Goodman Games

Fan Forums
It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:45 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:30 am 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 9:46 pm
Posts: 123
geordie racer wrote:
smathis wrote:
And raises the question of why bother to learn Fireball at all? Unless you need a backup for Magic Missile.


Fireball as it stands is a compromise between a dungeon spell and an outdoor artillery spell. I would differentiate it from Magic Missile by emphasizing the arc and area effect, having it as ONLY an area-effect spell at higher levels instead of being able to affect a single human-sized target. Obviously any flammable treasures (scrolls, potions, tomes etc.) are lost in the blast too. But I suppose if XP is derived from killing foes the spellcaster would be rinsing that spell to level up. I still dislike having Fireball in the spell list, but if we must have it give it a greater area of BOOM!

'OMG, Gandalf just took out Tegal Manor!'



The area affect vs single target is a good point.

smathis wrote:
geordie racer wrote:
Quote:
Fireball

Level = 3...


So, yes, 1d6+2 missiles doing 1d8+5 damage each is better than up to 12 fireballs doing 1d6 damage each. And I'll stand by that, given that the max damage of the missiles (104) cannot be lowered, whereas the max damage of the fireballs (72) can be cut in half.



Yes, comparing the two spells on this caster level shows some out of whack stuff. Although, just to point out, the 27-31 dose not coincied with the casting ranges on the tables in the beta rules so maybe a re-working of the spells is already in progress. I am generaly ok with fireball doing less damage then then magic missle at those high casts as long as the fire ball is an area of affect that can hit more then one target and in that way, deals way more damage then magic missle, just its more spread out.

When I think about it, taht 27-31 casting level for fire ball sounds like a typo maybe, as its worse then even the lower level fireball spells. I mean, gosh, at that level 3 targets will take at most 4d6 damage, but the 18-21 level dishes out 4d6 damage to as many creatures in s 20 foot radius (or 40 foot by 40 foot "box"). Now, if the 27-31 level was supposed to make 1d4 fireballs each with a d20 radius that can be shot at 3 different locations, and each fireball dose 1d6, and the damage from one fireball stacks with the other fireballs being casted, that could maybe be useful, if your trying to hit some very disperesed enemies. But as written, it dosn't read that way and deffenintly needs some amending.

Do any other spells seem out of whack with each other besides with the fireball spell?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:31 am 
Offline
Tight-Lipped Warlock

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm
Posts: 1086
moes1980 wrote:
The area affect vs single target is a good point.


I think it's worth noting that Magic Missile isn't against just a single target in many results. What's the functional difference between a 20'x20' fireball that catches 6 enemies and rolling a "4" on a Magic Missile result that produces 1d6+2 missiles?

If anything, you'd rather have the Magic Missile because (A) it doesn't miss and there's no save and (B) there's no risk of accidentally targeting allies.

In past iterations of D&D, the reason you'd take Fireball is the damage output. In DCC, damage output between Magic Missile and Fireball is roughly equal at almost all levels.

That's the problem, IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:51 am 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:46 pm
Posts: 2310
Location: Left Coast, USA
Maybe Joe just has a thing against fireball. :wink:

_________________
Gnome Boy (a.k.a. "Jon") • DCC play-tester @ DDC 35, Feb 2011. • Beta DL 2111, 7:00 AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since 1977 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters - Holds the power to play gnomes at will!

Here Be DCC Monsters...

General Yoros, Warrior, Str 13, Agl 8 (10), Stm 17, Per 13, Int 11, Lck 8; Law, HP 39, AC 17, R+2, F+4, W+2, band/shld, warhammer, longsword, longbow, pitchfork

Han Dee, (Weaver) Neutral Thief, Str 10, Agi 13, Stm 11, Per 11, Int 15, Lck 14, AC 13 (Leather), HP 25, Luck Die d6, Backstab 3, Sneak Silently 10, Hide In Shadows 9, Pick Pocket 10, Climb Sheer 10, Pick Lock 9, Find Trap 9, Disable Trap 9, Forge Doc 10, Disguise 3, Read Lang 5, Handle Poison 3, Cast Scroll d14+2, birth augur (Born under the loom) +1 to all skill checks (including thief skills), Banepicks (auto pick lock/disable trap, but lose 1d3 random ability loss, if a 3 then 1 pt is perm)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:20 am 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 9:46 pm
Posts: 123
smathis wrote:
moes1980 wrote:
The area affect vs single target is a good point.


I think it's worth noting that Magic Missile isn't against just a single target in many results. What's the functional difference between a 20'x20' fireball that catches 6 enemies and rolling a "4" on a Magic Missile result that produces 1d6+2 missiles?

If anything, you'd rather have the Magic Missile because (A) it doesn't miss and there's no save and (B) there's no risk of accidentally targeting allies.

In past iterations of D&D, the reason you'd take Fireball is the damage output. In DCC, damage output between Magic Missile and Fireball is roughly equal at almost all levels.

That's the problem, IMO.



The minium radius is 20 feet, which means its a circle with a 40 foot diameter or, a 40 foot by 40 foot box, if using tiles. Thats 8x8 5foot squares on a map, for a total of 64 potential targets. Of course, this is very rough as the game is not made for minitures and dose not use any of this 1 inch squar equals 5 feet nonsense. But still, assuming you have one person in a five foot square, thats 64 people you could potentially roast. Though, more likely, you will just be able to all the bad guys if they are somewhat clumped together. The fireball also dosn't "miss," there is no roll to hit, its just a save for half damage. so the 16-17 casting dose 3d6 to every one in that area where as the 14-17 for magic missle is only a single target, doing 1d4+caster level. And in fact, all the way up to level 19, the magic missle can only target one enemy. 20-23 you can split them up but you only get 3-6 missles at 1d6 per missle, compared to 5d6+ how ever many times you can skip the fireball, doing an extra d6 to each additional guy hit.

The only place I really see it break down is with that 27-31 with a spry of single fireballs. But like I said, if each ball was the minimum explosion radius of 20 feet, that would be 40x 40 or, 64 5 foot squares per fierball, giving a total area of afect of 192 squares or 960 square feet. Thats alot of people you can hit for 1d6. But the question is, is that how it is really supposed to work? (and as an added note, the level 22-23 skipping fireball explicitly states that only the single targets are hit, where as the 27-31 spry of three fireballs dose not explicitly state that only the individual target is hit, and thus it sounds like each ball might be a 20 foot radius.

With this interpretation I think the fireball spell is OK. Some of the results are pretty awsome, others, only cool in the right circumstances. Also remember that objects can be damaged and flamible objects catch fire, neither of which the magic missle can do. So, IMO, I think this spell is probably ok. Are their any other spells that seem out of whack?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:45 am 
Offline
Mighty-Thewed Reaver
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:13 am
Posts: 376
Location: Newcastle, England
moes1980 wrote:
smathis wrote:
moes1980 wrote:
The area affect vs single target is a good point.


I think it's worth noting that Magic Missile isn't against just a single target in many results. What's the functional difference between a 20'x20' fireball that catches 6 enemies and rolling a "4" on a Magic Missile result that produces 1d6+2 missiles?

If anything, you'd rather have the Magic Missile because (A) it doesn't miss and there's no save and (B) there's no risk of accidentally targeting allies.

In past iterations of D&D, the reason you'd take Fireball is the damage output. In DCC, damage output between Magic Missile and Fireball is roughly equal at almost all levels.

That's the problem, IMO.



The minium radius is 20 feet, which means its a circle with a 40 foot diameter or, a 40 foot by 40 foot box, if using tiles. Thats 8x8 5foot squares on a map, for a total of 64 potential targets. Of course, this is very rough as the game is not made for minitures and dose not use any of this 1 inch squar equals 5 feet nonsense. But still, assuming you have one person in a five foot square, thats 64 people you could potentially roast. Though, more likely, you will just be able to all the bad guys if they are somewhat clumped together. The fireball also dosn't "miss," there is no roll to hit, its just a save for half damage. so the 16-17 casting dose 3d6 to every one in that area where as the 14-17 for magic missle is only a single target, doing 1d4+caster level. And in fact, all the way up to level 19, the magic missle can only target one enemy. 20-23 you can split them up but you only get 3-6 missles at 1d6 per missle, compared to 5d6+ how ever many times you can skip the fireball, doing an extra d6 to each additional guy hit.

The only place I really see it break down is with that 27-31 with a spry of single fireballs. But like I said, if each ball was the minimum explosion radius of 20 feet, that would be 40x 40 or, 64 5 foot squares per fierball, giving a total area of afect of 192 squares or 960 square feet. Thats alot of people you can hit for 1d6. But the question is, is that how it is really supposed to work? (and as an added note, the level 22-23 skipping fireball explicitly states that only the single targets are hit, where as the 27-31 spry of three fireballs dose not explicitly state that only the individual target is hit, and thus it sounds like each ball might be a 20 foot radius.

With this interpretation I think the fireball spell is OK. Some of the results are pretty awsome, others, only cool in the right circumstances. Also remember that objects can be damaged and flamible objects catch fire, neither of which the magic missle can do. So, IMO, I think this spell is probably ok. Are their any other spells that seem out of whack?


There's going to be lots of arguments about who/what is in the area of effect unless the DM has a tight rein on positioning. In that respect the game will be very old school. :?

_________________
Sean Wills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 6:49 am 
Offline
Tight-Lipped Warlock

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm
Posts: 1086
moes1980 wrote:
The minium radius is 20 feet, which means its a circle with a 40 foot diameter or, a 40 foot by 40 foot box, if using tiles. Thats 8x8 5foot squares on a map, for a total of 64 potential targets. Of course, this is very rough as the game is not made for minitures and dose not use any of this 1 inch squar equals 5 feet nonsense. But still, assuming you have one person in a five foot square, thats 64 people you could potentially roast. Though, more likely, you will just be able to all the bad guys if they are somewhat clumped together.


But that will never happen. The occurrence of a person using fireball and hitting more than, say, 12 targets is extremely, extremely, extremely low. RPGs like DCC aren't feasible in that kind of mass combat mode.

And fireball doesn't affect just enemies either. I think that's being overlooked. In an enclosed space, like a dungeon or cavern, the area of effect is actually a hindrance to using fireball. That's always been the case -- though rarely adjudicated in that way -- so I can't pin that on DCC's fireball.

moes1980 wrote:
The fireball also dosn't "miss," there is no roll to hit, its just a save for half damage. so the 16-17 casting dose 3d6 to every one in that area where as the 14-17 for magic missle is only a single target, doing 1d4+caster level. And in fact, all the way up to level 19, the magic missle can only target one enemy. 20-23 you can split them up but you only get 3-6 missles at 1d6 per missle, compared to 5d6+ how ever many times you can skip the fireball, doing an extra d6 to each additional guy hit.


You're illustrating the low level anomaly. Where magic missile is actually worse than its D&D counterpart. I don't know why magic missile at 12-13 is worse than a D&D 0-level spell. Or worse than just throwing a dart at an opponent. But I pointed that out in an earlier post. Once you get up in the 20s, magic missile starts to become comparable and, IMO, outclasses the 3rd level fireball spell.

That should never happen, IMO. And, also IMO, Magic Missile is far too weak at its lowest levels of casting.

It's like Joseph has his own "scale" for results based on the die roll. That's fine, if that's the case. But it makes distinguishing the spells by level superfluous. If all spells on a roll of 27 are meant to be comparable in their effect, why bother with distinguishing them by level? It's just a penalty for those dumb or desperate enough to attempt casting a higher level spell.

moes1980 wrote:
The only place I really see it break down is with that 27-31 with a spry of single fireballs. But like I said, if each ball was the minimum explosion radius of 20 feet, that would be 40x 40 or, 64 5 foot squares per fierball, giving a total area of afect of 192 squares or 960 square feet. Thats alot of people you can hit for 1d6. But the question is, is that how it is really supposed to work? (and as an added note, the level 22-23 skipping fireball explicitly states that only the single targets are hit, where as the 27-31 spry of three fireballs dose not explicitly state that only the individual target is hit, and thus it sounds like each ball might be a 20 foot radius.


Again, multiple fireballs at 40x40 isn't that great. Not on the scale of tactical "dungeoneering" we're talking about. In most cases, the radiuses will overlap or even merge completely -- meaning those 4 Fireballs are no better or different than casting one. Unless we're into the damage from each one stacking with the others. Imagine being the sole party member stuck in that.

At 27, Magic Missile becomes a targeted long-range missile capable of killing most monsters (with no save) that aren't above 6HD. It's effectively a low level "Finger of Death". Only better. Because there's no save.

At 29, that long-range missile gets nerfed but multiplied. It starts to get it's mojo back in the 30s. But it's always pretty comparable to the fireball's effect -- assuming that adventuring is happening in dungeons and on a tactical level. Fireball would be more useful on a battlefield. But DCC doesn't cover mass combat.

moes1980 wrote:
With this interpretation I think the fireball spell is OK. Some of the results are pretty awsome, others, only cool in the right circumstances. Also remember that objects can be damaged and flamible objects catch fire, neither of which the magic missle can do. So, IMO, I think this spell is probably ok. Are their any other spells that seem out of whack?


We can agree to disagree, sort of.

My problem is that this conversation happens at all.

You've presented a well-reasoned argument for why Fireball is as good or better than Magic Missile. Before hitting the "Reply With Quote" button, please read that last sentence again. Because that's the sticking point IMO.

It shouldn't even be an issue. Could anyone posit that Magic Missile is as good as Fireball in any other version of D&D -- outside of a highly situational tactical context? Yet here, we're applying a highly situational tactical context (that is also less than likely under the current DCC rules) to justify that Fireball is as good as Magic Missile.

It shouldn't even be a debate, IMO. If DCC spells are going to be distinguished by "level", then the higher level spells should be better than the lower level spells at ALL ranges of results. Sure, if I'm in a 10x10 room with three opponents and two allies, I don't want to drop Fireball. I'd rather use Magic Missile. But that's not my issue with it.

If DCC acknowledges spell level, then it should be a no-brainer that higher level spells are better than lower level spells. If you're cool with that not being the case, I'm not going to dock you XP. But long term, I think it will handicap DCC.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:17 am 
Offline
Chaos-Summoning Sorcerer

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:28 am
Posts: 779
smathis wrote:
It's like Joseph has his own "scale" for results based on the die roll. That's fine, if that's the case. But it makes distinguishing the spells by level superfluous. If all spells on a roll of 27 are meant to be comparable in their effect, why bother with distinguishing them by level? It's just a penalty for those dumb or desperate enough to attempt casting a higher level spell.

+d100. I've been complaining about this forever. Thanks for putting it in terms of numbers (for some reason I had not done that). Spells do not need levels. Down with sacred cows.

Quote:
You've presented a well-reasoned argument for why Fireball is as good or better than Magic Missile. Before hitting the "Reply With Quote" button, please read that last sentence again. Because that's the sticking point IMO.

It shouldn't even be an issue. Could anyone posit that Magic Missile is as good as Fireball in any other version of D&D -- outside of a highly situational tactical context? Yet here, we're applying a highly situational tactical context (that is also less than likely under the current DCC rules) to justify that Fireball is as good as Magic Missile.

It shouldn't even be a debate, IMO. If DCC spells are going to be distinguished by "level", then the higher level spells should be better than the lower level spells at ALL ranges of results. Sure, if I'm in a 10x10 room with three opponents and two allies, I don't want to drop Fireball. I'd rather use Magic Missile. But that's not my issue with it.

If DCC acknowledges spell level, then it should be a no-brainer that higher level spells are better than lower level spells. If you're cool with that not being the case, I'm not going to dock you XP. But long term, I think it will handicap DCC.

Excellent stuff. Needs repeating. The flipside to this is "There's nothing wrong with with MM in relation to Fireball if there are no spell levels. Then the differences are indeed simply a matter of style and choice."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:54 am 
Offline
Tight-Lipped Warlock

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm
Posts: 1086
jmucchiello wrote:
Excellent stuff. Needs repeating. The flipside to this is "There's nothing wrong with with MM in relation to Fireball if there are no spell levels. Then the differences are indeed simply a matter of style and choice."


Yup and thanks. And I can live with that if that's the direction DCC decides to go. I think the game either needs to get rid of spell levels (and add lower scale effects down to whatever the default casting DC is) or audit the existing spell charts to honor the difference in spell level for all spells.

But this is the biggest beef I have with the rules as written. And, from the playtest, it's pretty glaring. It didn't take the Elf more than one combat to realize he needed to cast Magic Missile all the time, everytime.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 12:29 am 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 9:46 pm
Posts: 123
smathis wrote:
jmucchiello wrote:
Excellent stuff. Needs repeating. The flipside to this is "There's nothing wrong with with MM in relation to Fireball if there are no spell levels. Then the differences are indeed simply a matter of style and choice."


Yup and thanks. And I can live with that if that's the direction DCC decides to go. I think the game either needs to get rid of spell levels (and add lower scale effects down to whatever the default casting DC is) or audit the existing spell charts to honor the difference in spell level for all spells.

But this is the biggest beef I have with the rules as written. And, from the playtest, it's pretty glaring. It didn't take the Elf more than one combat to realize he needed to cast Magic Missile all the time, everytime.



Yup, I think we can all agree with this summation of the situation. If all levels of firball casting are better then all levels of casting for magic missle, then the level of the spell matters. Otherwise, the level attached to a spell means much less as all that matters is the casting roll. But which way we want that to go can be a matter of opinion. I suppose I would ahve no problem with droping "level" from spells and I think it would make spell casting seem even more...Vinician (I have no idea how to spell that).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:10 am 
Offline
Tight-Lipped Warlock
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:26 am
Posts: 896
Location: the Towers of Carcosa
moes1980 wrote:
all levels of firball casting


Only cats cast that one. Or is it lumberjacks...? :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 5:32 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:46 pm
Posts: 2310
Location: Left Coast, USA
Lumberjacks.

Furball is a 4th Level spell.

_________________
Gnome Boy (a.k.a. "Jon") • DCC play-tester @ DDC 35, Feb 2011. • Beta DL 2111, 7:00 AM PT, 8 June 11.
Playing RPGs since 1977 • Quasi-occasional member of the Legion of 8th-Level Fighters - Holds the power to play gnomes at will!

Here Be DCC Monsters...

General Yoros, Warrior, Str 13, Agl 8 (10), Stm 17, Per 13, Int 11, Lck 8; Law, HP 39, AC 17, R+2, F+4, W+2, band/shld, warhammer, longsword, longbow, pitchfork

Han Dee, (Weaver) Neutral Thief, Str 10, Agi 13, Stm 11, Per 11, Int 15, Lck 14, AC 13 (Leather), HP 25, Luck Die d6, Backstab 3, Sneak Silently 10, Hide In Shadows 9, Pick Pocket 10, Climb Sheer 10, Pick Lock 9, Find Trap 9, Disable Trap 9, Forge Doc 10, Disguise 3, Read Lang 5, Handle Poison 3, Cast Scroll d14+2, birth augur (Born under the loom) +1 to all skill checks (including thief skills), Banepicks (auto pick lock/disable trap, but lose 1d3 random ability loss, if a 3 then 1 pt is perm)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:26 pm 
Offline
Wild-Eyed Zealot

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 7:54 am
Posts: 73
I live in Austin. Let me know if you want to run/play in another DCC game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Infernal Crucible of Sezrekan the Mad - Austin, Texas (6
PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 11:18 am 
Offline
Tight-Lipped Warlock

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm
Posts: 1086
DimitriX wrote:
I live in Austin. Let me know if you want to run/play in another DCC game.


Will do. After our last session of 4e, one of the guys in the game asked about DCC. That's a good sign. Granted he was wanting to know what changes they were making and when he'd be able to play the "real" game as he termed it. But the interest was there.

I'll let you know whenever I do another playtest though. I'm hoping for one in the not-too-distant future.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group