The Gaming Den

Read the spells first, then we'll compare notes.
link to the two new spells

First, the easy spell:


Earthbolt

Ok, this is a 3rd level Wu Jen spell (who I assume are Wizardish). Its tactical role is as a damaging spell that does physical damage, and in that way only is superior to Lightning Bolt.

Its worse than LB in that it has a shorter range, only works outdoors and on the ground(making it basically a 2-d spell vs the 3-d LB), and there are more DR monsters out there than Lightning resistant monsters.

It has an SR and save for half, and the same damage as LB.

The oddest tactic that you can use with this spell is that the spell affects an amount of rock and earth(leaving it, apparently, unharmed) and is not targetted, meaning that you could cast it through a stone or cave wall and hit stuff on the other side. Pretty neat when combined with a stable cave system or stone castle, and 60' Tremorsense, but otherwise crap.

Its basicially a toolbox spell that you pull out in very specific situations where it is better than an elemental damage spell, like vs outsiders that always seem to get resistances for no good reason. Most days its either unusuable or poor. That means its ideal for a wizard caster, and suck for a Sorcerer.


Now, for the hard spell:

Defenestrating Sphere
At first glance, this looks like a high-level Flaming Sphere. It does a small amount of damage and requires a move action each round to direct.

For a 4th level slot, I tend to expect some pretty pimp effects, with the alumni of 4th level spells including Phantasmal killer, Minor Creation, and Polymorph.

However, this spell does a variable amount of damage (4d6 to 11d6) of falling damage, and only if you can get a creature to fail two Fort saves. Most days your ranged touch attack is getting you 3d6 of regular damage, which has all the problems of the spell above. Flying creatures in open space will also not be overly inconvenienced by being thrown in the air.

The only cool thing about the spell is that its a round/level spell and by casting it twice you can direct it them at enemys at the same time with all your actions, meaning that with two spells and 7 rounds, you could potentially do 147d6 of damage in 11d6 blocks to people, but assuming hits every turn and two failed saves every turn, your average is more like 71d6 over 7 turns.

The oddest tactic this spell offers is not available to most guys. You need have a Fly speed with (perfect) manuverability, and cast this spell on a weightless environment like the Plane of Earth where you determine "up" each round. Since the spell flings the target "up," it either works on the caster's "up", or the target's up. If its the caster's up, then by flying and changing your "up," you can throw around your enemies into each other, which is kind of cool.

If its the enemy's "up," then you can still throw them around in random directions, which is weird and kinda cool.

Another odd tactic is to use it on yourself (with your Fly speed) as a means of getting a free 10-80 feet straight up in movement at the "cost" of 3d6 damage(which can be soaked with any DR 10).

The best tactic for this spell is to combine it with Resilient Sphere. Cast the DS, then cast RS, and from the safety of an invulnerable ball of force you can direct the spell at your enemies, since only casting is blocked by line of effect.
Walls of Force can also be used this way.

Basically, this is a cheese spell, a pisspoor spell, or a Wizard toolbox spell, depending on the situation.

On Earthbolt:

The spell doesn't actually say Physical damage. It's magical "geomantic force" damage, which is the advantage it has over LB. You trade the ability to use it against distant, flying, or swimming opponents for the ability to negate any and all forms of damage resistance and shoot through walls. That's it. If your DM gets rocks off tormenting you with enemies who have energy resistances of any kind ever, this spell is for you. Also, you now get to have an argument with your DM as to whether "geomantic force" counts as a "force" effect for purposes of nailing incorporeal enemies with spring attack who hide in the ground.

On the sphere that apparently throws you through windows:

Major rules problem invoked with arcane tricksters, as this is a ranged touch attack but not an attack action. You now get to have an argument with your DM as to whether it qualifies for precision based damage or not.

Unfortunately perhaps, the 3.5 DR rules are in such a fvcking mess that the damage inflicted by Defenestrating Sphere is completely unstoppable. It's "battering winds damage", which means that it is energy damage of a crazy type that absolutely nothing is immune or resistant to.

Also note that you can't direct it from a resilient sphere, since it checks for range continuously. If it exceeds the range (like what happens if you are in a resilient sphere), the spell ends prematurely. So that particular cheese is off limits.

--

Both of these spells have the problem that they inflict damage without actually subscribing to a previously established damage type. While it's possible that there is a rule somewhere in the CA book there is a new rule that every spell with the Earth Descriptor inflicts Earth damage, and every spell with the Air Descriptor inflicts Air damage - that's still shit because that's never been the case before and no creatures actually have Earth resistance.

-Username17

I don't think the unresistable damage of the sphere is that big of a deal, more like a nice side effect. I think there should be some damage types that can't be resisted, if they are relatively capped. I think both spells are decent concepts, but if this is a representative sample I think I won't be too impressed. Although the spere could be decent for battlefield control (if they fail their fort save). I'm just not sure if it can crack the level 4 linup.

They preview two feats from the Complete Arcane here.

Game On,
fbmf

Wow, how not to design feats 101.

Everyone playing a straight wizards will always take Collegiate Wizard and nobody would ever take Precocious Apprentice.

And unless I missed an errata, Collegiate Wizard's "normal" clause contradicts the core rules.

Josh_Kablack at [unixtime wrote:1100552357[/unixtime]]And unless I missed an errata, Collegiate Wizard's "normal" clause contradicts the core rules.

Actually there is some rules-lawyering fun to be had here.

The SRD on Spellbooks wrote:A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells (except those from her prohibited school or schools, if any; see School Specialization, below) plus three 1st-level spells of your choice. For each point of Intelligence bonus the wizard has, the spellbook holds one additional 1st-level spell of your choice.

I think they were thinking of the bold portion when they said that you normally only get 3 1st level spells in your spellbook. Which means you should take the feat text and replace only the bold portion with it. Thus you now get to apply your INT bonus TWICE when getting extra 1st level spells.

Note: Precocious Apprentice is a very weird feat. At first it allows you to pick any 2nd level spell that is not in a barred school. This spell does not need to be on your spell list. So you can choose a 2nd level Bard Spell, or a 2nd level Ranger Spell. Go nuts.

But there's a problem: As soon as you can cast 2nd level spells, you lose this benefit and instead gain a 2nd level spell slot with no spells known to go with it. And since the feat comes with the ability to cast 2nd level spells, it immediately replaces itself with a 2nd level spell slot. Unless you consider tat this doesn't count as "becoming" able to cast 2nd level spells, in which case the replacement never happens.

So as I read the feat, it either gives you a 2nd level spell usable once per day that is not on your normal spell list forever, or it gives you a 2nd level spell slot that you actually can't fill with anything except a metamagiced 1st level spell when you get it.

Either way, the feat in no way does what it's supposed to do.

-Username17

Wow, Collegiate Wizard is just . . . man. Somehow, I don't think they'd have a feat letting Sorcerer's know twice as many spells per level, but apparently that's kewl for Wizards. They really do hate Sorcerers - I thought that was just a rant.

Precocious Apprentice? They always run into trouble when they try to describe anything by being "able" to cast certain spells. Crappy language. Why can't they say "when your class(es) would normally allow you to cast 2nd level arcane spells" or something like that?

You need to be able to cast 2nd level spells, but the feat only gives you one second level spell.

I really don't think collegiate wizard is that great. It's pretty useful if you're in one of those campaigns where the DM won't let you find cheaper ways to scribe spells but besides that I don't see it worth an entire feat. It gives you an average boost in total gold worth that has to be spent on spells. Pretty good, but it's nothing you couldn't buy yourself and amounts to a "You get extra gold" ability. Not all that interesting really, and something I'd only consider taking if my DM really cracked down hard on wizards and scribing costs.

The apprentice feat is incredibly stupid. It's one of those feats designed to trick people into taking it and then laughing at them when they've wasted a feat slot. For it to be any good it should continue up through the levels, giving you the ability to cast one spell level higher with some static percent chance of failure. About the only thing this feat is good for is possibly cheesing your way into PrCs quicker than usual since you can now cast 2nd level spells earlier.

MRW wrote: You need to be able to cast 2nd level spells, but the feat only gives you one second level spell.

The ability to cast one 2nd level spell is considered the ability to cast 2nd level spells for every other purpose.

-Username17

Because I know someone in my group will ask, would you mind giving some examples?

Game On,
fbmf

A 3rd level wizard with an Int of 12 can only cast one second level spell, but qualifies for Mystic Theurge.

Rich Baker posted about this on a thread over at WotC:

We're going to issue a little clarification on this soon. Here's the deal: It doesn't count for qualifying you toward a prestige class. Our (thin) rationalization is that you can't consistently and successfully cast 2nd-level spells, because you're "reaching" with that caster level check.

At least he admits it's a thin rationalization....

A third level Wizard with an Intelligence of 12 or 13 can take 3 levels of Cleric and qualify for Mystic Theurge. A Sorcerer can qualify for Mystic Theurge at level 4. The Wizard only has one spell slot per day, and the Sorcerer only has one spell that he knows.

The real damning one, of course, is the Sorcerer, because there is no time requirement on your ability to cast "spells". So since the Sorcerer can only cast one spell, albeit over and over again - the precocious apprentice can as well. The Sorcerer can cast one 2nd level spell 3 times in one day, and this counts as spells. The precocious apprentice can cast one 2nd level spell 3 times in 3 days, and since there is no time bounding on the statement, that must count as spells as well.

Interestingly, the author never intended this sort of thing to happen, as evidenced by Rich Baker's backpeddaling here:

http://boards.wizards.com/showthread.ph ... [br][br]He has no legs to stand on, and is right to cal his reasoning "thin". Basically, they just did some really horrible writing and editting, and are going to be distancing themselves from the implications over the next couple of months. Watch the Character Optimization Board, because any problems, no matter how severe, that don't get posted about there will go unresolved.

-Username17

If you are guaranteed to make the caster level check due to Ioun Stones or whatnot, you're not 'reaching' anymore, are you?

Here's another way of reading into that:

Rich Baker wrote:Our (thin) rationalization is that you can't consistently and successfully cast 2nd-level spells

Would that mean that a 3rd level wizard who is wearing a chain shirt (and thus has an arcane spell failure chance) wouldn't qualify as being able to cast 2nd level spells, because he can't "consistently and successfully" cast?

Why don't they just rewrite the damned thing? Why do they need to knot everyone's panties about it?

If they rewrite it, that's tantamount to admitting they were wrong.

Its important to note that a DC of 8 on a Spellcraft roll is pathetically low. A 1st level spellcasting character with 4 ranks of Spellcraft and an Int of 16 can make that roll every time with no chance of failure (since Spellcraft is not an "auto-fail on 1" like UMD).

Also, add in Skill Focus or Magical Aptitude, and you can have an average Int and still make the roll every time.

To make me happy, the writer of that feat needs to produce a written confession stating:

"I am a hoser cheese monkey who tried to break my DM's game by writing a hoser cheese-monkey feat, and now as my penance I will wear the Hoser Cheese-Monkey Hat of Shame."

It's a caster level check, not a Spellcraft check.

IT's still a 7 or higher on a d20 at level 1 though, that's not hard to make.

Certainly not. But it's not "automatic" like K was suggesting. And because it's not automatic, that's WotC's explanation as to why you can't use it to qualify for a PrC. And if that's the case, I can't see how Arcane Spell Failure also prevents you from qualifying for a PrC, either.

But it actually can be actually automatic. For example, a Warlock can have a caster level of 12 or 15 and still not have a 2nd level spell slot for real.

-Username17

Oh how much easier to just say, "Whoopsie - shagged the dog on that one."

They should just get rid of their stupid "don't base PrC requirements on class levels" thing. Then they could avoid all the stupidity of searching through every Feat and PrC in every book to see if the writers slipped up and gave out a free requirement somewhere. I can't even remember all the stupid, messed up ways of qualifying for MyTh w/ only one level of either a divine or arcane caster class.