Cone of Cold [Archive] - Wizards Community

Cone of Cold [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Tony111
11-07-05, 05:25 PM I feel that cone of cold is a little weak for its level. It is two entire levels above fireball, but the targetting mechanism (a cone) is arguably worse than a 20-foot radius spread (like fireball). The spell offers nothing else except the increased damage cap, which is supposed to be a given.

I propose that cone of cold also slow anyone who fails the save for a few rounds. I am going with 1 round for now given that my policy is to make the least harsh changes possible when I propose changing anything.

Thoughts?

-Tony
Seeker95
11-07-05, 05:57 PM The increased damage cap is one difference from fireball, and a pretty good one at that.
Another is that fewer than half as many creatures are immune to cold as are immune to fire.

I think the spell works great.
Llathos
11-07-05, 06:13 PM Actually, I kind of agree with the op.

So what that it's a different element. Does icy burst have a higher enhancement bonus on a weapon than flaming burst? Nope.

Does orb of sound have a higher spell level than orb of fire? Nope.

The argument could also be made that a burst effect from a point line of sight with long range is far more flexible than a cone effect centered on you.
Asciiman
11-07-05, 06:16 PM Actually, I kind of agree with the op.

So what that it's a different element. Does icy burst have a higher enhancement bonus on a weapon than flaming burst? Nope.

Does orb of sound have a higher spell level than orb of fire? Nope.

The argument could also be made that a burst effect from a point line of sight with long range is far more flexible than a cone effect centered on you.

This argument does nothing but point out that perhaps icy burst should have a higher weapon enchantment bonus then flaming burst, and that orb of sound is more powerful then orb of fire.

Seeker95 is right. The fact that it is not fire is a benefit for cone of cold.
cwslyclgh
11-07-05, 06:25 PM despite the limitation that it must start from where you stand, Cone of Cold also affects a MUCH larger area then fireball, and can potentialy catch quite a few more critters in it's area of effect... I am not sure that larger AoE and cold type damage is worth 2 spell levels (especialy considering its limitation of starting at you)... but I can except it as a 5th level spell (albiet a weaker one)... I could also possibly see it as a strong 4th level spell, but in my mind it is always better to err on the side of caution, so 5th level is probably right. beside CoC has always been a 5th level spell ;)
Llathos
11-07-05, 06:25 PM If you say so. The elemental effects are entirely situational.

If you're going to the frozen north, chances are you will find more things immune to cold effects. I assure you...in that place a fireball is far better than a cone of cold.

There's a reason all the elements are assigned the same value in weapon enchantments, most spells, and spell abilities.

You basically just said "All that balance is wrong, Seeker is right". I'm afraid I'd need a better reason than "he said so" to jump on that bandwagon...
Seeker95
11-07-05, 09:15 PM If you say so. The elemental effects are entirely situational.Yes, they are. But the number of situations in which you might encounter a fire-based creature are greater than the number of situations in which you might encounter a cold-based creature.

16 creatures with the [fire] subtype.
7 creatures with the [cold] subtype.

8 spells with the [cold] descriptor.
16 spells with the [fire] descriptor.

You are more likely to encounter fire-resistant creatures.
You are more likely to face fire-using casters.

Fire is less effective as a situational factor.

Given the choice between a ring of fire resistance and a ring of frost resistance, PCs will more likely choose the ring of fire resistance.

So will their enemies.
smrtgmp
11-08-05, 12:06 AM beside CoC has always been a 5th level spell ;)Yes, but it used to have an increasing range and an uncapped 1d4+1/level as well.
Nightspirit
11-08-05, 04:09 AM It's balanced as a 5th level spell(not one of the best, but still good)
colm_l
11-08-05, 04:48 AM Mestil's acid breath from MOF is the same spell only with a 10d6 cap @ level 3

Wujen or shujenga also have an identical spell to it @ level 2 with a 10d6 cap.
Shatteredtower
11-08-05, 07:39 AM The increased damage cap is one difference from fireball, and a pretty good one at that.But it's not so good when an empowered fireball can outstrip it for damage until level 15, using the same spell slot.

True, this involves a feat. True, the same feat allows cone of cold to outstrip a delayed blast fireball on damage at all levels. But that's not the whole of the equation.

Another is that fewer than half as many creatures are immune to cold as are immune to fire.This isn't really a significant difference, though. Most creatures aren't immune to either. Even at higher levels, creatures that are resistant to one tend to be equally resistant to both (with devils the notable exceptions and celestials notably weak on fireproofing).

despite the limitation that it must start from where you stand, Cone of Cold also affects a MUCH larger area then fireball, and can potentialy catch quite a few more critters in it's area of effect...The count is 96 squares for cone of cold compared to 44 for fireball.

The trouble is that range more than makes up for this. At 9th level, the fireball can be used to target anyone within 760 feet -- 700 feet beyond the limit of cone of cold. With Extend Spell, we're increasing that difference to 1460 feet!

But let's take it underground, where such ranges rarely matter as much. Does the cone of cold gain the advantage? Well, almost. Both it and fireball are bursts, so they don't turn corners. This means that in most cases, it's going to hit significantly less than 96 squares, though generally more than the fireball can.

Why generally? Because you can never cast cone of cold to hit targets on all sides of you. This is usually a bad idea with a fireball, but not always. I've seen it used to admirable effect for cleaning off assaults by swarming hordes of enemies. (I've also seen it used this way by people who forgot to account for the fact that it was almost assured to kill allies who were dying at the time. This is particularly irritating to rogues and monks, since it's one of those occasions in which evasion does nothing.) This becomes more effective when you've taken steps to prepare your party for the blast ahead of time, which shouldn't be that hard, since you know what spells you have and many of the things they can do.

However, even when your enemy is only on one side of you, you must figure out the space you'll be fighting in. If it's a 10 ft wide by 60 ft long corridor, you're hitting 50% more squares than a fireball does (16 vs 24), but if the maximum dimensions in any direction are 40 ft, you're really not getting anything more. You'll get more damage out of cone of cold after you've passed 10th level, but when does that become significant enough to make up for a spell that reaches its optimum advantage at 60 ft, declining rapidly for greater distances? In some of those cases, you'd even be better off with lightning bolt (and not just because fewer creatures are immune to electricity than cold damage).

The extra two spell levels aren't really worth the cost until you've at least hit 13th level, and even then, it's kind of doubtful. We're talking an average of +10.5 hp of damage here, +17.5 by the time it caps and finally catches up to what you could do with an empowered fireball back at 10th level. (Of course, you've been staying ahead with that empowered cone of cold since 13th level, unless you were using a lesser metamagic rod.)

Let's not forget that cone of cold makes it rather difficult for allies to block for you. If they choose not to stand in the effect of the spell, they have to leave your enemies enough room to charge straight at you, though it means that at least one of your allies will get to make an attack of opportunity. On the other hand, you're less likely to benefit from cover against ranged attacks. With fireball, you never have to leave enemies the opportunity to rush right at you, and your allies can more readily provide you with cover.

beside CoC has always been a 5th level spell ;)Yeah, but you have to consider what else it gave you back in 1st and 2nd Edition. Back then, lightning bolt could richocet back at you if you cast it in too confined an area, and fireball had a way of engulfing everyone in the party because its effect shaped itself to fit the space available to it.

I don't mind it being a 5th level spell, but I feel it should do at least one more thing to merit that status. It would even be enough to treat anyone taking damage from the spell as frostbitten for one minute, unless immune to nonlethal damage, resistant to cold damage, or under the influence of resist elements. Treat the ground affected by the spell as slippery for 2d4 rounds. Treat any creature that fails the save (even one immune to the damage) as slowed for one round (or 1d4 rounds). Extinguish fire sources in the area, even magical ones of lesser level. One or two of these things might do it.
solbergb
11-08-05, 12:08 PM Like many spells, Cone of Cold is the way it is because of prior editions.

It was always 5th level.

It was always awkward to aim.

It was a different damage type, which was sometimes handy.

Most importantly, it was area damage that ignored a globe of invulnerability.

All of this is still true in 3.5. In prior editions, fireball had no cap, but couldn't be empowered *shrug*. Not all spells are top tier. Cone of cold is a middle-of-the-road spell. The cone targeting mechanism can be pretty precise and get a really nice area if the caster flies.
tarkin
11-08-05, 01:19 PM The main problem with cone of Cold is that they worded it so that it could not be Enlarged. If you want an easy power boost for Cone of Cold, simply change:

Range: 60 ft.

to

Range: Close (25 + 5 ft/2 levels).

Now, at minimum caster level it's range is only 45 ft, but once you hit 11th level you can easily boost it from 50 ft to 105 ft.

A Cone of 105 ft is a HUGE area, and suddenly Cone of Cold begins to look really nice.

Maxining out at 20th level of range 75 ft without extending, 150 ft with extending, makes it a powerfull spell.
Sphyre
11-08-05, 01:23 PM You may note that in the making of spells section that you are not required to stay with cone of cold. For example you could research a spell at 5th level that would be long range, 20 foot spread, and 15d6 cold damage, and it falls into a 5th level spell.

Personally, I much prefer making custom spells modeled off the real spells, rather than being forced to be level 9, before i get a real cold dealing damage spell (ignoring the orbs, and ray of frost)
Seeker95
11-08-05, 02:47 PM True, this involves a feat. True, the same feat allows cone of cold to outstrip a delayed blast fireball on damage at all levels. But that's not the whole of the equation.It is not the "whole of the equation". But it is a non-factor. The equation is made no different by mentioning it. It is like adding X to both sides of an equation -- it doesn't make a difference.
ReadError
11-08-05, 02:59 PM The fire version (Blast of fire in CA) is 4th level, no SR! and capped at 10d6...

I think I prefer the fire version.
smrtgmp
11-08-05, 04:34 PM I like tarkin's suggestion.
Shatteredtower
11-08-05, 08:42 PM Like many spells, Cone of Cold is the way it is because of prior editions.

It was always 5th level.

It was always awkward to aim.But you're forgetting that both fireball and lightning bolt also tended to be awkward to aim up until 3rd Edition. The only one of the three that could never turn around and bite you was cone of cold. That "safety" factor could be used to justify a higher level spell.

That's no longer the case. Lightning bolt is no longer coming back at me. Fireball is no longer the spell the party won't let you cast.

The cone targeting mechanism can be pretty precise and get a really nice area if the caster flies.And the times this area is superior to the area you can nail with fireball is seldom significant. Meanwhile, you either have to risk injuring an ally or leaving yourself exposed for at least a few seconds to use it.

It is not the "whole of the equation". But it is a non-factor. The equation is made no different by mentioning it.Tell that to a wizard of less than 13th level. It makes an impressive difference there.

Look, when you first get magic missile, it does quite unimpressive damage, barely better than what you get from the ray of frost cantrip, a spell that can sometimes score a critical hit (and can be be attempted against enemies you can't see). It doesn't come into its own for damage against that cantrip until 3rd level.

However, its got a much longer range and it never misses (so long as you've got line of site to the target). In the core rules, one spell blocks magic missile but not ray of frost, while there are at least three that block ray of frost but not magic missile. Ray of frost might hit someone with total concealment, but magic missile won't miss someone with just concealment and it ignores anything less than total cover.

You're getting a lot for that one spell level. Likewise, acid arrow, flaming sphere, and scorching ray offer a lot you can't get from burning hands or shocking grasp, while fireball and lightning bolt both offer you more than that 2nd level list -- and in each case, this is right from the level you get them.

This is not the case with cone of cold. The difference in area covered is seldom a significant factor. It can be, in the same way that blight can occasionally be better than fireball (provided you're only fighting one plant and are already in grappling range), but it's not worth two extra spell levels hoping for those rare moments.

The empowered fireball is nearly always superior to cone of cold. The same thing can't be said of the empowered cone of cold vs. delayed blast fireball. Being able to delay triggering your spell effect is worth that extra 6d6 hp of damage at 13th level, even that 7d6 damage at 15th (after which the gap closes again). Range vs. area isn't always a factor, but circumstances favour range being the more significant of the two.

For example, to casting cone of cold, you have to come within attacking distance of anyone wielding a javelin or dart, while those wielding bows and crossbows are taking no range modifier to hit you (or -2 at worst). Compare this to the fireball cast from 600 ft, a serious inconvenience even to those with longbows or heavy crossbows and Far Shot.

Yes, you can minimize the hazard from ranged attacks, but so can the fireball wielder, who already has the leg up on you. You're casting from within the range of true sight and even a few of the short-range spells, while nothing but the long-range magic is going to get him.

Yes, that's situational. Throw these guys into a dungeon and the difference shrinks to the point that sometimes area trumps range and sometimes range trumps area. Those "sometimes", however, do not make up for the two extra spell levels.

And sooner or later, there's just no avoiding encounters in vast spaces.
jaelis
11-08-05, 09:23 PM But let's take it underground, where such ranges rarely matter as much. Does the cone of cold gain the advantage? Well, almost. Both it and fireball are bursts, so they don't turn corners. This means that in most cases, it's going to hit significantly less than 96 squares, though generally more than the fireball can.

Fireball is a spread, not a burst. It does turn corners.

I think fireball is, overall, a very good spell for it's level. Try comparing CoC to lightning bolt instead.
Shatteredtower
11-09-05, 01:26 AM Fireball is a spread, not a burst. It does turn corners.You're right. I did read it before posting to make sure of that, but must have been more tired than I thought to make that error.

So suddenly fireball has potential to cover more area in cramped conditions than cone of cold.

I think fireball is, overall, a very good spell for it's level. Try comparing CoC to lightning bolt instead.A very good spell for 3rd level should not be roughly on par for a mediocre 5th level spell. But let's take a look.

Lightning bolt covers 24 squares to 96 for cone of cold, and the fact that it is a line effect makes it difficult to strike more than two opponents at a time in less than optimum conditions. It originates in the caster's square, as does cone of cold, so you need to either risk an ally or leave yourself open to use it.

However, as it is a line, you only need to leave one square open in front of you, not two. Your range of cover is modestly more generous, and anyone charging you stands to draw an attack of opportunity from two of your allies, rather than just one (unless, of course, your allies have reach or your enemy is Large and has only 5 ft reach).

Furthermore, the lightning bolt is good to a range of 120 ft, twice that of the cone of cold. In other words, you can cast it from beyond the distance most (but not all) creatures can charge. That's often a significant factor, especially if you're going to leave a line open for people to rush you.

Less critical, though it can't be ruled out, is how nasty this spell is within a 5 ft wide tunnel. Coverage by a fireball is eight squares. Cone of cold gets twelve. Lightning bolt nails twenty-four. Now those are indeed very specialized conditions, but it's not that hard to play to them.

There's one other thing the spell has going for it that is harder to achieve with either fireball or cone of cold. You can more easily use it to assist allies engaged in a pitched melee. The hardest to use that was is cone of cold, then fireball, but if you want to assist allies flanking an enemy without risk of hurting them, lightning bolt is the best of three options.
solbergb
11-09-05, 12:29 PM But you're forgetting that both fireball and lightning bolt also tended to be awkward to aim up until 3rd Edition. The only one of the three that could never turn around and bite you was cone of cold. That "safety" factor could be used to justify a higher level spell.

Nah. I hit more party memebers with cones of cold than I ever did with lightning bolts or fireballs. Anything that starts with the caster is going to be hazardous for the party, unless the caster is tough enough to stand in front. Lightning bolts were a bit easier, cause in 1st edition you could start the bolt at some place other than your fingertips. (3rd edition made line spells a lot harder to use). Fireballs just weren't something you could use in enclosed areas without fire resistance, but you could launch one down the corridor or have somebody else contain the blast with a wall spell or by shutting a door or something. Cone of Cold had no remote targeting, so someone was almost always in the way, or the wiz was exposed.
Auorix
11-09-05, 01:22 PM I like the three ideas above. Changing range from set amount to close range increase with lvl, or to add a round of slowed to those who failed save.. or even make the ground slippery for a limited duration.

Seems like an ally is always in the way... The feat extraordinary spell aim is excellent in this situation. Center your "hole" or choose not to affect your ally in the way and let it rip. The DC can be rough from around 9th to say 12 or so... 25+spell level which in CoC case would be DC30 spellcraft. Within that range most would have a 50/50 chance to shape CoC around that ally.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tony111 11-07-05, 05:25 PM	I feel that cone of cold is a little weak for its level. It is two entire levels above fireball, but the targetting mechanism (a cone) is arguably worse than a 20-foot radius spread (like fireball). The spell offers nothing else except the increased damage cap, which is supposed to be a given. I propose that cone of cold also slow anyone who fails the save for a few rounds. I am going with 1 round for now given that my policy is to make the least harsh changes possible when I propose changing anything. Thoughts? -Tony
Seeker95 11-07-05, 05:57 PM	The increased damage cap is one difference from fireball, and a pretty good one at that. Another is that fewer than half as many creatures are immune to cold as are immune to fire. I think the spell works great.
Llathos 11-07-05, 06:13 PM	Actually, I kind of agree with the op. So what that it's a different element. Does icy burst have a higher enhancement bonus on a weapon than flaming burst? Nope. Does orb of sound have a higher spell level than orb of fire? Nope. The argument could also be made that a burst effect from a point line of sight with long range is far more flexible than a cone effect centered on you.
Asciiman 11-07-05, 06:16 PM	Actually, I kind of agree with the op. So what that it's a different element. Does icy burst have a higher enhancement bonus on a weapon than flaming burst? Nope. Does orb of sound have a higher spell level than orb of fire? Nope. The argument could also be made that a burst effect from a point line of sight with long range is far more flexible than a cone effect centered on you. This argument does nothing but point out that perhaps icy burst should have a higher weapon enchantment bonus then flaming burst, and that orb of sound is more powerful then orb of fire. Seeker95 is right. The fact that it is not fire is a benefit for cone of cold.
cwslyclgh 11-07-05, 06:25 PM	despite the limitation that it must start from where you stand, Cone of Cold also affects a MUCH larger area then fireball, and can potentialy catch quite a few more critters in it's area of effect... I am not sure that larger AoE and cold type damage is worth 2 spell levels (especialy considering its limitation of starting at you)... but I can except it as a 5th level spell (albiet a weaker one)... I could also possibly see it as a strong 4th level spell, but in my mind it is always better to err on the side of caution, so 5th level is probably right. beside CoC has always been a 5th level spell ;)
Llathos 11-07-05, 06:25 PM	If you say so. The elemental effects are entirely situational. If you're going to the frozen north, chances are you will find more things immune to cold effects. I assure you...in that place a fireball is far better than a cone of cold. There's a reason all the elements are assigned the same value in weapon enchantments, most spells, and spell abilities. You basically just said "All that balance is wrong, Seeker is right". I'm afraid I'd need a better reason than "he said so" to jump on that bandwagon...
Seeker95 11-07-05, 09:15 PM	If you say so. The elemental effects are entirely situational.Yes, they are. But the number of situations in which you might encounter a fire-based creature are greater than the number of situations in which you might encounter a cold-based creature. 16 creatures with the [fire] subtype. 7 creatures with the [cold] subtype. 8 spells with the [cold] descriptor. 16 spells with the [fire] descriptor. You are more likely to encounter fire-resistant creatures. You are more likely to face fire-using casters. Fire is less effective as a situational factor. Given the choice between a ring of fire resistance and a ring of frost resistance, PCs will more likely choose the ring of fire resistance. So will their enemies.
smrtgmp 11-08-05, 12:06 AM	beside CoC has always been a 5th level spell ;)Yes, but it used to have an increasing range and an uncapped 1d4+1/level as well.
Nightspirit 11-08-05, 04:09 AM	It's balanced as a 5th level spell(not one of the best, but still good)
colm_l 11-08-05, 04:48 AM	Mestil's acid breath from MOF is the same spell only with a 10d6 cap @ level 3 Wujen or shujenga also have an identical spell to it @ level 2 with a 10d6 cap.
Shatteredtower 11-08-05, 07:39 AM	The increased damage cap is one difference from fireball, and a pretty good one at that.But it's not so good when an empowered fireball can outstrip it for damage until level 15, using the same spell slot. True, this involves a feat. True, the same feat allows cone of cold to outstrip a delayed blast fireball on damage at all levels. But that's not the whole of the equation. Another is that fewer than half as many creatures are immune to cold as are immune to fire.This isn't really a significant difference, though. Most creatures aren't immune to either. Even at higher levels, creatures that are resistant to one tend to be equally resistant to both (with devils the notable exceptions and celestials notably weak on fireproofing). despite the limitation that it must start from where you stand, Cone of Cold also affects a MUCH larger area then fireball, and can potentialy catch quite a few more critters in it's area of effect...The count is 96 squares for cone of cold compared to 44 for fireball. The trouble is that range more than makes up for this. At 9th level, the fireball can be used to target anyone within 760 feet -- 700 feet beyond the limit of cone of cold. With Extend Spell, we're increasing that difference to 1460 feet! But let's take it underground, where such ranges rarely matter as much. Does the cone of cold gain the advantage? Well, almost. Both it and fireball are bursts, so they don't turn corners. This means that in most cases, it's going to hit significantly less than 96 squares, though generally more than the fireball can. Why generally? Because you can never cast cone of cold to hit targets on all sides of you. This is usually a bad idea with a fireball, but not always. I've seen it used to admirable effect for cleaning off assaults by swarming hordes of enemies. (I've also seen it used this way by people who forgot to account for the fact that it was almost assured to kill allies who were dying at the time. This is particularly irritating to rogues and monks, since it's one of those occasions in which evasion does nothing.) This becomes more effective when you've taken steps to prepare your party for the blast ahead of time, which shouldn't be that hard, since you know what spells you have and many of the things they can do. However, even when your enemy is only on one side of you, you must figure out the space you'll be fighting in. If it's a 10 ft wide by 60 ft long corridor, you're hitting 50% more squares than a fireball does (16 vs 24), but if the maximum dimensions in any direction are 40 ft, you're really not getting anything more. You'll get more damage out of cone of cold after you've passed 10th level, but when does that become significant enough to make up for a spell that reaches its optimum advantage at 60 ft, declining rapidly for greater distances? In some of those cases, you'd even be better off with lightning bolt (and not just because fewer creatures are immune to electricity than cold damage). The extra two spell levels aren't really worth the cost until you've at least hit 13th level, and even then, it's kind of doubtful. We're talking an average of +10.5 hp of damage here, +17.5 by the time it caps and finally catches up to what you could do with an empowered fireball back at 10th level. (Of course, you've been staying ahead with that empowered cone of cold since 13th level, unless you were using a lesser metamagic rod.) Let's not forget that cone of cold makes it rather difficult for allies to block for you. If they choose not to stand in the effect of the spell, they have to leave your enemies enough room to charge straight at you, though it means that at least one of your allies will get to make an attack of opportunity. On the other hand, you're less likely to benefit from cover against ranged attacks. With fireball, you never have to leave enemies the opportunity to rush right at you, and your allies can more readily provide you with cover. beside CoC has always been a 5th level spell ;)Yeah, but you have to consider what else it gave you back in 1st and 2nd Edition. Back then, lightning bolt could richocet back at you if you cast it in too confined an area, and fireball had a way of engulfing everyone in the party because its effect shaped itself to fit the space available to it. I don't mind it being a 5th level spell, but I feel it should do at least one more thing to merit that status. It would even be enough to treat anyone taking damage from the spell as frostbitten for one minute, unless immune to nonlethal damage, resistant to cold damage, or under the influence of resist elements. Treat the ground affected by the spell as slippery for 2d4 rounds. Treat any creature that fails the save (even one immune to the damage) as slowed for one round (or 1d4 rounds). Extinguish fire sources in the area, even magical ones of lesser level. One or two of these things might do it.
solbergb 11-08-05, 12:08 PM	Like many spells, Cone of Cold is the way it is because of prior editions. It was always 5th level. It was always awkward to aim. It was a different damage type, which was sometimes handy. Most importantly, it was area damage that ignored a globe of invulnerability. All of this is still true in 3.5. In prior editions, fireball had no cap, but couldn't be empowered shrug. Not all spells are top tier. Cone of cold is a middle-of-the-road spell. The cone targeting mechanism can be pretty precise and get a really nice area if the caster flies.
tarkin 11-08-05, 01:19 PM	The main problem with cone of Cold is that they worded it so that it could not be Enlarged. If you want an easy power boost for Cone of Cold, simply change: Range: 60 ft. to Range: Close (25 + 5 ft/2 levels). Now, at minimum caster level it's range is only 45 ft, but once you hit 11th level you can easily boost it from 50 ft to 105 ft. A Cone of 105 ft is a HUGE area, and suddenly Cone of Cold begins to look really nice. Maxining out at 20th level of range 75 ft without extending, 150 ft with extending, makes it a powerfull spell.
Sphyre 11-08-05, 01:23 PM	You may note that in the making of spells section that you are not required to stay with cone of cold. For example you could research a spell at 5th level that would be long range, 20 foot spread, and 15d6 cold damage, and it falls into a 5th level spell. Personally, I much prefer making custom spells modeled off the real spells, rather than being forced to be level 9, before i get a real cold dealing damage spell (ignoring the orbs, and ray of frost)
Seeker95 11-08-05, 02:47 PM	True, this involves a feat. True, the same feat allows cone of cold to outstrip a delayed blast fireball on damage at all levels. But that's not the whole of the equation.It is not the "whole of the equation". But it is a non-factor. The equation is made no different by mentioning it. It is like adding X to both sides of an equation -- it doesn't make a difference.
ReadError 11-08-05, 02:59 PM	The fire version (Blast of fire in CA) is 4th level, no SR! and capped at 10d6... I think I prefer the fire version.
smrtgmp 11-08-05, 04:34 PM	I like tarkin's suggestion.
Shatteredtower 11-08-05, 08:42 PM	Like many spells, Cone of Cold is the way it is because of prior editions. It was always 5th level. It was always awkward to aim.But you're forgetting that both fireball and lightning bolt also tended to be awkward to aim up until 3rd Edition. The only one of the three that could never turn around and bite you was cone of cold. That "safety" factor could be used to justify a higher level spell. That's no longer the case. Lightning bolt is no longer coming back at me. Fireball is no longer the spell the party won't let you cast. The cone targeting mechanism can be pretty precise and get a really nice area if the caster flies.And the times this area is superior to the area you can nail with fireball is seldom significant. Meanwhile, you either have to risk injuring an ally or leaving yourself exposed for at least a few seconds to use it. It is not the "whole of the equation". But it is a non-factor. The equation is made no different by mentioning it.Tell that to a wizard of less than 13th level. It makes an impressive difference there. Look, when you first get magic missile, it does quite unimpressive damage, barely better than what you get from the ray of frost cantrip, a spell that can sometimes score a critical hit (and can be be attempted against enemies you can't see). It doesn't come into its own for damage against that cantrip until 3rd level. However, its got a much longer range and it never misses (so long as you've got line of site to the target). In the core rules, one spell blocks magic missile but not ray of frost, while there are at least three that block ray of frost but not magic missile. Ray of frost might hit someone with total concealment, but magic missile won't miss someone with just concealment and it ignores anything less than total cover. You're getting a lot for that one spell level. Likewise, acid arrow, flaming sphere, and scorching ray offer a lot you can't get from burning hands or shocking grasp, while fireball and lightning bolt both offer you more than that 2nd level list -- and in each case, this is right from the level you get them. This is not the case with cone of cold. The difference in area covered is seldom a significant factor. It can be, in the same way that blight can occasionally be better than fireball (provided you're only fighting one plant and are already in grappling range), but it's not worth two extra spell levels hoping for those rare moments. The empowered fireball is nearly always superior to cone of cold. The same thing can't be said of the empowered cone of cold vs. delayed blast fireball. Being able to delay triggering your spell effect is worth that extra 6d6 hp of damage at 13th level, even that 7d6 damage at 15th (after which the gap closes again). Range vs. area isn't always a factor, but circumstances favour range being the more significant of the two. For example, to casting cone of cold, you have to come within attacking distance of anyone wielding a javelin or dart, while those wielding bows and crossbows are taking no range modifier to hit you (or -2 at worst). Compare this to the fireball cast from 600 ft, a serious inconvenience even to those with longbows or heavy crossbows and Far Shot. Yes, you can minimize the hazard from ranged attacks, but so can the fireball wielder, who already has the leg up on you. You're casting from within the range of true sight and even a few of the short-range spells, while nothing but the long-range magic is going to get him. Yes, that's situational. Throw these guys into a dungeon and the difference shrinks to the point that sometimes area trumps range and sometimes range trumps area. Those "sometimes", however, do not make up for the two extra spell levels. And sooner or later, there's just no avoiding encounters in vast spaces.
jaelis 11-08-05, 09:23 PM	But let's take it underground, where such ranges rarely matter as much. Does the cone of cold gain the advantage? Well, almost. Both it and fireball are bursts, so they don't turn corners. This means that in most cases, it's going to hit significantly less than 96 squares, though generally more than the fireball can. Fireball is a spread, not a burst. It does turn corners. I think fireball is, overall, a very good spell for it's level. Try comparing CoC to lightning bolt instead.
Shatteredtower 11-09-05, 01:26 AM	Fireball is a spread, not a burst. It does turn corners.You're right. I did read it before posting to make sure of that, but must have been more tired than I thought to make that error. So suddenly fireball has potential to cover more area in cramped conditions than cone of cold. I think fireball is, overall, a very good spell for it's level. Try comparing CoC to lightning bolt instead.A very good spell for 3rd level should not be roughly on par for a mediocre 5th level spell. But let's take a look. Lightning bolt covers 24 squares to 96 for cone of cold, and the fact that it is a line effect makes it difficult to strike more than two opponents at a time in less than optimum conditions. It originates in the caster's square, as does cone of cold, so you need to either risk an ally or leave yourself open to use it. However, as it is a line, you only need to leave one square open in front of you, not two. Your range of cover is modestly more generous, and anyone charging you stands to draw an attack of opportunity from two of your allies, rather than just one (unless, of course, your allies have reach or your enemy is Large and has only 5 ft reach). Furthermore, the lightning bolt is good to a range of 120 ft, twice that of the cone of cold. In other words, you can cast it from beyond the distance most (but not all) creatures can charge. That's often a significant factor, especially if you're going to leave a line open for people to rush you. Less critical, though it can't be ruled out, is how nasty this spell is within a 5 ft wide tunnel. Coverage by a fireball is eight squares. Cone of cold gets twelve. Lightning bolt nails twenty-four. Now those are indeed very specialized conditions, but it's not that hard to play to them. There's one other thing the spell has going for it that is harder to achieve with either fireball or cone of cold. You can more easily use it to assist allies engaged in a pitched melee. The hardest to use that was is cone of cold, then fireball, but if you want to assist allies flanking an enemy without risk of hurting them, lightning bolt is the best of three options.
solbergb 11-09-05, 12:29 PM	But you're forgetting that both fireball and lightning bolt also tended to be awkward to aim up until 3rd Edition. The only one of the three that could never turn around and bite you was cone of cold. That "safety" factor could be used to justify a higher level spell. Nah. I hit more party memebers with cones of cold than I ever did with lightning bolts or fireballs. Anything that starts with the caster is going to be hazardous for the party, unless the caster is tough enough to stand in front. Lightning bolts were a bit easier, cause in 1st edition you could start the bolt at some place other than your fingertips. (3rd edition made line spells a lot harder to use). Fireballs just weren't something you could use in enclosed areas without fire resistance, but you could launch one down the corridor or have somebody else contain the blast with a wall spell or by shutting a door or something. Cone of Cold had no remote targeting, so someone was almost always in the way, or the wiz was exposed.
Auorix 11-09-05, 01:22 PM	I like the three ideas above. Changing range from set amount to close range increase with lvl, or to add a round of slowed to those who failed save.. or even make the ground slippery for a limited duration. Seems like an ally is always in the way... The feat extraordinary spell aim is excellent in this situation. Center your "hole" or choose not to affect your ally in the way and let it rip. The DC can be rough from around 9th to say 12 or so... 25+spell level which in CoC case would be DC30 spellcraft. Within that range most would have a 50/50 chance to shape CoC around that ally.