Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kulbaen 01-26-07, 04:17 PM	I am running into an issue where casting in combat is really not only safe, but unstoppable. I know there has got to be a rule that I've overlooked, but basically to give you the scenario: We roll initiative, caster beats my lil melee attacking creature (because the player has Improved Initiative) and from then on even though he is in melee combat with the creature gets every spell off without worry. What the players do is (being first on initiative), they take a 5 foot step back and cast defensively. This causes a DC15 concentration check, which my 4th level Sorcerer player is able to make with a roll of 2 or better (+3 from CON, Maxed out Concentration +6 and Combat Casting +4). WTF?! Do they retain their full AC casting in combat still? Are there any other negatives in the rules to this at all or what? In 3.0 casting in combat was a lot more dangerous it seemed, but since I've only recently returned to D&D and haven't read all the changes in 3.5 they seem to be holding out on something. Please clue me in! --- Kul, frustrated that his 4th level creatures are powerless against casters.
TheChilliGod 01-26-07, 04:31 PM	First off, the check is DC 15 + Spell level, so that should help with the higher-level spells. Secondly, you can always have your enemies take readied actions to attack whenever someone attempts to cast a spell. Not only does casting defensively have no effect on readied actions, but you might also be able to disrupt the spell then and there! That help?
Fred 01-26-07, 04:37 PM	Actually it doesn't matter if they beat your initiative or not, they can still take a 5 foot step back and cast. They don't even need to cast defensiely. There are several ways to beat this. You still get your attack (full attack even) when you take a 5 foot step to them. Have someone else stand behind them, they can only get away from 1 of you. You can get a reach weapon. When they step back 5 feet they are still threatened. Spiked chain works nicely here.:D You can stop them from moving with a tanglefoot bag or net. You can grapple them. Most spell casts don't have good grapple and casting most spells when grappled isn't possible. I am running into an issue where casting in combat is really not only safe, but unstoppable. I know there has got to be a rule that I've overlooked, but basically to give you the scenario: We roll initiative, caster beats my lil melee attacking creature (because the player has Improved Initiative) and from then on even though he is in melee combat with the creature gets every spell off without worry. What the players do is (being first on initiative), they take a 5 foot step back and cast defensively. This causes a DC15 concentration check, which my 4th level Sorcerer player is able to make with a roll of 2 or better (+3 from CON, Maxed out Concentration +6 and Combat Casting +4). WTF?! Do they retain their full AC casting in combat still? Are there any other negatives in the rules to this at all or what? In 3.0 casting in combat was a lot more dangerous it seemed, but since I've only recently returned to D&D and haven't read all the changes in 3.5 they seem to be holding out on something. Please clue me in! --- Kul, frustrated that his 4th level creatures are powerless against casters.
Eightbitmage 01-26-07, 05:35 PM	I don't believe you can ready a full attack as a readied action. Besides even if you could you would need to be within 5 feet when they perform the triggering action and most mages will 5 foot step back before they cast requiring two five foot steps (minimum) and a full attack action unless the guy is pinned against a wall. The 5 foot step negates the need to cast defensively. I would also like to point out that it shouldn't really be difficult for someone to cast spells in a fight. There is a reason they are refered to as casters.
Sarella Starshine 01-26-07, 05:47 PM	If I read you right, you have a sorc PC who, when he wins init, takes a 5 foot step AWAY from your monster and then decides to cast defensively? Well, that's a rather pointless action as being that the monster is flat-footed and cannot take an AoO, and even if they could, usually taking that 5 foot step moves them out of threat range, so he is just wasting the ability. However, you can have your monster also take a 5 foot step and then full attack your sorc, who should have little hps (even with a +3 con mod) and little ac (usually with mage armor around 15 or 16 (depending on dex mod)), so they cannot stand in melee for long. Casting in melee IS dangerous, not because of the problems casting a spell, but because sorcs and wizzies usually do not have the AC or HPs to stand toe to toe when it comes to melee combat, so when you have casters go toe to toe, have the monsters hit the squishies, especially if its a smart monster (squishy man without armor is easier to hit than squishy man IN armor) :)
Grand Theft Otto 01-26-07, 05:48 PM	The fact that they are in melee range of something is bad enough.
Capt. Pixel 01-26-07, 05:48 PM	... The 5 foot step negates the need to cast defensively. .... Unless the opponent has Reach (weapon or natural) :cool:
dengarbountyhunter 01-26-07, 07:51 PM	I believe that you can ready an action to attack AND move 5 feet if the other creature does.
Eled_the_Worm_Tamer 01-26-07, 08:07 PM	And what on earth is any caster bar a Druid, Cleric or close analoge / Gish doing in meele any way? franky spell distrupions should be the last of there worrys.
Thubby 01-26-07, 08:59 PM	their is a feat in complete warrior that makes casting defensive while you threaten impossible. teh dc for the defensive cast is 15+spell level. not 15
bob_the_great 01-26-07, 10:54 PM	remember that he has spent two feats on improved initiative and combat casting, so he should win his fair share of initiatives and make his concentration checks. use creatures with multiple attacks so that after the wizard takes a 5 ft step and casts it can then take a 5 ft step and full attack. hit points are his weakness. you can also grapple him too. melee range is a bad place for wizards/sorcerers
High Octane 01-26-07, 11:06 PM	their is a feat in complete warrior that makes casting defensive while you threaten impossible. teh dc for the defensive cast is 15+spell level. not 15 Mage Slayer. Its in Complete Arcane.
OneWinged4ngel 01-26-07, 11:08 PM	I am running into an issue where casting in combat is really not only safe, but unstoppable. I know there has got to be a rule that I've overlooked Unfortunately, there isn't. Quite simply, casters have no need for tanks. In fact, they make BETTER tanks than Fighters, primarily because they can control the field and mitigate damage better. Short of an arbitrary feat or ability expressly dedicated to this, casters cannot be interrupted except in the case of something like a readied action. Even if you get Mage Slayer, interrupting mages is still tricky. And what on earth is any caster bar a Druid, Cleric or close analoge / Gish doing in meele any way? franky spell distrupions should be the last of there worrys. Your knowledge of the potential of spellcasters is clearly as great as your spelling. :rolleyes: you can also grapple him too. melee range is a bad place for wizards/sorcerers Grappling isn't going to help many melee fighters... you can't use your good ol' greatsword there, right? Anyways, wizards worth their salt are likely to prepare for such eventualities, and grappling them could actually be the quickest way to get yourself killed against a well-played spellcaster. There's always still spell, along with a variety of spells that make the Wizard effectivev in grapples. In fact, it's possible for them to be AMAZING. Ever hear of the "grapplemancer"? Grab a hefty 10+ grapple at level 1, and it goes up fast from there. Well, let's just say it's not unheard of for wizards to grapple purple worms and dragons to death at level 7 with the right grapple-spell abuse. Yes, it's ridiculous. ___ By the way, Combat Casting sucks. Skill Focus (Concentration) is better.
Nephlite 01-26-07, 11:12 PM	I am running into an issue where casting in combat is really not only safe, but unstoppable. I know there has got to be a rule that I've overlooked, but basically to give you the scenario: We roll initiative, caster beats my lil melee attacking creature (because the player has Improved Initiative) and from then on even though he is in melee combat with the creature gets every spell off without worry. What the players do is (being first on initiative), they take a 5 foot step back and cast defensively. This causes a DC15 concentration check, which my 4th level Sorcerer player is able to make with a roll of 2 or better (+3 from CON, Maxed out Concentration +6 and Combat Casting +4). WTF?! Do they retain their full AC casting in combat still? Are there any other negatives in the rules to this at all or what? In 3.0 casting in combat was a lot more dangerous it seemed, but since I've only recently returned to D&D and haven't read all the changes in 3.5 they seem to be holding out on something. Please clue me in! --- Kul, frustrated that his 4th level creatures are powerless against casters. Personally, you should have chosen Skill Focus: Concentration. Combat Casting sounds better +1 more when cast defensive. But Skill focus works any time: take damage requires a check; Combat casting isn't helping, but Skill focus would have.
Some Like It Hot 01-27-07, 12:47 AM	Reach and mage slayer work well for awhile, but then encounters begin to seem a bit contrived. I vote change the rules for casting defensively. It's worked for the group I game with.
Dragonsblood 01-27-07, 02:05 AM	Reach and mage slayer work well for awhile, but then encounters begin to seem a bit contrived. I vote change the rules for casting defensively. It's worked for the group I game with. I agree that you can't keep using mage slayer and reach enemies just because casters are giving you a hard time. However I don't agree that the rules need to be changed here. The OP needs to learn better tactics, get a better handle on the rules, and not feel cheated because the PC wizard is actually casting spells. I'm going to echo the fact that the concentration DC is 15 + spell level and that a check isn't necessary with the 5' step out of melee range. The way to stop a mage isn't just to stop him from casting spells, it's to beat the crap out of him. But if you do want to prevent spells, all you need is a ranged weapon. I don't know why posters here are so focused on melee readied actions. Ranged weapons are very common options for enemies. Obviously there are spells that protect against this, but it still goes a long way toward curbing a caster's power.
DM_Death 01-27-07, 02:37 AM	Use Vampire Monks... Energy drain the spell casters with their, ahem, 'fantastic', ahem, fort saves then grapple them... Or trip them with improved trip and pummel them to death on the ground. In my game, one of my spellcasters (I have a Cleric, a Druid, and a Warmage) has both Combat Casting AND Skill Focus (Concentration)...talk about cheese. I just don't worry about disrupting their spells. If I want to keep the Warmage contained, I charge him early on and do loads of damage, then ready actions to attack him while casting spells. For the Cleric and the Druid, I focus on spells that require reflex saves...or flank them with rogues or monks. To really annoy your PC casters, I recommend the following: Human Fighter4+/Rogue3+ (possibly Exotic Weapon Master, if that's your bag) Feats: EWP (Spiked Chain), Improved Trip (and pre-reqs), Adaptable Flanker, and Vexing Flanker, Weapon Focus (Spiked Chain), Weapon Specialization (SC) Add Sweeping to the chain, and you've got all kinds of mean-ness for them to deal with. Two of them can threaten (and therefore FLANK) a ridiculous number of squares, doing sneak attack damage on all of their successful attacks (which they receive a +4 flanking bonus on). Ready an action to attack them when they cast a spell, trip them with the readied attack, and then use the follow up attack to smack them at AC-4 when they're prone...It's crude, but effective.
Kulbaen 01-28-07, 08:18 AM	Okay first of all, let me say that yes I know the rule is DC15+ level of the spell, I didn't put that in there cause I figured most people would realize that at 4th level his max spell still is a laughable roll. "Oh, my 2nd level spell... I need a 4!" ::yawn:: Secondly, "Whats the caster doing in melee?!" well, tactically speaking it doesn't seem to matter if he is or not. With his Mage armor on and Dex buff (him and the cleric trade spells for a round or two, even if I ambush them and get surprise they laugh and just keep casting) he's sitting at a sturdy 19 AC, unless he puts up his shield spell... you get the picture. I've sent rogues in to sneak attack them from behind but after the first couple rounds they have Dex buff, mage armor, mirror image and shield up. Then he just trades out his remaining spells for Magic missiles. From the responses it appears that the rules support casting in combat and that its up to me as a DM to send in the wrestling team, the archery club or gigantic reach stuff. Vampiric monks? Sorry don't really see that falling in line with my plot... especially at 4th level. Mobbing them seems so passe' but if I have to constantly have a flanker on the casters it just seems very contrived. I have 6 players: 2 warriors, a rogue, a monk, a cleric and a sorcerer. I'm used to the old mindset of the mage/sorcerer type classes struggling at the start to lead to greater power at the higher levels and vice versa for warriors. The warriors at the table are all amazed that they're taking the hits and doing their job but rarely seeing the casters getting nailed except by my bosses that are high strength fighter types with like +10 to hit. Like I say, with the current ruleset that I've seen, even if I get a surprise round I'll do some damage but after that its the same routine of 5 foot step, cast... no problems. Even cornering them, casting defensive is a joke of a DC... so I'm probably going to take the suggestion of raising the DC on it. Still open to ideas, but realize too that I really don't want to have to introduce Monty Hall-ish encounters as a solution that don't really fit into the storyline. I'm sure I could make some fit though with tweaking. --- Kul
Kulbaen 01-28-07, 08:32 AM	Dragonsblood: The OP needs to learn better tactics, get a better handle on the rules, and not feel cheated because the PC wizard is actually casting spells. How tactically elite should kobolds be? Or do I need to just throw away my Monstrous Manual and only throw pre-gen specialists at them. That mighty +1 to hit with bows doesn't go real far on a 24 AC. Handle on the rules? I haven't seen a solution yet that showed the danger of a caster in melee... your solution, ranged weapons. Duly noted. Feel cheated? No, more disallusioned... I just have trouble seeing mages going through the motions of casting spells so easily with 5 swords coming at them. Feels like a flaw to me, but its just my opinion and I came here to see if someone knew something I didn't about casting in melee rules. Seems like my handle on the rules is about right, and I just don't really agree with them. One last thing, is it just me or does it seem that the skill rate of increase is skewed toward making the Concentration check for defensive casting even more laughable at higher levels? For instance, without combat casting at 8th level a Wizard or Sorcerer who just invested skill points (which they probably have plenty of) to max out Concentration would have no chance of failure for their highest level spell (4th). --- Kul P.S. Thanks to everyone who is replying. I do appreciate all. ;)
Senevri 01-28-07, 08:52 AM	Sorcerers don't have skill points. They're still going to be maxing concentration, as is any caster. The concentration check is actually pretty bad at low levels: Despite the fact that CON is the second most important stat to casters, they're still going to have only +2 - +3 there. So! Lv1 we have 4 Ranks + 3 stat, best case. Against DC 16 for 1st level spells, this means a caster has a 40% chance of failure when casting defensively. Now, this effectively goes down by 5 % every two levels. Theoretically without feats spent or CON boosts, you'll have a chance of failing your concentration check up to level 15 or so with your top level spells. To me this reads: Works just fine as intended. Defensive casting isn't really that easy 'till level 10 and up, unless you've spent feats on it. And then, it _should_ be. Now, prepared actions will ruin any mage's day. No matter what pre-epic level, that dc 40->up concentration check is going to be nasty. I guess the problem is... if you cannot handle defensive casting mages, how are you going to handle invisible, flying, energy immune, damage reducing mages? As for Kobolds... heh, Tucker's Kobolds? (http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/) You can get a lot out of Acid Flasks and Alchemist's Fires. Also, it doesn't take +25 to hit a Big Red Button(tm) when the party is in the right spot in a corridor.
Neutronium_Dragon 01-28-07, 09:03 AM	Unlike old-E, 3E doesn't assume that a mage is going through some sort of contortion act to cast a spell. He points his finger, says "Shazam", and the spell happens. It's more difficult when under attack, but not *that* much more difficult. The game is also designed around the assumption that the mage is going to be able to get his spell off almost all of the time, with defensive casting for the oddball times when he can't, and generally succeeding then. If you start making it hard/impossible for him to cast his spells, you're punishing him in a way that the game does not expect or desire. Moreover, this is also around so that clerics can zap their fighter buddies with cure spells on the front line - something that becomes darned near impossible if melee casting is made into a herculaean task.
CharlieRock 01-28-07, 09:26 AM	Unlike old-E, 3E doesn't assume that a mage is going through some sort of contortion act to cast a spell. He points his finger, says "Shazam", and the spell happens. It's more difficult when under attack, but not *that* much more difficult. Also, unlike old-Ed. most spells (I havn't seen one used in my team yet) don't take full rounds to fire off. Kinda takes the bite out of the line "Fireballs comin' on-line ,B.A." P.S. Best way to fight a caster is with another caster. I've found. Make Kobold Shamans. Then, if that didn't work, Kobold Priests/Clerics/Druids etc.
TheWanderingAlchemist 01-28-07, 09:46 AM	I haven't read all the replies so if it has been said forgive me. Personally as the DM I would make it dangerous. They are called handbooks and guidebooks more than rule books and if you've looked at the DM's guide enough it tells you to consider rules and if you need to change some. Basically figure out a fair-ish way of making it dangerous and do it up. Personally I saw not a person mention Attack of Opportunity. If you are in melee range and that damned wizard wants a step back while preparing to cast then he's gonna risk getting hit (realistically if i wathc somone back up and start muttering an invocation I'd say oh no f that and swing.) Also keep in mind that a spell that is not instanttaneous isn't technically completed until the beginning of his next turn and that all action during that round is (in game anyways) happening at the exact same time so when it comes to you're say hobgoblin's turn he hasn't been hit hes watching the spell caster step back and start the invocation. Make his ass try and end that (assuming he didn't get an attack or failed in succeeding that attack). ~ The Wandering Alchemist
mkill 01-28-07, 10:44 AM	Ok, let me rephrase that... You have a 4th level sorc with * Concentration 6 ranks * Improved Initiative * Combat Casting * Con +3 * Mage Armor known spell * Dex buff (Cat's Grace I presume, from the cleric?) * AC 19 with Mage Armor and Dex buff, so Dex +3 * Shield, mirror image, magic missile known spell Do you notice something? Your sorcerer put almost all of his available ressources into not being hit in combat. He has Mage Armor and Shield and Mirror Image and a high Dex and spent 2 feats on it. So, he might not get hit, but what does he have on the offensive... Magic Missile? 2d4+2? After Mage Armor and Shield, he has 4 of them left. Is that impressive? I don't think so. And what the hell does he do in melee with his meager 24 hit points (average)? And what the hell are those other players doing when their characters (2 warriors, a rogue, a monk, a cleric and a sorcerer, you say) are outclassed by AC 19? Thats barely Dex +1 and a masterwork fullplate, if the cleric and the fighters don't have that by now they don't know what they are doing. A good tank has at least AC 24 at that level. I think what you have is a very one-sided sorcerer who cares too much about defense and missed on the good spells (color spray? alter self?) and a bunch of other characters who don't know how to shield the sorc so he never has to go to melee. A party of 6 PCs and rogues manage to flank the sorcerer for several rounds? What were they doing? And to answer your question: Two good hits of a strong enemy and your sorcerer is dead. Be glad that it is possible to cast in melee without getting hit, or you'd have a PK every session.
High Octane 01-28-07, 11:49 AM	Ok, let me rephrase that... You have a 4th level sorc with * Concentration 6 ranks * Improved Initiative * Combat Casting * Con +3 * Mage Armor known spell * Dex buff (Cat's Grace I presume, from the cleric?) * AC 19 with Mage Armor and Dex buff, so Dex +3 * Shield, mirror image, magic missile known spell Do you notice something? Your sorcerer put almost all of his available ressources into not being hit in combat. He has Mage Armor and Shield and Mirror Image and a high Dex and spent 2 feats on it. So, he might not get hit, but what does he have on the offensive... Magic Missile? 2d4+2? After Mage Armor and Shield, he has 4 of them left. Is that impressive? I don't think so. And what the hell does he do in melee with his meager 24 hit points (average)? And what the hell are those other players doing when their characters (2 warriors, a rogue, a monk, a cleric and a sorcerer, you say) are outclassed by AC 19? Thats barely Dex +1 and a masterwork fullplate, if the cleric and the fighters don't have that by now they don't know what they are doing. A good tank has at least AC 24 at that level. I think what you have is a very one-sided sorcerer who cares too much about defense and missed on the good spells (color spray? alter self?) and a bunch of other characters who don't know how to shield the sorc so he never has to go to melee. A party of 6 PCs and rogues manage to flank the sorcerer for several rounds? What were they doing? And to answer your question: Two good hits of a strong enemy and your sorcerer is dead. Be glad that it is possible to cast in melee without getting hit, or you'd have a PK every session. First off, with a +3 dex combining shield and mage armor he would have an AC of 21 instead of 19. Also dexterity is second or third on most arcane casters stat lists, only behind their primary casting stat and possibly constitution. Its not unusual for acrcane casters to have a 14 or even 16 dex, so with shield and mage armor they can manage a 20-21 AC at low levels while still having a couple offensive spells. Not a GOOD AC, but not a guaranteed hit. The problem is that an arcane casters armor class increases at a very slow rate after those two spells, and the spells get a lot more expensive. Generally higher level casters instead rely on miss chance and distance.
mkill 01-28-07, 12:11 PM	First off, with a +3 dex combining shield and mage armor he would have an AC of 21 instead of 19. Yes, but the OP wrote his player's char has AC 19 with Mage Armor and Cat's Grace, so that's 23 when Shield comes in. Btw. AC 23 is nice but our AC 24 dwarf nearly died the first time we tried a APL 4 LG module. Actually he did die but the DM fudged the roll. So even AC 23 is not 100% reliable and no reason for a lvl 4 sorc to go into melee. Apart from that, I'm glad you agree it is a bad idea for sorcs and wizards to go into melee, with or without casting on the defensive.
Kursk 01-28-07, 12:55 PM	Yes, it's MUCH easier and safer than in 1st & 2nd Ed. Couple that with wizards and the like leveling MUCH faster than before and you see the reason for balance crashing in their favor in 3.X. I have fixed it to some degree in my campaign though.
lears_fool 01-28-07, 01:25 PM	Unfortunately, there isn't. Quite simply, casters have no need for tanks. In fact, they make BETTER tanks than Fighters, primarily because they can control the field and mitigate damage better. How much this is the case depends on a multitude of factors, including the DM. If there's only one fight per day, then you can bet a Wizard will really shine, especially as you go up in levels. One of the best ways to even the odds in situations like that is to have more encounters per day without giving the players a chance to rest. Throw the players every now and then with back-to-back encounters too Your knowledge of the potential of spellcasters is clearly as great as your spelling. :rolleyes: Totally uncalled for and useless in SO many ways :rolleyes: Grappling isn't going to help many melee fighters... you can't use your good ol' greatsword there, right? Anyways, wizards worth their salt are likely to prepare for such eventualities, and grappling them could actually be the quickest way to get yourself killed against a well-played spellcaster. There's always still spell, along with a variety of spells that make the Wizard effectivev in grapples. In fact, it's possible for them to be AMAZING. Ever hear of the "grapplemancer"? Grab a hefty 10+ grapple at level 1, and it goes up fast from there. Well, let's just say it's not unheard of for wizards to grapple purple worms and dragons to death at level 7 with the right grapple-spell abuse. Yes, it's ridiculous. The extremes of which are completely fair for the DM to disallow, and again, it's generally primarily only of advantage to a wizard when there's only a single encounter or perhaps two a day. Just wanted to make sure we didn't discourage DM's creations from using intelligent tactics (i.e. trying to grapple casters). It often DOES work very well, and even if it doesn't it often greatly reduces the ability of said casters to bring their fullest of abilities to bear.
A_Wizard_for_Breakfast 01-28-07, 02:27 PM	I vote change the rules for casting defensively. It's worked for the group I game with. I agree. I've never understood why the DC for casting defensively didn't go up depending on how many people were threatening you. I've tried it a couple of different ways with my group. 1) You can only cast defensively against one attacker at a time. This worked alright, forced casters to be very tactically minded since two attackers meant a rough day. Either that or they had to be fairly certain that they weren't going to get hit by at least one of them. 2) Scale the DC differently. This has taken two forms. The DC is 15 + 2*spell level. This makes it scale at about the same level as the skill points. Con will increase as level does, but that's a foregone conclusion for almost any character. Concentration boosting items become more important. The DC increases by 2 for each additional attacker. This is less severe either of the other two, but does take into account that not getting hit by one guy is more difficult than not getting hit by two. 3) Casting defensively increases the casting time of the spell. I've done both full-round casting times and full-round actions. Turning it into a full round action limits mobility. Making it a full-round casting time means that, chances are, someone will be able to move in to attack you before you're done. Again, these force the casters to be somewhat more tactically minded. I dislike the bit about losing the spell if you fail to cast defensively. Getting hit is bad enough, you should at least be allowed to roll to avoid losing the spell due to damage. All of the above changes were coupled with this: fail to cast defensively and you still cast the spell, assuming you make it through the concentration check to beat the damage.
PhoenixtheDM 01-28-07, 02:48 PM	With all those spells cast at fourth level, how much damage does said sorcerer really do? I mean, he's only limited to second level spells at that point. If he's getting to be that much of a problem, make your guys smarter. The one game our group has going that I'm NOT DMing, our party kills things a lot because of my use of curing spells and my ability to reach 'em to the people necissary (and my annoying thing with making my 9th and 8th level spells end up being "Mass Heal" and "Mass Cure Crit (or is it serious? Meh, not the point.)) So what does said DM do? Also we've got one fighter that does tons and tons of damage with every smack. Woo, Dervish. So what does the DM do? He makes a few monsters get away, and suddenly the main baddies in the dungeon get smart. They see "Oh look. That one heals them. Lets take her out, and maybe the people won't get healed. Next we take out the dervish, who goes down easier now that he doesn't have said cleric spending her time as a walking magical first aid kit." Next thing you know, the party's thrown for a loop because they can't rely on that perfectly timed "Mass Heal" to hit them at the oppertune moment. Mind you, another reason why this works is because I've got a nice Bag of Holding which I have equipped to serve as a "In Case Cleric Goes Down, use potions/rod/wand" kit. Note: If the player is exceedingly whiny, DON'T do this There's nothing worse than a player who constantly complains because he got hit AGAIN.
Sadrx 01-28-07, 04:13 PM	6 Players at Level 4? A standard fight for them should be roughly EL 5 (and they should be doing four per day). How about two Ogres or one Ogre with two barbarian levels? They're either rolling to hit twice at +8 (for 16 damage on average per swing), or once at +14 (for 23 damage on average). That 10-foot reach is a nice touch as well, and Ogres are the type to swing for the squishier target shooting fire from its finger tips. Match this encounter against your party four times before they get to rest, and I guarantee your Sorcerer will start to prefer staying near to the back of the group after this. Something extra to consider though, a Fighter's resource is his hit points. He has to give up adventuring for the day when the healing has run out. A Sorcerer's resource, on the other hand, is his spells. Don't worry too much about the power of your Sorcerer so long as he's spending a spell each round to accomplish it.