A spell that Arcana Clerics can do? Yes. What about it?
(Changing subject again, as you were specifically arguing about replicating resurrection spells and healing, but whatever)
A _very_ specific domain..And?
It's also limited to 1of4
you keep trying to impose these ******** nonsensical restrictions there is no reason not to compare the wizard to the fighter and as I said the wizard can duplicate the effects of any other spells that a Clericcasts Simulacrum is how he does that.
No I wasn't talking about Wish. I was talking about Simulacrum.
So your argument now is that wizards are much more powerful and don't need access to all their class features and additional spells at lower levels because they can cast a 7th level spell (Simulacrum) to create an imitation of a cleric level 17 or higher that can cast 9th level spells? An extremely powerful cleric that the wizards has to keep within touch range for the 12 hours casting time of the spell?
What is the point of all this? It sounds like you are trying to fix a problem you see with wizards at levels the vast majority of players never eve see in play by stripping its core features and abilities from it the rest of its life cycle?
If you aren't going to hand out scrolls for wizards to scribe into their books at 50 gp per spell level, will you restrict Clerics to NOT having access to the entire set of cleric spells to prepare after each long rest? Clerics and druids have a much bigger selection from level 1 than wizards will ever be able to afford to collect.
No I wasn't talking about Wish. I was talking about Simulacrum.
So your argument now is that wizards are much more powerful and don't need access to all their class features and additional spells at lower levels because they can cast a 7th level spell (Simulacrum) to create an imitation of a cleric level 17 or higher that can cast 9th level spells? An extremely powerful cleric that the wizards has to keep within touch range for the 12 hours casting time of the spell?
What is the point of all this? It sounds like you are trying to fix a problem you see with wizards at levels the vast majority of players never eve see in play by stripping its core features and abilities from it the rest of its life cycle?
I'm beginning to think you guys are just trying to be argumentative.
You wanna pick a low-level wizard spell that illustrates how powerful they are? Sleep can instantly end an encounter.
Again you're thinking "encounter = combat" which is false. Not all encounters involve battle.
You're not alone. Using Command to make the guard flee triggering Opp Attacks or making them drop prone so all your allies can whack them with advantage while also halving their movement (since getting up from prone takes half move). You can indeed be capable of ending combat in a single round thanks to the spell - having done so before. Don't forget the Cleric also gets Bane to make enemies more vulnerable to your Commands. Command remains effective all the way through with ways (like Bane) to make it more so.
Sleep may seem better - but it applies more weakly - especially if trying to get more enemies, and becomes utterly useless later on. The roll averages 22, and any successes detract from that pool. Even most low enemies, particularly the CR 1s you'll most likely face, typically have higher than this. Some being outright immune as their average HP being too high than what you can actually roll. So, useful? Certainly! - Overpowered enough to warrant removing base class features and nerfing several subclasses? Not even remotely close.
I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature.
Situational DM-heavy scenarios are not going to win your case, just so you know.
Again you're thinking "encounter = combat" which is false. Not all encounters involve battle.
You're not alone. Using Command to make the guard flee triggering Opp Attacks or making them drop prone so all your allies can whack them with advantage while also halving their movement (since getting up from prone takes half move). You can indeed be capable of ending combat in a single round thanks to the spell - having done so before. Don't forget the Cleric also gets Bane to make enemies more vulnerable to your Commands. Command remains effective all the way through with ways (like Bane) to make it more so.
Sleep may seem better - but it applies more weakly - especially if trying to get more enemies, and becomes utterly useless later on. The roll averages 22, and any successes detract from that pool. Even most low enemies, particularly the CR 1s you'll most likely face, typically have higher than this. Some being outright immune as their average HP being too high than what you can actually roll. So, useful? Certainly! - Overpowered enough to warrant removing base class features and nerfing several subclasses? Not even remotely close.
I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature.
Situational DM-heavy scenarios are not going to win your case, just so you know.
If you use Command on a guard to have him flee he will return in one round knowing that he has been mind-affected and raising an alarm. That doesn't prevent an encounter. It is almost guaranteed to make encounters worse.
And now you want to remove that the defining aspect of a wizard, namely that his spells are more powerful than other casters.
Wren, we are not worried about the relative power of a wizard spell - we are worried that taking away the found spells (scrolls, spellbooks etc) nerfs the wizard so that he becomes basically a book bound sorceror - he has a very limited set of spells to chose from in preparing for each day rather than a wide selection to both choose to prep and to chose to create his own scrolls to have available on an as need basis. At max a sorceror knows 21 spells including cantrips and has 22 slots, your 2/L only wizard is slightly better - 49 spells known including cantrips 25 prepared and 22 slots, the cleric has 209 known spells + cantrips, 35 prepped and 22 slots, even druids have 137 known +cantrips, 25/35 prepped and 22 slots. If a wizard is going to be all he can be with a spell available for any occasion he has to get more than 2 spells/level. To match the Druid he needs to get @4.5 spells, to match the cleric in range of variety he needs to get at least 9 additional spells, to be better than either he needs to get at least 10 additional new spells (from scrolls/spellbooks/etc every level.for those that were wondering how many new spells a wizard should get there is an answer.
The wizard should be creating his own unique spells for the 2 free spells/level and be finding 9-11 spells they don’t already have via other sources each level.
... I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature. ...
The spell's requirements will often ban itself. Failing that, dispel magic might be used as a pretty good ban. Casting Simulacrum on too many targets could ban a player. A simulacrum cleric could be a glass ahem canon. :D Simulacrums increase the party power increasing the cr ratings DMs used. Then the simulacrums are dispelled and the party dies. Players turn on wizard player banning such future grandstanding 'wizardry'.
The party defeats the big boss. The wizard sings, "do you want [me] to build a snowman", it will only take 12 hours. "No!" Characters I role-play with can get bored when my casters ritual cast for 10 minutes. They'd be even less interested in the wizard casting simulacrum just to make the wizard more powerful.
Wren, we are not worried about the relative power of a wizard spell - we are worried that taking away the found spells (scrolls, spellbooks etc) nerfs the wizard so that he becomes basically a book bound sorceror
two points
1.)I said repeatedly that vision should be finding new spells. Our disagreement is only about how often. I say they should be treated as equivalent to gaining a magic item
2.) it's a huge stretch to say that restricting the Wizard to only two spells per level makes him basically a bookbound sorcerer at 20th level Sorcerer knows 15 spells while a wizard would know 44 spells
"we are not worried about the relative power of a wizard spell"
and that is causing you to have a very biased way of looking at the class
... I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature. ...
The spell's requirements will often ban itself. Failing that, dispel magic might be used as a pretty good ban. Casting Simulacrum on too many targets could ban a player. A simulacrum cleric could be a glass ahem canon. :D Simulacrums increase the party power increasing the cr ratings DMs used. Then the simulacrums are dispelled and the party dies. Players turn on wizard player banning such future grandstanding 'wizardry'.
The party defeats the big boss. The wizard sings, "do you want [me] to build a snowman", it will only take 12 hours. "No!" Characters I role-play with can get bored when my casters ritual cast for 10 minutes. They'd be even less interested in the wizard casting simulacrum just to make the wizard more powerful.
1.) as per the spell dispel magic, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range." anyone dispelling the simulacrum would have to know at that time that it is a spell there's almost no way to know that
2.) after defeating the big bad boss, the wizard should be taking skin and hair samples. Then, he should be creating a Simulacrum between adventures
... I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature. ...
The spell's requirements will often ban itself. Failing that, dispel magic might be used as a pretty good ban. Casting Simulacrum on too many targets could ban a player. A simulacrum cleric could be a glass ahem canon. :D Simulacrums increase the party power increasing the cr ratings DMs used. Then the simulacrums are dispelled and the party dies. Players turn on wizard player banning such future grandstanding 'wizardry'.
The party defeats the big boss. The wizard sings, "do you want [me] to build a snowman", it will only take 12 hours. "No!" Characters I role-play with can get bored when my casters ritual cast for 10 minutes. They'd be even less interested in the wizard casting simulacrum just to make the wizard more powerful.
1.) as per the spell dispel magic, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range." anyone dispelling the simulacrum would have to know at that time that it is a spell there's almost no way to know that
2.) after defeating the big bad boss, the wizard should be taking skin and hair samples. Then, he should be creating a Simulacrum between adventures
Thank-you for your correction regarding dispel magic which was a major objection.
Simulacrum CASTING TIME 12 Hours RANGE/AREA Touch "You shape an illusory duplicate of one beast or humanoid that is within range for the entire casting time of the spell. ..."
A big bad boss left unguarded may get away. "An illusory duplicate of [a dead] beast or humanoid" may not be of great help.
2) so the wizard goes around mutilating the bodies of defeated dead foes - pretty (not).
3) cleric’s spells come thru it’s deity, and a good DM will play that deity going “hrmmmm, there are now 2 of him on opposite sides ( or hrmmmm, yes she is here with me must be a simulacrum so no spells!) True seeing - ahhh simulacrum gets no spells” so now you have body with half HP, what ever armor and weapons you’ve given it as pretty much freebies for the party. So no duplicating spells. Deities generally don’t like folks stealing their powers (spells) and can do stuff about it.
... I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature. ...
The spell's requirements will often ban itself. Failing that, dispel magic might be used as a pretty good ban. Casting Simulacrum on too many targets could ban a player. A simulacrum cleric could be a glass ahem canon. :D Simulacrums increase the party power increasing the cr ratings DMs used. Then the simulacrums are dispelled and the party dies. Players turn on wizard player banning such future grandstanding 'wizardry'.
The party defeats the big boss. The wizard sings, "do you want [me] to build a snowman", it will only take 12 hours. "No!" Characters I role-play with can get bored when my casters ritual cast for 10 minutes. They'd be even less interested in the wizard casting simulacrum just to make the wizard more powerful.
1.) as per the spell dispel magic, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range." anyone dispelling the simulacrum would have to know at that time that it is a spell there's almost no way to know that
2.) after defeating the big bad boss, the wizard should be taking skin and hair samples. Then, he should be creating a Simulacrum between adventures
Thank-you for your correction regarding dispel magic which was a major objection.
Simulacrum CASTING TIME 12 Hours RANGE/AREA Touch "You shape an illusory duplicate of one beast or humanoid that is within range for the entire casting time of the spell. ..."
A big bad boss left unguarded may get away. "An illusory duplicate of [a dead] beast or humanoid" may not be of great help.
And likewise thank you for the correction onSimulacrum, however that still doesn't prevent this stuff from being cast between adventures. There are various ways to incapacitate a big bad evil guy.
2) so the wizard goes around mutilating the bodies of defeated dead foes - pretty (not).
3) cleric’s spells come thru it’s deity, and a good DM will play that deity going “hrmmmm, there are now 2 of him on opposite sides ( or hrmmmm, yes she is here with me must be a simulacrum so no spells!) True seeing - ahhh simulacrum gets no spells” so now you have body with half HP, what ever armor and weapons you’ve given it as pretty much freebies for the party. So no duplicating spells. Deities generally don’t like folks stealing their powers (spells) and can do stuff about it.
The one way that I could think of detecting a Simulacrum is True Sight. As for Detect Magic, the idea that the big bad evil guy is going to take a round of combat just to cast detect magic is not sensible
As for your second and third points, they're not RAW.
Clerics get armour, better hit dice and interchangeable spell options. Sorcerers get con saving throws and nifty metamagic options. Wizard get some nerdy specs and an ability to learn spells.
I agree that wizards have powerful spell options - and, personally, it's not something I have any great care about.
I like the idea that wizards can become powerful. I also think it's likely that this will happen in a gaming context of characters in a party that will, hopefully, mutually support each other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A spell that Arcana Clerics can do? Yes. What about it?
(Changing subject again, as you were specifically arguing about replicating resurrection spells and healing, but whatever)
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
A _very_ specific domain..And?
It's also limited to 1of4
you keep trying to impose these ******** nonsensical restrictions there is no reason not to compare the wizard to the fighter and as I said the wizard can duplicate the effects of any other spells that a Clericcasts Simulacrum is how he does that.
So your argument now is that wizards are much more powerful and don't need access to all their class features and additional spells at lower levels because they can cast a 7th level spell (Simulacrum) to create an imitation of a cleric level 17 or higher that can cast 9th level spells? An extremely powerful cleric that the wizards has to keep within touch range for the 12 hours casting time of the spell?
What is the point of all this? It sounds like you are trying to fix a problem you see with wizards at levels the vast majority of players never eve see in play by stripping its core features and abilities from it the rest of its life cycle?
If you aren't going to hand out scrolls for wizards to scribe into their books at 50 gp per spell level, will you restrict Clerics to NOT having access to the entire set of cleric spells to prepare after each long rest? Clerics and druids have a much bigger selection from level 1 than wizards will ever be able to afford to collect.
I'm beginning to think you guys are just trying to be argumentative.
You wanna pick a low-level wizard spell that illustrates how powerful they are? Sleep can instantly end an encounter.
The irony!
Heavily depends on the encounters. By that measure so can Command or Inflict Wounds. What's your point?
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Command,at at best might give you an extra attack which might hit let you do extra damage which might kill the target assuming you only have one enemy
sleep affects multiple targets has no to hit roll. no save and let you do an automatic crit on a target
the fact that you're even trying to compare these just further shows that you're trying to be argumentative
Again you're thinking "encounter = combat" which is false. Not all encounters involve battle.
You're not alone. Using Command to make the guard flee triggering Opp Attacks or making them drop prone so all your allies can whack them with advantage while also halving their movement (since getting up from prone takes half move). You can indeed be capable of ending combat in a single round thanks to the spell - having done so before. Don't forget the Cleric also gets Bane to make enemies more vulnerable to your Commands. Command remains effective all the way through with ways (like Bane) to make it more so.
Sleep may seem better - but it applies more weakly - especially if trying to get more enemies, and becomes utterly useless later on. The roll averages 22, and any successes detract from that pool. Even most low enemies, particularly the CR 1s you'll most likely face, typically have higher than this. Some being outright immune as their average HP being too high than what you can actually roll. So, useful? Certainly! - Overpowered enough to warrant removing base class features and nerfing several subclasses? Not even remotely close.
I could agree with you on Simulacrum, but that's one broken spell which you could just ban that spell. Better that than removing a core feature.
Situational DM-heavy scenarios are not going to win your case, just so you know.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
If you use Command on a guard to have him flee he will return in one round knowing that he has been mind-affected and raising an alarm. That doesn't prevent an encounter. It is almost guaranteed to make encounters worse.
And now you want to remove that the defining aspect of a wizard, namely that his spells are more powerful than other casters.
Wren, we are not worried about the relative power of a wizard spell - we are worried that taking away the found spells (scrolls, spellbooks etc) nerfs the wizard so that he becomes basically a book bound sorceror - he has a very limited set of spells to chose from in preparing for each day rather than a wide selection to both choose to prep and to chose to create his own scrolls to have available on an as need basis. At max a sorceror knows 21 spells including cantrips and has 22 slots, your 2/L only wizard is slightly better - 49 spells known including cantrips 25 prepared and 22 slots, the cleric has 209 known spells + cantrips, 35 prepped and 22 slots, even druids have 137 known +cantrips, 25/35 prepped and 22 slots. If a wizard is going to be all he can be with a spell available for any occasion he has to get more than 2 spells/level. To match the Druid he needs to get @4.5 spells, to match the cleric in range of variety he needs to get at least 9 additional spells, to be better than either he needs to get at least 10 additional new spells (from scrolls/spellbooks/etc every level.for those that were wondering how many new spells a wizard should get there is an answer.
The wizard should be creating his own unique spells for the 2 free spells/level and be finding 9-11 spells they don’t already have via other sources each level.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
The spell's requirements will often ban itself. Failing that, dispel magic might be used as a pretty good ban. Casting Simulacrum on too many targets could ban a player. A simulacrum cleric could be a glass ahem canon. :D
Simulacrums increase the party power increasing the cr ratings DMs used. Then the simulacrums are dispelled and the party dies. Players turn on wizard player banning such future grandstanding 'wizardry'.
The party defeats the big boss. The wizard sings, "do you want [me] to build a snowman", it will only take 12 hours. "No!" Characters I role-play with can get bored when my casters ritual cast for 10 minutes. They'd be even less interested in the wizard casting simulacrum just to make the wizard more powerful.
A first-level party of 5 wizards or 5 clerics?
A 20th level party with 5 wizards or composed with a variety of character classes?
two points
1.)I said repeatedly that vision should be finding new spells. Our disagreement is only about how often. I say they should be treated as equivalent to gaining a magic item
2.) it's a huge stretch to say that restricting the Wizard to only two spells per level makes him basically a bookbound sorcerer at 20th level Sorcerer knows 15 spells while a wizard would know 44 spells
"we are not worried about the relative power of a wizard spell"
and that is causing you to have a very biased way of looking at the class
1.) as per the spell dispel magic, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range." anyone dispelling the simulacrum would have to know at that time that it is a spell there's almost no way to know that
2.) after defeating the big bad boss, the wizard should be taking skin and hair samples. Then, he should be creating a Simulacrum between adventures
Thank-you for your correction regarding dispel magic which was a major objection.
Simulacrum
CASTING TIME
12 Hours
RANGE/AREA
Touch
"You shape an illusory duplicate of one beast or humanoid that is within range for the entire casting time of the spell. ..."
A big bad boss left unguarded may get away. "An illusory duplicate of [a dead] beast or humanoid" may not be of great help.
1) detect magic/true sight, dispel magic
2) so the wizard goes around mutilating the bodies of defeated dead foes - pretty (not).
3) cleric’s spells come thru it’s deity, and a good DM will play that deity going “hrmmmm, there are now 2 of him on opposite sides ( or hrmmmm, yes she is here with me must be a simulacrum so no spells!) True seeing - ahhh simulacrum gets no spells” so now you have body with half HP, what ever armor and weapons you’ve given it as pretty much freebies for the party. So no duplicating spells. Deities generally don’t like folks stealing their powers (spells) and can do stuff about it.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
And likewise thank you for the correction onSimulacrum, however that still doesn't prevent this stuff from being cast between adventures. There are various ways to incapacitate a big bad evil guy.
The one way that I could think of detecting a Simulacrum is True Sight. As for Detect Magic, the idea that the big bad evil guy is going to take a round of combat just to cast detect magic is not sensible
As for your second and third points, they're not RAW.
Clerics get armour, better hit dice and interchangeable spell options.
Sorcerers get con saving throws and nifty metamagic options.
Wizard get some nerdy specs and an ability to learn spells.
I agree that wizards have powerful spell options - and, personally, it's not something I have any great care about.
I like the idea that wizards can become powerful. I also think it's likely that this will happen in a gaming context of characters in a party that will, hopefully, mutually support each other.