Post/Author/DateTime	Post
elven warriorXX 12-20-05, 10:01 PM	Okay I know for first off that Cone of cold sucks badly and it is not even needed. In CA there is a spell called Blast of Flame (pg. 99) This spell is just like cone of cold but has some very high differences. Level: Cone is 5th level but Blast is 4th Range: same Area: same Damage: cone deals cold and blast deals fire, Cone has a 15d6 damage cap while flame has a 10d6 cap. Spell resistance: Cone says yes but Blast says NO. Now with the Energy substitution feat you can easily make Blast of flame a Cone of cold but lower level, and No spell resistance. Here is my fix: Take out Blast of flame, Make Cone slow opponents that fail there save for 1 round/level. Then make a different spell that is just like Cone althought deals fire damage and instead dazes for a number of turns. Then make a spell that deals Lightning damage and stuns for 1 round or so. Then make a Acid spell that on the next turn people that failed there save take 1 damage/Caster level. Anythoughts?
runestar 12-20-05, 10:58 PM	You answered your own question - the higher damage cap for cone of cold is the reason for the higher spell lv. At lower lvs, just use that blast of fire. When cone of cold would do more damage, then switch to it. The higher spell lv will be offset by it doing more damage at later lvs. This is why no one uses cone of cold at lv9 when an empowered fireball is so much sexier. :)
Emeramber 12-20-05, 11:50 PM	While there are rare exceptions, most spells follow a certain progression, especially from L3 on. For area spells, that is generally - L3 10d cap, basic L4 10d cap, advanced L5 15d cap, basic L6 15d cap, advanced L7 20d cap, basic L8 20d cap, advanced basic - In general, this is one of the 4 common energies (acid, cold, electricity, or fire) with one of the normal shapes (line, 20' burst, etc.) and no particularly exceptional features (Delayed Blast Fireball being an obvious exception). advanced - This might be a rarer energy (sonic or possibly force), or have some notable extra utility over the base damage (like the sheer shapability of Explosive Cascade), or even be the no SR conjuration type, such as blast of fire. This isn't hard and fast, but it is the predominant pattern, and a good one to be aware of. If you want a fireball made of force, bump it to 4th. if you want said forceball to have a 15d cap, bumping it to 5th doesn't cut it, even if that's 2 levels higher, because of the damage cap. You need to bump it to 6th at that point, to keep it balanced.
smrtgmp 12-21-05, 12:21 AM	I think Emeramber made some excellent points, all of which I agree with. To the OP: removing blast of flame, which is a solid 4th level spell, will do nothing to fix cone of cold. Dont nerf a decent spell to make a crappy spell seem better. Fix the crappy spell and leave the decent one alone. Your idea of adding a slow affect is a good (not to mention common) one. I dont think I would have it slow them for that long, though. I would also make it so a successful ref save resulted in no more than 1 round of slowing. Another idea would be to give CoC back its variable range, so that its area increases drastically as you progress in levels.
Derren S. 12-21-05, 03:08 AM	There is an easy explanation why blast of flame is better. Power Creep.
JadeSpider9643 12-21-05, 03:29 AM	There is an easy explanation why blast of flame is better. Power Creep. *ding ding ding!* [creepy carn-y voice]Ladies and gentlemen we have a winner![/creepy carn-y voice] Give the man his cookie :cookie: And who says blast of flame is better? fire is the uber-common element, more than are resistant to fire than to cold, and more things and vulnerable to cold than are to fire...hmm actually the vulnerable thing might not be true if you include plants...
Shatteredtower 12-21-05, 08:30 AM	And who says blast of flame is better? fire is the uber-common element, more than are resistant to fire than to cold, and more things and vulnerable to cold than are to fire...Energy resistance as a balancing factor gets blown all out of proportion. What percentage of the creatures you encounter at 20th level are immune to fire but not cold? Are all of your encounters with efreet, fire giants, devils, and red dragons instead of frost giants and white dragons? No encounters with demons, equally resistant to fire and cold (and acid too) and immune to electricity? No, in most encounters at 10th level, I'd rather be using a 4th level spell slot to cause 10d6 fire damage than a 5th level slot to cause the same amount of cold damage, especially if I could bypass spell resistance entirely. In fact, in most cases, I'd avoid using either of these spells and stick to fireball, when I might cover less area, but can cover it from over ten times the range, thank you very much. It's nice to talk about the perks of doing 15d6 damage vs. 10d6, but when does that cap really stand out on its own? It's not worth the higher level spell slot at either 9th or 10th level (equal damage), hardly worth it at 11th (1d6 extra damage) or 12th, and left in the shadow of 7th level spells like delayed blast fireball after that point, provided we stick to talking only of direct damage spells.
elven warriorXX 12-21-05, 10:31 AM	Okay then what would you do to make Cone of Cold better for its level? I don’t know what WOTC was thinking making Blast of fire which most obviously is more powerful (despite the 15d6 damage). And I don’t like the power of a Cone spell at 7th level. I like the core spells and mostly stick to them so I would rather fix the core spell and scrub the Splat spell.
Puca 12-21-05, 10:51 AM	Change the level of Cone of Cold to 4th. Cap the damage at 10d6. Keep the range and the area of effect the same. Change the school from Evocation [cold] to Conjuration [creation][cold]. Give it the same SR and save stuff that Blast of Flame has. Then, Cone of Cold and Blast of Flame will be nicely balanced with each other.
elven warriorXX 12-21-05, 10:59 AM	Indeed that works well thanks. But I have been working out a system that all every spell that deals a element damage (Lightning, fire, cold, acid) you can, when you learn the spell, pick if you want the spell to use a different energy. Sure this gets rid of ESub but it works better. So there is no need to level-down CoC. Maybe the first cone spell cain (Cone of fire, acid blah blah blah) will have a Greater version at 5th level spell that has a special effect (slow, daze, stun, burn) and higher damage cap.
Puca 12-21-05, 11:04 AM	Indeed that works well thanks.Thats because I was kidding. All I did was change the energy type and the name. Other than that, its the exact same as Blast of Force.
elven warriorXX 12-21-05, 11:06 AM	Thats because I was kidding. All I did was change the energy type and the name. Other than that, its the exact same as Blast of Force. yes I was been sarcastic
tarkin 12-21-05, 12:05 PM	I agree 3.5 Cone of Cold is on the weak side. There is however a SIMPLE upgrade you can do to it. Revert the 3.5 Range from Range: 60 ft. To the old 3.0 range: Range: Close (25 feet + 5 ft/2 levels) While this is a slight range decrease at lower levels, it is a big boost at higher levels, and more importantly, the feat ENLARGE now doubles the range, which is a HUGE increase in area of effect, for a cone.
elven warriorXX 12-21-05, 12:22 PM	I agree 3.5 Cone of Cold is on the weak side. There is however a SIMPLE upgrade you can do to it. Revert the 3.5 Range from To the old 3.0 range: Range: Close (25 feet + 5 ft/2 levels) While this is a slight range decrease at lower levels, it is a big boost at higher levels, and more importantly, the feat ENLARGE now doubles the range, which is a HUGE increase in area of effect, for a cone. So that means you can cast it 25ft away from your self?
Bragol 12-21-05, 12:29 PM	*ding ding ding!* [creepy carn-y voice]Ladies and gentlemen we have a winner![/creepy carn-y voice] Give the man his cookie :cookie: And who says blast of flame is better? fire is the uber-common element, more than are resistant to fire than to cold, and more things and vulnerable to cold than are to fire...hmm actually the vulnerable thing might not be true if you include plants... I don't allow CA spells in my game. They are overpowered compared to those in the PHB. The fact that many damage progression spells in CA are conjurations (Orb spells, fire blast, etc...) , therefore not subject to SR, are enough to over power the already dominant wizards.
elven warriorXX 12-21-05, 12:48 PM	I don't allow CA spells in my game. They are overpowered compared to those in the PHB. The fact that many damage progression spells in CA are conjurations (Orb spells, fire blast, etc...) , therefore not subject to SR, are enough to over power the already dominant wizards. Indeed so that is why I stick to core. Okay to fix Cone of cold (and cone of fire, lightning, acid) do you thin that Slowing(dazing, stuning, burning) the creature is a good fix? If so how many rounds should they be slowed to balance it as a 5th level spell?
Shatteredtower 12-22-05, 02:11 AM	Revert the 3.5 Range... [to] ...the old 3.0 range: Range: Close (25 feet + 5 ft/2 levels) While this is a slight range decrease at lower levels, it is a big boost at higher levels, and more importantly, the feat ENLARGE now doubles the range, which is a HUGE increase in area of effect, for a cone.Well, the feat would be a definite plus, but should a spell be feat dependent? Otherwise, the 3.0 version doesn't surpass the 3.5 version's range until level 16, let alone equal it before 14th level. At 20th level, it's still only 75 ft -- the 25% gain is nice, but nothing to write home about. Is it a fix if the spell doesn't come into its own before epic levels, barring the use of a feat? I notice that some people feel the spell works fine with "intelligent aiming," but the conditions that allow for such aiming are highly specialized and rarely applicable to a condition in which a fireball wouldn't serve just as well, barring energy immunity or resistance, which is not the omnipresent factor some make it out to be. When your higher level direct damage spell comes out ahead only in special cases, no matter how often your DM creates just such cases, it might be necessary to consider a small adjustment. Even a 2 point penalty to Dexterity that lasts 1d6 rounds wouldn't be an unreasonable gain.
smrtgmp 12-22-05, 10:25 PM	I don't allow CA spells in my game. They are overpowered compared to those in the PHB. The fact that many damage progression spells in CA are conjurations (Orb spells, fire blast, etc...) , therefore not subject to SR, are enough to over power the already dominant wizards.I will never understand this sentament. How is blast of fire breaking anyones game? Even at 10th level, you're only getting an average of 35 points of fire damage on a failed save, and you have to get close to the action to use the spell. Furthermore, all of the DD spells in CA follow the damage cap limits. IMO, making any energy spell subject to SR is a bad idea. They have to get through energy resistance, SR, and a save. Most spells dont have 3 hurdels to leap. I see no reason why energy spells should be any different. I adopted the optional rule from UA that makes all energy spells bypass SR, and I have yet to have a problem. As such, it baffels me that anyone would be having a problem with these spells. The damage potential simply isnt great enough to cause any serious problems, especially if you vary your encounters.
Gnarl 12-23-05, 06:56 AM	I will never understand this sentament. How is blast of fire breaking anyones game? Even at 10th level, you're only getting an average of 35 points of fire damage on a failed save, and you have to get close to the action to use the spell. It's not the damage potential that can be troublesome, it's that material in the complete arcane seriously reduces the usefulness of spell resistance. Most good spells had spell resistance. In complete arcane, you have lots of new ways to bypass huge spell resistances: assay resistance and a whole lot of nice damaging spells. The wizard now has some real serious stuff against very high spell resistance critters and even golems, things he lacks if you stick to core books. I wouldn't call it overpowered either though. After all, if the wizard is taking assay resistance, then it's one less explosive cascade to worry about.
Derren S. 12-23-05, 07:18 AM	Who says that Assay Resistence isn't overpowered. This and Spell Vulnerability made SR practically useless and arguning that spell A isn't broken because of the broken spell B is kinda illogical.
smrtgmp 12-24-05, 03:07 AM	Who says that Assay Resistence isn't overpowered.Me. Any time you fight more than a single creature (which should be just about every frickin encounter, given how easily a single enemy is to defeat) its usefulness is drastically reduced. This and Spell Vulnerability made SR practically useless and arguning that spell A isn't broken because of the broken spell B is kinda illogical.Spell Vulnerability is a joke. The combination of a 1 round casting time and short range makes casting this spell tantamount to suicide. You might as well staple a "target" sign to your forhead and spend your turn picking your nose. Even if they dont disrupt your casting, its a piece of cake to move out of range before you finish, making the spell nearly impossible to use against an enemy with a modicum of intelligence. Most enemies with a high SR fall into this category. Furthermore, the updated version removes the save penalty, making it all but worthless against creatures like dragons and outsiders.
Yak of Darkness 12-24-05, 04:07 AM	Indeed that works well thanks. But I have been working out a system that all every spell that deals a element damage (Lightning, fire, cold, acid) you can, when you learn the spell, pick if you want the spell to use a different energy. Sure this gets rid of ESub but it works better. So there is no need to level-down CoC. Maybe the first cone spell cain (Cone of fire, acid blah blah blah) will have a Greater version at 5th level spell that has a special effect (slow, daze, stun, burn) and higher damage cap.The Expanded Psionics Handbook might be what you're looking for. Most "energy" blasting powers there let you choose among the different types, and many give you an extra effect based on the type of energy you choose.
Derren S. 12-24-05, 05:23 AM	Me. Any time you fight more than a single creature (which should be just about every frickin encounter, given how easily a single enemy is to defeat) its usefulness is drastically reduced. Yeah, because you can only remove the defenses against magic of a single creature, which can now be blasted at will with all the no SR rays which appeared recently it is balanced. :rolleyes: Ok, single creatures are now completly helpless against spellcasters but who uses a single big creature as enemy especially as the MM gives CRs only for single creatures. You probably also think Harm 3.0 is balanced because you can only kill a single creature with it.
smrtgmp 12-24-05, 06:16 PM	Yeah, because you can only remove the defenses against magic of a single creature, which can now be blasted at will with all the no SR rays which appeared recently it is balanced. :rolleyes:You dont remove the defenses, you reduce them. And since Assay Spell Resistance only works for your own spells, it wont do your allies any good. You act as if spellcasters never had anything to do against enemies with high SR prior to the publication of this new material. Ever heard of buff and combat control spells? I dont know about anyone else, but I've never been ineffective against such enemies as a caster, even before the spells in CA were released. All CA did was give you more options. It didn't invalidate the old ones. Furthermore, most creatures with SR have an assload of other defensive options. Dragons and outsiders both have a slew of spells and or spell-like abilities, not to mention resistances and immunities. As such, its not like you're making them helpless by reducing or bypassing their SR. I have NEVER encountered a dragon that didnt have defensive spells in place. Factor in their hoard and chances are they have some impressinve protective items at their disposal as well. Ok, single creatures are now completly helpless against spellcasters but who uses a single big creature as enemy especially as the MM gives CRs only for single creatures.yeah, because the DMG doesnt have any info on calculating the encounter level for multiple enemies. :rolleyes: Any time you throw a single enemy at a party of PCs, it's CR better be quite a bit higher than the party level (in which case their SR will be high enough that something like assay spell resistace is almost mandatory if you want to affect them direcltly with spells that are subject to SR with any sort of regularity). The ability to focus all your actions against a single foe generally means they wont last more than a round or two in all but the most extream of cases. Do you actually play this game? Or do you just complain about it endlessly? You probably also think Harm 3.0 is balanced because you can only kill a single creature with it.I have no experience with 3.0 harm (Does it work like the 2nd edition version, droping you to 1d4hp, regardless of how healthy you were to begin with?). That being said, based on your comment, I'll assume its capable of killing something by itself, which is something assay spell resistance and its kin are incapable of. Have you ever actually tried to use lower resistance in a fight? With its minescule range and dreadfully long casting time, its almost impossible to use effectively. Besides that, I believe the updated (SC) version removed the save penalty, making it even more useless, since dragons and outsiders and other creatures with high SR rarely fail their saves, especially when its a fort save.
NightScreamer20 12-24-05, 07:30 PM	I dunno if this counts at all but... Blast of Flame is Conjuration (Creation) [Fire]... Cone of Cold is Evocation [Cold]... Mostly I believe it was made to be of a more Conjurer offensive weapon, as opposed to Evokers holding all the power cards. I mean honestly, most 'Offensive' Wizards/Sorcerers are Evocation dominant, and most specialist Evokers, tend not to rely on Conjuration. Plus if you want your Blast of Flame to be as reliable as your Fireball, you have to take Spell Focus in 2 different schools. You all seem to be focused on the power aspect, and while a good Fireball is nice, a Cone of Cold has more area to it, allowing you to hit a major spread of enemies, ecspecially in a 3-D environment (say against flying creatures). That's my 2 cp...
Moon-Lancer 12-24-05, 09:57 PM	cone of cold sucks. Polor Ray allso sucks. Get over it. They sucked before SC, and they still suck afterwords. They dident just start to suck. They always sucked. Now casters have viable damage spells past level 3 (not counting prismatic spray).
Ogre4Hire 12-25-05, 02:53 AM	cone of cold sucks. Polor Ray allso sucks. Get over it. They sucked before SC, and they still suck afterwords. They dident just start to suck. They always sucked. Now casters have viable damage spells past level 3 (not counting prismatic spray). Why, did Disintigrate, Chain Lightning, Finger of Death, Horrid Wilting, Meteor Swarm, Power Word: Kill, and Weird all start sucking when I wasn't looking?
smrtgmp 12-25-05, 03:30 AM	I dont know if I would categorize finger of death, power word kill, and weird as "damage spells." They fall into the save-or-die category (or, in the case of PW:K, "hope-you-have-enough-HP-or-immunity-to-mind-affecting-spells-or-die" category). I've never been overly impressed by meteor swarm. There are several other 9th level spells I would rather have prepared in just about any situation.
Willie the Duck 12-25-05, 11:23 PM	Look, most direct damage spells suck in 3rd edition. Magic missile gets off the hook for its consistency and fireball because it's because 10d6 to lots of creatures for only a 3rd level slot starts looking okay at 10th level (and, yes, a few non-core get by with the right combo of unusual energy type and SR exclusion), but the general rule is that direct damage is a waste of a spell slot. The best solution is not to take these spells (actually the best solution is to fix direct damage, but then you'd better also fix touch ACs, spellcaster vs. tank power issues, shapechange, ECL, and all of a sudden you've just created 4th edition). Changin the power level of CoC is not a good solution. This is because a number of evil outsiders (routinely considered quite competitive for their CR) get to cast CoC at will. While not worth a 4th level spell slot, this spell is definately useful if you can cast it at will, and changing the nature of the spell would make these outsiders even tougher. My advice: take BoF if your DM allows it, whether they do or don't, don't bother with CoC. I'll take solid fog as my 4th level spell and Teleport as my 5th.