Advice on crowd control spells

[Obitus]

The Charisma on my Bard (32) is almost as same as the Charisma on my Sorc (34). So I give up 1 on my dc. But other than that I don't get how a hypnotize from a Bard is any less effective than a hypnotize from my sorcerer.

If we're assuming both characters use Heighten, then the Sorcerer (at the current level cap) has a further +2 to DCs because he has access to 7th level spells, and you only have access to 5th level spells.

Yes, my Sorcerer is able to enchant more quickly than my Bard. And my Sorcerer can cast more hypnotizes than my bard. But since I never run out of SP, and you don't need to spam cast CC spells, I still dispute your claim that there's any noticeable difference.

The first point is rather huge. The difference in casting time between a Sorc and a Bard using, say, Dancing Ball, is night and day.

But sure, if you want to limit the comparison to enchantment-school spells, a Sorcerer isn't that far ahead. My issue with that is that the criteria are too narrow. A Sorcerer (if he chooses to spec a certain way) is a much better crowd control caster than a Bard, because the Sorcerer will not only have higher DCs and faster casting time; the Sorcerer will also have access to options that the Bard doesn't, like Command Undead, Web, Flesh to Stone, Solid Fog. Then, of course, if we wanted to open a can of worms, we could debate whether the ability to nuke things into the stone age when called upon is a form of crowd control.

None of this is to say that casting Bards can't be good characters. I just personally wouldn't play a pure CC-specced Bard. As it stands now, the one major CC advantage a Bard has over other arcane casters is Fascinate, and you can use that whether your Charisma is 8 or 34.

[EinarMal]

If we're assuming both characters use Heighten, then the Sorcerer (at the current level cap) has a further +2 to DCs because he has access to 7th level spells, and you only have access to 5th level spells.



The first point is rather huge. The difference in casting time between a Sorc and a Bard using, say, Dancing Ball, is night and day.

But sure, if you want to limit the comparison to enchantment-school spells, a Sorcerer isn't that far ahead. My issue with that is that the criteria are too narrow. A Sorcerer (if he chooses to spec a certain way) is a much better crowd control caster than a Bard, because the Sorcerer will not only have higher DCs and faster casting time; the Sorcerer will also have access to options that the Bard doesn't, like Command Undead, Web, Flesh to Stone, Solid Fog. Then, of course, if we wanted to open a can of worms, we could debate whether the ability to nuke things into the stone age when called upon is a form of crowd control.

None of this is to say that casting Bards can't be good characters. I just personally wouldn't play a pure CC-specced Bard. As it stands now, the one major CC advantage a Bard has over other arcane casters is Fascinate, and you can use that whether your Charisma is 8 or 34.

And sorcerers can't buff the group with songs, fight as well, etc... they are two completely different characters. To say then that Bards shouldn't bother to cast CC spells because they are not as good as casters as sorcerers is silly.

Nobody in their right mind is claiming that bards are better or even close to equal casters as a sorc. They are not supposed to be, except in very limited enchantment spells and buffs, where they are in the same ballpark.

I agree that a pure casting Bard is probably not the best choice, although at one time it was the most popular build by far on these boards. It sort of defeats the purpose of the Bard to me which is doing a lot of things well not just one.

I would be very leary if I were on the 8 charisma side of fascinate, that is such an obvious fix that needs to be made to the game (evasion in heavy armor anyone??) I would almost give a 100% guarantee that at some point fascinate will have a DC based on Perform as it should....

When Bards get ottos irresistable dance in Mod6 that gives you a single target SR check only spell for CC with no save. Add that to AOE spells like mass suggestion and dancing ball and Bards can get the job done in the CC spell department with a ~30 ish charisma which doesn't require sacrificing fighting etc...

Now, one can argue that sorcerers are very overpowered right now but that is the subject of another thread or three going on already. But yeah if you are going to make a caster then sorcerer is the obvious choice if you just care about spell casting power.

[Obitus]

And sorcerers can't buff the group with songs, fight as well, etc... they are two completely different characters. To say then that Bards shouldn't bother to cast CC spells because they are not as good as casters as sorcerers is silly.

I didn't say Bards shouldn't bother to cast CC spells.

Nobody in their right mind is claiming that bards are better or even close to equal casters as a sorc. They are not supposed to be, except in very limited enchantment spells and buffs, where they are in the same ballpark.

Read Avonway's first post in this thread.

I agree that a pure casting Bard is probably not the best choice, although at one time it was the most popular build by far on these boards.

My thought exactly.

I would be very leary if I were on the 8 charisma side of fascinate, that is such an obvious fix that needs to be made to the game (evasion in heavy armor anyone??) I would almost give a 100% guarantee that at some point fascinate will have a DC based on Perform as it should....

I just threw 8 Charisma out there to make a point. It was obvious hyperbole.

The fact of the matter, though, is that you don't need to sell out on your build to use Fascinate well. Even if the devs do institute a DC check (which I imagine they will eventually), you ought to be able to use the skill fairly well if you put max ranks into Perform, equip an item, and have a reasonably high Charisma.

Regardless, at the present time, Fascinate doesn't benefit at all from putting all your eggs in the Charisma basket.

[EinarMal]

Read Avonway's first post in this thread.

I read it...he put a caveat on CC spells and at least in terms of enchantment you can get close enough for making it comparable.

I just threw 8 Charisma out there to make a point. It was obvious hyperbole.

The fact of the matter, though, is that you don't need to sell out on your build to use Fascinate well. Even if the devs do institute a DC check (which I imagine they will eventually), you ought to be able to use the skill fairly well if you put max ranks into Perform, equip an item, and have a reasonably high Charisma.

Regardless, at the present time, Fascinate doesn't benefit at all from putting all your eggs in the Charisma basket.

Definitely no need to start with 20 charisma and put all level ups into. Starting with 16 and level ups works fine for enchantmenent casting, UMD, and fascinate DC (when it gets one). I wouldn't call that selling out the build for charisma personally. I have seen some builds with as low as 9 and many Dwarf builds with 12 starting charisma and no level ups. So that could be as much as +7 behind someone with charisma in the 30-32 range. It is impossible to say how the DC calculation will work so I don't know if you will need that +7 or not.

Replies in red...

[Obitus]

I read it...he put a caveat on CC spells and at least in terms of enchantment you can get close enough for making it comparable.

Indeed, and my response was, in part, to point out that CC != Enchantment.

Taking comparably focused builds, on the whole, a Sorcerer will be a much better CC caster. Faster casting, more SP, more spell options.

Definitely no need to start with 20 charisma and put all level ups into. Starting with 16 and level ups works fine for enchantmenent casting, UMD, and fascinate DC (when it gets one). I wouldn't call that selling out the build for charisma personally.

And again, I think you're putting words into my mouth, with all due respect.

I wouldn't call the build you and I both play (a Drow with 16 starting CHA) "selling out for Charisma either." My entire point is that I don't like the builds that DO sell out for casting power.

I just don't see the value in it. If you want to specialize in CC, then a Sorcerer is better, and yes, we could argue all day long back and forth that Sorcerers are or aren't too powerful. They may well be nerfed in the future. I don't know. I only know what the game is today.

So that could be as much as +7 behind someone with charisma in the 30-32 range. It is impossible to say how the DC calculation will work so I don't know if you will need that +7 or not.

It remains to be seen whether the various low-CHA Warchanter builds will be able to use Fascinate when/if the devs institute a DC check. However, that +7 disadvantage with respect to the ability score is only a +3 disadvantage with respect to DC.

I can't say for certain how it will shake out, but given the magnitude of the bonuses available on +perform items, I don't think it will be the difference between night and day.

[EinarMal]

It remains to be seen whether the various low-CHA Warchanter builds will be able to use Fascinate when/if the devs institute a DC check. However, that +7 disadvantage with respect to the ability score is only a +3 disadvantage with respect to DC.

.

Actually no, (16 + 5 levels) = 21 - 9 = 12 so -6 is the disadvantage not the score or 21-12 = 4 or 5. Doesn't matter yet anyway.....

[Obitus]

Actually no, (16 + 5 levels) = 21 - 9 = 12 so -6 is the disadvantage not the score or 21-12 = 4 or 5. Doesn't matter yet anyway.....

Heh, since you mentioned someone with 30-32 Charisma as a comparison point, I assumed you were talking about the current level cap. 16 base + 3 levels = 19 Charisma, which is +7 (the number you stated) more than 12.

And a 9 ability point disadvantage translates into a 4 point (skill or DC) modifier disadvantage, not a +6.

[EinarMal]

Heh, since you mentioned someone with 30-32 Charisma as a comparison point, I assumed you were talking about the current level cap. 16 base + 3 levels = 19 Charisma, which is +7 (the number you stated) more than 12.

And a 9 ability point disadvantage translates into a 4 point (skill or DC) modifier disadvantage, not a +6.

Well by the time they actually use a DC for fascinate what do you think the cap will be? Doesn't look like Mod6 will have it...haven't really heard much from a Dev other than they "consider" the perform skill and fascinate. It is 4-5 depending on how tomes, enhancements, etc... work out for a difference of 21 versus 12.

[Samadhi]

also, calling yourself a battle-bard without the warchanter enhancement is sort of like buying a porsche with an automatic transmission

I must disagree with that one. Both my "standard" bard and battle bard are spellsingers and I would not change it. The best part of the warchanter is the DR 5 on the song - but you can get DR 3 pretty easily with standard equipment. Meanwhile your spellsinger has an extra 100 mana to keep himself displaced throughout the mission (not even counting the 10% benefit from the spellsinging itself). It's arguable, I will admit, but even given no equipment considerations for "close DR" constant displacement should outshine the benefits of DR. Self-displacement is where the battle bard can really shine; give me the spellsinger.

Now, does the DR 5 effect everyone? Yes, but... most barbarians will get no benefit from it because their personal DR is already higher. These bonuses do not stack. Your average WF or fighter will get some benefit, but not a lot. While a common choice, warchanter is far from the only choice and is extremely arguable about whether it is the best.

[EinarMal]

Now, does the DR 5 effect everyone? Yes, but... most barbarians will get no benefit from it because their personal DR is already higher. These bonuses do not stack. Your average WF or fighter will get some benefit, but not a lot. While a common choice, warchanter is far from the only choice and is extremely arguable about whether it is the best.

Plus higher UMD for stoneskin DR 10 which is better regardless.

[Delt]

Plus higher UMD for stoneskin DR 10 which is better regardless.

For the record, it's pretty **** silly that the DR song doesn't stack. The way mobs hit end game, at least a little more flexability in DR sources would hurt anything.

[EinarMal]

For the record, it's pretty **** silly that the DR song doesn't stack. The way mobs hit end game, at least a little more flexability in DR sources would hurt anything.

Yeah no arguement there from me, in PnP it never stacks so it doesn't here either, of course mobs hit a lot harder!

[CSFurious]

do we have to min/max everything in this game?

however, i would like the devs to make warchanter II or III much more powerful so that the bards who are not drow have more benefit to the party when making war then the spellsingers

I must disagree with that one. Both my "standard" bard and battle bard are spellsingers and I would not change it. The best part of the warchanter is the DR 5 on the song - but you can get DR 3 pretty easily with standard equipment. Meanwhile your spellsinger has an extra 100 mana to keep himself displaced throughout the mission (not even counting the 10% benefit from the spellsinging itself). It's arguable, I will admit, but even given no equipment considerations for "close DR" constant displacement should outshine the benefits of DR. Self-displacement is where the battle bard can really shine; give me the spellsinger.

Now, does the DR 5 effect everyone? Yes, but... most barbarians will get no benefit from it because their personal DR is already higher. These bonuses do not stack. Your average WF or fighter will get some benefit, but not a lot. While a common choice, warchanter is far from the only choice and is extremely arguable about whether it is the best.

[CSFurious]

first, perform items right now are a dime a dozen because they have no use (stock up now)

second, i would think most players would start their bard with at least 12 chr; so assuming an int of 10, i think that they will be able to max out perform every level-up

then throwing in tomes, stat level-ups & even skill focus: perform & enhancements, i think most will survive

Well by the time they actually use a DC for fascinate what do you think the cap will be? Doesn't look like Mod6 will have it...haven't really heard much from a Dev other than they "consider" the perform skill and fascinate. It is 4-5 depending on how tomes, enhancements, etc... work out for a difference of 21 versus 12.

[CSFurious]

thank you, sir for eloquently elaborating on my initial posts in this thread

p.s. ulitmate cc right now for me is my level 14 sor casting otto's disco ball & then casting empowered firewall on the dancers

but, hey a bard can cast the ball, i do not care so long as the enemy does not squish me

peace

If we're assuming both characters use Heighten, then the Sorcerer (at the current level cap) has a further +2 to DCs because he has access to 7th level spells, and you only have access to 5th level spells.



The first point is rather huge. The difference in casting time between a Sorc and a Bard using, say, Dancing Ball, is night and day.

But sure, if you want to limit the comparison to enchantment-school spells, a Sorcerer isn't that far ahead. My issue with that is that the criteria are too narrow. A Sorcerer (if he chooses to spec a certain way) is a much better crowd control caster than a Bard, because the Sorcerer will not only have higher DCs and faster casting time; the Sorcerer will also have access to options that the Bard doesn't, like Command Undead, Web, Flesh to Stone, Solid Fog. Then, of course, if we wanted to open a can of worms, we could debate whether the ability to nuke things into the stone age when called upon is a form of crowd control.

None of this is to say that casting Bards can't be good characters. I just personally wouldn't play a pure CC-specced Bard. As it stands now, the one major CC advantage a Bard has over other arcane casters is Fascinate, and you can use that whether your Charisma is 8 or 34.

[EinarMal]

do we have to min/max everything in this game

however, i would like the devs to make warchanter II or III much more powerful so that the bards who are not drow have more benefit to the party making war then the spellsingers

Fine with me...I will simply re-spec my Drow to warchanter if they make it more valuable than spellsinger is currently Although if the current trend towards casters over melee continues and assuming they upgrade spellsinger as well it still might be the better choice. Can you imagine spellsinger III giving a 30% reduction in spell point cost? What caster heavy group wouldn't love that?

[Talon_Moonshadow]

The Charisma on my Bard (32) is almost as same as the Charisma on my Sorc (34). So I give up 1 on my dc. But other than that I don't get how a hypnotize from a Bard is any less effective than a hypnotize from my sorcerer.

Yes, my Sorcerer is able to enchant more quickly than my Bard. And my Sorcerer can cast more hypnotizes than my bard. But since I never run out of SP, and you don't need to spam cast CC spells, I still dispute your claim that there's any noticeable difference.

I have a CC Sor who spams CC spells to great effect. It is an incredibly effective way to play.

My Wiz cannot spam spells anywhere near the way my Sor can......I imagine a bard would have a similar problem (not really a problem, just not as effective).

I'm sure an active CC casting bard would be great......but I think the Sor can do it better....faster casting, a lot more SP.

[CSFurious]

from sor-addiction

i cannot even play a wizard because they cast too **** slow

that is why i made my original response in this thread, sors just do it better (better = faster)

I have a CC Sor who spams CC spells to great effect. It is an incredibly effective way to play.

My Wiz cannot spam spells anywhere near the way my Sor can......I imagine a bard would have a similar problem (not really a problem, just not as effective).

I'm sure an active CC casting bard would be great......but I think the Sor can do it better....faster casting, a lot more SP.

[Cireeric]

Isn't this the Bard discussion group?

The topic is CC spells.

Why is there all of this talk of how sorcerers are better? Take it to that group.

[skraus1]

well once the cap raises we will gett ottos irressitable, which doesn't have a save. All bards everywhere without a decent cha will rejoice!