowered. It removes one of the only thing used to keep the already strong spellcasters a bit in check, namely Spell Resistance. That it only works on one creature isn't really a problem. When do you fight several high SR creatures at the same time? By the encounter rules a full spellcaster would have no problem when fighting a balanced encounter with two or more creatures as teh CR of those monsters would be lower than the level of the caster (CR is made for single combat) which means the SR of this creature was assigned to block spells of lower level casters about 50% of all times. The only real downside of Assay is its level, so sorcerers have to wait a bit longer till they can throw it around in masses. (But how often do you fight problematic SR creatures at low level?)
Vegepygmy 01-14-08, 12:07 PM	In midlevel play, you're sacrificing one 4th level spell per monster per round to penetrate spell resistance. That's great; at midlevels, SR is a useful and situational obstacle that should require some real expenditure of resources to defeat.I fixed your post for you.
Wellspring 01-14-08, 01:09 PM	I fixed your post for you. I should have been more clear-- when you fight four monsters, you'll have to cast the spell four times (either two rounds of inaction or four rounds of no quickened spells.
Gnarl 01-14-08, 02:18 PM	Yes it's full of crap and overpowered. It's one of those spells I got rid of after playtesting it. Spell resistance is 'supposed' (or not, it's your game after all) to be a pain in the ass for spellcasters. With assay spell resistance, a mid to high level wizard can bypass nearly any spell resistance. In my experience, what makes it overpowered is that without it, a spellcaster needs to find tactics against critters with high spell resistance. With it, a spellcaster can rely on the same tactics against high SR critters at the cost of a single 4th level spell (and perhaps a scroll in case there are more than one). Combined with a penetrating third eye and arcane mastery, SR is never an issue. The spell is a great hedge against high-SR monsters, which leave you burning spell slots and wasting time trying to affect them. It's not overpowered. Such monsters typically have very strong save bonuses also Yeah right, the rakshasa, mind-flayer and roper are all notorious for their very high save... And those very high saves are so increadibly usefull against spells like maze, powers words, ray of enfeeblement, ray of diziness...
Bopple 01-14-08, 10:08 PM	You don't have to cast ASR against every enemy with SR you face. Ordinary minions aren't much of a problem, even if they had SR. Because they are on low CR, they have low SR. It's not hard to beat their SR. Furthermore, they are weaklings, melee combatants wouldn't have a hard time to beat them. All you need is a joker to beat BBEG's SR. And of course there are orb spells. But then again, it's universally accepted that DD damage is weaker thing to do with magic. Moreover, the orb spells are subject to energy resistance(fire/acid/cold/elec) or they do sorry damage(sonic/force).
nightwyrm 01-15-08, 12:14 AM	As someone has mentioned before, the orb spells bypass SR. Also, many great battlefield control spells, such as the various fogs, many of the wall spells and evards tentacles, also ignores SR. Probably the only main thing you need to get pass someone's SR are direct debuffs or save-or-die/suck.
Bopple 01-15-08, 01:21 AM	The thing is, BBEG's with SR usually have high strength and most have special abilities including fly or teleport. Spells like fogs, walls, evard's, and ect aren't as effective as it would against minions. And of course those spells can also hinder the actions of PC allies.
kuonji 01-15-08, 07:02 AM	It makes no sense to nerf your players by removing this spell, just so you can nerf the monsters, too. Of COURSE the monster is too tough-- you removed a major tool the players have for defeating it. Considering the spell comes from sources outside core, how exactly am I nerfing players by taking away a spell they didn't have in the first place? To address the rest of your comments, yes, I realize that many higher level opponents come with SR. I kind of figured that was the point. To me SR is the designers way of trying to protect monsters from the giant arsenal of high damage or save-or-suck spells that exist. I'm not saying that it's a good way of dealing with those types of spells, but that's what we got. Taking that protection away through the use of a lower level spell, a spell that can be cast in addition to your DD or save-or-suck spell, trivializes encounters to the point of ending them on the wizards turn. Well, maybe it'll take more then 1 round if there are multiple SR creatures.
Wellspring 01-15-08, 02:09 PM	Considering the spell comes from sources outside core, how exactly am I nerfing players by taking away a spell they didn't have in the first place? To address the rest of your comments, yes, I realize that many higher level opponents come with SR. I kind of figured that was the point. To me SR is the designers way of trying to protect monsters from the giant arsenal of high damage or save-or-suck spells that exist. I'm not saying that it's a good way of dealing with those types of spells, but that's what we got. Taking that protection away through the use of a lower level spell, a spell that can be cast in addition to your DD or save-or-suck spell, trivializes encounters to the point of ending them on the wizards turn. Well, maybe it'll take more then 1 round if there are multiple SR creatures. You make a good point here. There are far too many save-or-die or save-or-all-but-die powers out there. When fights last 5-8 rounds, CC'ing a monster for even a round or two is deadly. Adding more monsters to a fight helps vs this, but obviously that has its own issues. The new CR system will GREATLY help with this; adding monsters to each encounter reduces the relative power of crowd control. I've always felt that ASR was invented to address a problem that emerges at high levels: a sheer number of monsters running around with very high SR ratings. Not to mention high saves and immunities. Someone mentioned the Mind Flayer, Rakasha and Roper as examples of high-level monsters who don't have high saves. The problem is that they're CR 8, 10 and 12-- definitively midlevel. And remember there are multiple barriers before a spell goes off-- even a decent chance to succeed at each level can turn into a low overall chance. In any case, Ropers aren't exactly the enemies of choice in most campaigns. In my many years of D&D, I can't say I've ever fought a roper, but I've fought quite a lot of Beholders, Liches, Demons/Devils, and of course NPCs. All with high SR, high saves, and many immunities. There are many interesting ways to play casters, but with so many monsters virtually immune to magic I've seen casters reduced to a very limited number of spells and roles in the party. Ranged DD spells like Meteor Swarm are basically hopeless from the time you get them, except for the RP fun of nuking peons. It also forces you to take anti-SR feats like the spell penetration chain, locking up feats that should be useful for genuine customization. If SR was less common, you'd see more kinds of caster builds out there, and I'd be far more tolerant of having the occasional monster be very hard to kill with magic. Rather than retcon all the monsters to a lower level of SR, it's better to simply raise the easy access to an SR-beating mechanic to a point where it's pricey but doable for midlevel characters, and cheap-but-wastes-a-swift-action for high level characters.