Sorcerer/wizard role reversal in ddo vs pnp

[Truga]

I usually just play D&D by taking spells that will help the party take enemies down a little faster. Usually the DM will have an adventure set up for a party of 2-3 melees and a caster.. Which means most encounters are 1-2 enemies that are hard to kill and the entire party beats down on them, and a bunch of trash mobs (say low-level orcs, with ogre+troll bosses).

Here, a fireball is the best. It will wipe most the trash mobs out instantly, and heavily damage the bosses, allowing the melees to mop up with the rest in a round or two, and, what's most important, everyone has fun.

Not saying this is the best way to deal with the situation, it just gives everyone the opportunity to do something, rather than *glitterdust* *beat on blind enemies that can't fight back* *battle won*.

Also thanks to Aspenor on giving me another idea for when playing wizards.

[sainy_matthew]

I usually just play D&D by taking spells that will help the party take enemies down a little faster. Usually the DM will have an adventure set up for a party of 2-3 melees and a caster.. Which means most encounters are 1-2 enemies that are hard to kill and the entire party beats down on them, and a bunch of trash mobs (say low-level orcs, with ogre+troll bosses).

Here, a fireball is the best. It will wipe most the trash mobs out instantly, and heavily damage the bosses, allowing the melees to mop up with the rest in a round or two, and, what's most important, everyone has fun.

Not saying this is the best way to deal with the situation, it just gives everyone the opportunity to do something, rather than *glitterdust* *beat on blind enemies that can't fight back* *battle won*.

Also thanks to Aspenor on giving me another idea for when playing wizards.

Yep, for the most part that works & the problems that show up with Glitterdust are the same ones that show up with Fireball: There both area effect spells. Love them or hate them Area Effect spells can change the flow of battle.

-M

[SquelchHU]

Sorry to say this but Squelch and Aspenor are correct. The reason I am sorry is due to the tone they sometimes take, it doesn't make them any less right....just more annoying about it.

You would sound annoyed too if you regularly had to deal with those spreading false information deliberately.

Also if you include PrE's from the Non-Core Complete series you can get a heavy fort like ability on the Monk with either Tatooed monk or henshin mystic if I am not mistaken and I am going from memory at dang near midnight.

Link? Keep in mind even if they do get Heavy Fort Monks are gimped for many many reasons... this just scratches one off the list.

anyway squelch and Aspenor are power gamers only in the fact that they can be kinda rude about being correct, and do not like alternate explanations or terminology, for example someone using a different definition of Nuke is not incorrect, just using a different lexicon.

None of those things have anything to do with the presence or absence of powergaming. They have everything to do with getting annoyed at people who deliberately perpetuate falsehoods, which is to say a normal human reaction. And they have everything to do with using words to mean what they actually mean.

Go ahead and Google various combinations of nuke + game. What you'll see is a lot of references to WoW, Starcraft, and other games in which everyone understands nuke = damage spell and the act of 'nuking' is to cast said spells. This is because the definition of nuke, in the context of gaming refers to direct damage abilities. So yes, they are in fact incorrect to use those terms to refer to save or dies.

Now the actual effect of direct damage in D&D in no way resembles a nuclear explosion at any level. But that's a testament to it doing low damage. The term for casting Fireball, or whatever is still 'nuking'.

at 10th level a base line fighter with his gimped 16 con with no items has the potential for 130 hp. that is the capped damage for 2 max level fireballs....sorry but the fighter usually isn't going to be alone and you aren't going to get the second one off if anyone has any skill.....rogue with bola's or a net, another caster with web or whatever else, a druid wildshaping, or even a plucky monk just annoying you to death will end the encounter first.

What are you talking about?

so anyway point of this ramble is evoking as an effective spell casting style really does not work in DND methodology, about the only time it is even almost viable is in massive combat ie country on country combat, with low level wizards bombing everything...even then most likely there is a better option. tentacles being the example given by aspenor. or if you are targeting casters Insect plague to disrupt their casting as that would be the deciding factor in the battle.

Armies are irrelevant in D&D. Low level soldiers are too far below you to care about. And anything you do will kill them for the same reason.

I usually just play D&D by taking spells that will help the party take enemies down a little faster. Usually the DM will have an adventure set up for a party of 2-3 melees and a caster.. Which means most encounters are 1-2 enemies that are hard to kill and the entire party beats down on them, and a bunch of trash mobs (say low-level orcs, with ogre+troll bosses).

Here, a fireball is the best. It will wipe most the trash mobs out instantly, and heavily damage the bosses, allowing the melees to mop up with the rest in a round or two, and, what's most important, everyone has fun.

Not saying this is the best way to deal with the situation, it just gives everyone the opportunity to do something, rather than *glitterdust* *beat on blind enemies that can't fight back* *battle won*.

Also thanks to Aspenor on giving me another idea for when playing wizards.

Nope. Try again.

[Ethiel]

yes because assuming max hp and assuming max damage the fireball is ineffective.

assuming less than max hp and less than max damage fireball still ineffective.

Yes fighters can use bola's or a net or whatever other unique and cool weapon you can get your hands on, that was not the exact point. The point was that if you are focusing on direct damage spells in DND you more then likely are not going to succeed in your mission....unless said mission was wiping out hordes of low hp minions in said army on army conflict.....not really likely, that is more of a 4th edition thing.

The easiest way to beat a spell caster is to gain his/her trust then turn on them when they are least expecting (discounting the fact that if the DM allows it they would know you were going to do it anyway with a combo of divinations)..and that is far from easy, most casters are paranoid beyond the pale and do not trust anyone.


Squelch, I am not discounting the fact that the counter posters may annoy you....just saying the way you respond festers a similar response from them perpetuating the cycle.
And I do not have links for the Complete Series as that would be illegal and as I said before I wasn't positive about the Tatooed monk or henshin mystic having a heavy fort like ability. I think one of the tatoo options grants it but again no books don't know if I am right or wrong at this point.

[Aspenor]

Not irrelevant, because as i pointed out Casting Defensively is only any good with AoO, not readied actions. I'm not going to put a level on this idea, as i personally don't like level 17 games, as they become ****ing matches between players. But at low-mid levels the "rogues attack" concept is entirely fun & is a good way to scare the players without killing them. Make them shadow dancers instead & it works a lot better.

So you're commenting on something with which you have no experience. Golden.

I see you've done that thing you do again. Do not expect that you will have a spell ready for every occassion & a magical item for every attack. If you hypothetical character had as many items & magical spells as you seem to think he has, he should probably change his name to Boccob. The amount of things you think your wizard can do, is impossible for any single character, even at level 17. You also don't need to be able to defeat absolutely everything on your own & most assuredly not in a single shot. I'll be the first to say it "my characters can't defeat everything." Neither can yours, i'm just truthful enough to admit it.

You are an adventurer, not only that, you are a wizard. You are the least dependent on magical items of everybody in your party. By the time you've obtained level 16 and nearly 17, you have amassed an incredible amount of wealth with comparatively little on which to spend it. You purposefully carry many scrolls that you may need, particularly ones like Moment of Prescience that is incredibly useful, and lasts hours per level until discharged (which is, at this level, effectively the entire adventuring day). You make much more than the cost of the scroll back for every encounter, so there is no reason at all that you can't use multiples every day.

I also think you sorely overestimate how many spells it takes to get through an adventuring day (which can be explained by your insistence that dealing damage with spells is useful, and explains your fascination with reserve feats). A typical adventuring day is supposed to be 4 or 5 encounters, give or take. You can easily end many encounters with just 1, but to be fair let us say you use 2. You still have a TON of spells to deal with any surprises you may have, you even have plenty to do this at lower levels when you use the right spells.

[sainy_matthew]

Armies are irrelevant in D&D. Low level soldiers are too far below you to care about. And anything you do will kill them for the same reason.

Um... not really: Death by a thousand cuts is still a death all the same. Red Hands of Doom is a perfect example of this. They send in wave after wave of military might until you run out of resources & die. Not to forget siege weapons & inhuman soldiers... Heck WotC released an entire book about warfare called Heroes of Battle & because it was impossible for any PC's to stand in the middle of a warzone & "win" on their own. Its a great book if you are looking to run a game based around the concept of war without just making everyone a soldier & throwing them out into the field to die.

-M

[Aspenor]

A monk can technically obtain heavy fort on a robe, shirt, or something of that nature. He just has to pay through the teeth for it (just like he has to pay through the teeth for everything). Multiply the base price by 1.5 to use a non-traditional body slot.

The monk also pays through the teeth for enhancement bonuses to his weapons due to the amulet he uses costing something like 4 times as much as a weapon of the same bonus (AFB and can't check on that).

[sainy_matthew]

So you're commenting on something with which you have no experience. Golden.

I have experienced it, thats why i'm not a fan. I've seen how the fun gets drained from the game when everyone is trying to out do each other & at level 17 thats pretty much all thats left to do... party in-fighting.

You are an adventurer, not only that, you are a wizard. You are the least dependent on magical items of everybody in your party. By the time you've obtained level 16 and nearly 17, you have amassed an incredible amount of wealth with comparatively little on which to spend it.

I disagree. You still need to purchase spells, researching spells, scribing materials, spell books, defenses for spell books, expensive magical components, your own standard magical items, a magical weapon, scrolls & potions. Not to mention the everyday operational costs.

You purposefully carry many scrolls that you may need, particularly ones like Moment of Prescience that is incredibly useful, and lasts hours per level until discharged (which is, at this level, effectively the entire adventuring day).

yes & once its gone, its gone, at which point you purchase a new one, there by draining the coffers & refuting your own previous statement.

You make much more than the cost of the scroll back for every encounter, so there is no reason at all that you can't use multiples every day.

yes, but so does everyone else that does have to purchase scrolls.

I also think you sorely overestimate how many spells it takes to get through an adventuring day (which can be explained by your insistence that dealing damage with spells is useful, and explains your fascination with reserve feats). A typical adventuring day is supposed to be 4 or 5 encounters, give or take. You can easily end many encounters with just 1, but to be fair let us say you use 2. You still have a TON of spells to deal with any surprises you may have, you even have plenty to do this at lower levels when you use the right spells.

There is no such thing as a standard adventuring day. The amount of encounters one has to face is not decided by the players, its decided by the DM. The DM should be using random encounters, suprise attacks, & time based victory conditions in his story, as a good DM. If he's not he really should either take some notes from someone who has written a good module or look at the pacing of a good novel. You may become a 20th level character, but its still the DM's world, players just live in it.

-M

[Ethiel]

yeah I have a pretty pimped out primary Monk but it took a lot of work to make him Viable.

Bypass DR Feats in addition to several others... he wasn't unfun to play but I had to do some dumb stuff along the way, to get what I needed.

Luckily i was in a primary Role play game for that guy not a roll play game....

the first monk a dm made me play sucked, he made me play monk since I kept beating his quests without trying hard (that was the experience that made me have to try and make viable monks just to annoy him)

[sainy_matthew]

and explains your fascination with reserve feats.

I'd like to point out there are a whole heap of reserve feats, & many do no damage at all.

[sainy_matthew]

yeah I have a pretty pimped out primary Monk but it took a lot of work to make him Viable.

Bypass DR Feats in addition to several others... he wasn't unfun to play but I had to do some dumb stuff along the way, to get what I needed.

Luckily i was in a primary Role play game for that guy not a roll play game....

the first monk a dm made me play sucked, he made me play monk since I kept beating his quests without trying hard (that was the experience that made me have to try and make viable monks just to annoy him)

I recently got a chance to play a quaterstaff wielding monk & it was great fun. Apparently there were a good selection of feats for polearms (in an issue fo dragon) & some where just made for monks. One allowed the monk to deflect all incoming arrows with his quaterstaff, kind of wonder woman style but using a staff rather then bracers. It was kind of cool.

I saw no real problem with the monk, not really, but as you said i was role playing, not roll playing. Also +1 rep for being cool enough to enjoy playing monks.

-M

[Truga]

Nope. Try again.

Sorry but try again what? It works just fine, why would I have to try again?

Argh, you got edited by a mod, I think I've missed some of the post

[Suzaku]

A monk can technically obtain heavy fort on a robe, shirt, or something of that nature. He just has to pay through the teeth for it (just like he has to pay through the teeth for everything). Multiply the base price by 1.5 to use a non-traditional body slot.

The monk also pays through the teeth for enhancement bonuses to his weapons due to the amulet he uses costing something like 4 times as much as a weapon of the same bonus (AFB and can't check on that).

They pay about x3 for Amulet, but why does the monk have to pay more? Robe and Armor occupied the same slot (body) so the 1.5x shouldn't factor for inappropriate slot (unlike the amulet of mighty fist which takes a necklace spot oppose to a weapon spot).

[Aspenor]

They pay about x3 for Amulet, but why does the monk have to pay more? Robe and Armor occupied the same slot (body) so the 1.5x shouldn't factor for inappropriate slot (unlike the amulet of mighty fist which takes a necklace spot oppose to a weapon spot).

This is how I would rule it, also, but some DM's are pricks about customizing magic items.

[Aashrym]

yes & once its gone, its gone, at which point you purchase a new one, there by draining the coffers & refuting your own previous statement.

Scrolls are cheap. I'm pretty sure his point was that he makes more than he spends on them and doesn't drain his coffers, refuting your statement.

Sorry, but these guys are correct. Wizards dominate PnP play.

I had a PnP DM house rule that I could not play wizards or druids just to provide the other players something to do.

We are way off topic tho.

There were changes made to DDO to simulate the spirit of the classes in PnP. Sorcerers do cast faster than wizards and that is a reversal of PnP rules.

If we can agree that PnP sorcerers were more geared to blasting a lot of spells and PnP wizards were more geared to towards less spells with more effect and having the correct spells for the job then the same basic functions of the classes do seem to have carried over to DDO.

[Aspenor]

And as far as costs for putting spells into spell books, wizards don't use a typical spell book after they can afford a Boccob's Blessed Book, which is fairly early.

[Suzaku]

And as far as costs for putting spells into spell books, wizards don't use a typical spell book after they can afford a Boccob's Blessed Book, which is fairly early.

Yes they do... They have a spare spell book just in case their current spell book gets destroy. It's typically cost prohibit to but a second blessed book when you're just occasionally adding spell to backup book.

[Aspenor]

Yes they do... They have a spare spell book just in case their current spell book gets destroy. It's typically cost prohibit to but a second blessed book when you're just occasionally adding spell to backup book.

I wouldn't say it's cost prohibitive to buy a second blessed book, I'd say it's a poor idea NOT to do so. It has 1000 pages, is only 1 pound, and costs nothing to scribe into. A typical spellbook weighs 3 pounds, and only has 100 pages and costs 100 gp per page, with a cost of 1 page per level of the spell entered. You end up paying the cost of the book, plus 10,000 gold pieces and you can't even put all your spells in it. The Boccob's reduces the cost per page to 1.25, whereas the cost per page of the other is 100.

Additionally, you can lower the cost even more to .625 gold pieces by using the spell Secret Page to scribe additional spells on each page of the spell book, essentially doubling your capacity and getting 2000 pages worth of spells inside it.

[Suzaku]

This is how I would rule it, also, but some DM's are pricks about customizing magic items.

Remind your DM that robes are "armor" that provide 0 armor bonus :P

I wouldn't say it's cost prohibitive to buy a second blessed book, I'd say it's a poor idea NOT to do so. It has 1000 pages, is only 1 pound, and costs nothing to scribe into. A typical spellbook weighs 3 pounds, and only has 100 pages and costs 100 gp per page, with a cost of 1 page per level of the spell entered. You end up paying the cost of the book, plus 10,000 gold pieces and you can't even put all your spells in it. The Boccob's reduces the cost per page to 1.25, whereas the cost per page of the other is 100.

Additionally, you can lower the cost even more to .625 gold pieces by using the spell Secret Page to scribe additional spells on each page of the spell book, essentially doubling your capacity and getting 2000 pages worth of spells inside it.

Yeah but you have to spend many days scribing into your book, I would rather spend the time crafting scrolls or magic item. And before some mention you'll loose xp for crafting well you get bonus xp for being level lower then the party by raw... Though some dm don't like bonus xp...

[Aspenor]

Yeah but you have to spend many days scribing into your book, I would rather spend the time crafting scrolls or magic item. And before some mention you'll loose xp for crafting well you get bonus xp for being level lower then the party by raw... Though some dm don't like bonus xp...

It isn't bonus XP at all. You earned it. If the party is of different levels, experience needs to be calculated for each player individually. If your DM isn't giving it to you, he is lazy or a jerk.

FWIW, my current DM is both lazy AND a jerk, since he did exactly this to two of our players (not me).